Pakistan opposes UN Council permanent seat to India

[doppelganger]

Just like there can be a Hindu Rashtra.

Your Hindi is weak. Understandably.

Rashtra means Nation. Not Land.

 

[axisofevil]

CONGRESS supporters should read this part over and over again:

While India was among the founding members of United Nations, the permanent membership in UNSC always remained elusive. In fact, India's endeavour for permanent membership in UNSC began in 1955 when the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru reportedly turned down the coveted status offered to India which was then grabbed by China. While the reason for Nehru's inadvertent gesture—which he repeatedly denied—still remains a mystery (there are those who believe that he trusted China a bit too much), it proved to be costlier for India.



India's Quest For Permanent UN Security Council Seat: The Ball Is In China’s Court | Business Insider India

 

[alpha q]

So that means its also right labelling india as terrorists as we are the prime target of these terrorists.

Tibet, Xin jiang and these areas which you have mentioned are all parts of china there are no separatist rather insurgents and plus there is also no human rights violation in uyghyr or any other area, but i cant say the same about kashmir and other parts of india where people are seeking independence.


No actually its totally opposite to this, you guys are just using the the word terrorists to bash Pakistan in world in order to suit your own interest.


Ok may be Pakistan is not on the top, but still look at this list again! we are still there. You cant exclude out Pakistan from the world politics because Pakistan holds its importance in this world too.
The very reason why bush came here in Pakistan for seeking help regarding war on terror instead of going towards india is also an ample example of how much weight do we have in this region. And another thing is Russia inclination towards us is also a validity of our importance.
And economically we may not be at top ten but we are surely on our way upto that spot, and there is also no doubt about it as also indicated by experts. And militarily, we are most important muslim country in this planet as we are only muslim country with weapons of mass destruction with 200+mill population.
So its just stupid to omit Pakistan out of the world politics by saying it dont have any importance.


Kashmir issue is different from rest, as in kashmir people are seeking independence while on other parts which jamahir have mentioned are actually the terrorists which targets innocent people.

For the bolden part please check the land boundaries of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan, if you are intelligent enough you would get the answer.

 

[Pakistanisage]

Who cares we need 2/3 votes of total members of UN, pakistan can say whatever they want.
With backing of US, UK, FRANCE, and RUSSIA, India should become the permanent member sooner than later along with Germany, Japan, And Brazil.
These 4 nation deserve to be the permanent members of UNSC.

Does China have a VETO Power ?

 

[alpha q]

How does a land become muslim. I thought people were muslim.

Maybe he is refering to.greenery in kashmir, lots of trees there you know.

 

[jaiind]

 

[doppelganger]

We've already said that any UNSC reform resolution that includes Japan will be vetoed, as long as we still have a territorial dispute with them.

I agree. That is what you have said.

 

[Blue_Eyes]

CONGRESS supporters should read this part over and over again:

While India was among the founding members of United Nations, the permanent membership in UNSC always remained elusive. In fact, India's endeavour for permanent membership in UNSC began in 1955 when the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru reportedly turned down the coveted status offered to India which was then grabbed by China. While the reason for Nehru's inadvertent gesture—which he repeatedly denied—still remains a mystery (there are those who believe that he trusted China a bit too much), it proved to be costlier for India.



India's Quest For Permanent UN Security Council Seat: The Ball Is In China’s Court | Business Insider India

and that is why we Indians will never accept him as great leader or freedom fighter or even a desh bhakt, he was just a loser and destroyed our country in many way.

 

[Nilesh Singh]

UN will surely gonna lose its trust from Pakistan

 

[doppelganger]

Which they won't and simply turn against Germany to remain in their prefered position. With the growing political and defence relation of the UK and France and the constant restrain of Germany to commit themselfs to conflicts, there is no chance for Germany to be a permanent member. India actually would have it easier, if the government moves away from the aim to reform the UNC on a larger scale, since all 5 current veto powers would support India alone, while the problems are the other possible new members. China logically will support India, because of the relations in the BRICS and common political aims in Asia vs the western countries, but that's also the reason why the US will insist on getting Japan on board too, to remain with an advantage.

