PM Narendra Modi wants concrete outcome on UNSC reforms at upcoming meet

[RazorMC]

India is one of the founding members of the UN

• India is the largest contributor to the UN peacekeeping operations
• India has contributed over 1,60,000 troops to 43 of 64 UN peacekeeping operations
• Indian armed forces are part of seven of the 14 ongoing UN peacekeeping missions
• India co-sponsored the landmark 1960 Declaration on Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples
• India was one of the first countries to raise the issue of apartheid in South Africa at the UN in 1946

My question is still unanswered.

A single veto will effectively block India's entry. How does India plan on addressing that issue?

To override that veto, the entire structure of the UNSC and UN must change and undergo reform. How likely is that to happen?

 

[Nilgiri]

My question is still unanswered.

A single veto will effectively block India's entry. How does India plan on addressing that issue?

To override that veto, the entire structure of the UNSC and UN must change