I'm afraid that ship has sailed.India waited quite awhile for the Chinese to see reason of an Asian trio, balancing a Western one.

When that did not happen, Modi ji finally took the bull by its horns and moved closer to the US.

Aligning with a sugar daddy is something the Chinese have taught us. Align, learn, grow, and then branch off.

 

[13 komaun]

So that means its also right labelling india as terrorists as we are the prime target of these terrorists.

Tibet, Xin jiang and these areas which you have mentioned are all parts of china there are no separatist rather insurgents and plus there is also no human rights violation in uyghyr or any other area, but i cant say the same about kashmir and other parts of india where people are seeking independence.


No actually its totally opposite to this, you guys are just using the the word terrorists to bash Pakistan in world in order to suit your own interest.


Ok may be Pakistan is not on the top, but still look at this list again! we are still there. You cant exclude out Pakistan from the world politics because Pakistan holds its importance in this world too.
The very reason why bush came here in Pakistan for seeking help regarding war on terror instead of going towards india is also an ample example of how much weight do we have in this region. And another thing is Russia inclination towards us is also a validity of our importance.
And economically we may not be at top ten but we are surely on our way upto that spot, and there is also no doubt about it as also indicated by experts. And militarily, we are most important muslim country in this planet as we are only muslim country with weapons of mass destruction with 200+mill population.
So its just stupid to omit Pakistan out of the world politics by saying it dont have any importance.


Kashmir issue is different from rest, as in kashmir people are seeking independence while on other parts which jamahir have mentioned are actually the terrorists which targets innocent people.

Apart from the fact that Kashmir will remain with India i support Baloch freedom fighters.

 

[ares]

Does China have a VETO Power ?

"SEP 26, 2014, 02.00 PM

During his recent visit to India, Chinese President Xi Jinping made a statement that he will support India for a permanent membership in the UN Security Council (UNSC)."

 

[sancho]

I'm afraid that ship has sailed.India waited quite awhile for the Chinese to see reason of an Asian trio, balancing a Western one.

When that did not happen, Modi ji finally took the bull by its horns and moved closer to the US.

Aligning with a sugar daddy is something the Chinese have taught us. Align, learn, grow, and then branch off.

Not really, since India will remain with a record of voting against US interests in the UN. We take the advantage of the hour to get the US closer to us, for strategic reasons, but politically we remain more on the line of the BRICS and will remain to do so. For us also nothing has changed, since the 123 packt we see support of the US an other veto powers for us, but we know, that the UN itself needs reforms to remain usefull in current times. Unless the new governement changes that point of view and aim just on getting into the club alone (which will put us in big trouble with Japan, since our deepening ties to them over the last years were based on joint proposals with them, Germany and Brazil), nothing will change.

 

[doppelganger]

Not really, since India will remain with a record of voting against US interests in the UN. We take the advantage of the hour to get the US closer to us, for strategic reasons, but politically we remain more on the line of the BRICS and will remain to do so. For us also nothing has changed, since the 123 packt we see support of the US an other veto powers for us, but we know, that the UN itself needs reforms to remain usefull in current times. Unless the new governement changes that point of view and aim just on getting into the club alone (which will put us in big trouble with Japan, since our deepening ties to them over the last years were based on joint proposals with them, Germany and Brazil), nothing will change.

If we remain joined at the hip with the rest of the G4, I agree with the @Chinese-Dragon assessment that it will be much easier for the UNSC to stall indefinitely. Playing one against the other, and using the all or nothing paradigm to feign powerlessness.

In the current context of a tightly interlinked world, in terms of strategic and business interests, what each one of the 5 permanent members is MORTALLY fearful of is this going to a vote. Because then it is black or white. You have to pick a side.

So they stall.

I think this thread could easily be merged with my already existing multi page one on India's permanent seat on the UNSC, India's permanent seat on the UNSC , that has been made into a "featured" thread by @WebMaster (don't know what it means).

I do not see either Germany or Japan as direct entries into the UNSC. They have a history which cannot be forgotten, will not be forgotten, and to a large extent is not forgotten, both by other major countries, as well as their own.

Brazil, yes. But at the current moment, and by the look of things for some time to come, Brazil has bigger problems.

 

[ito]

Tell me something new.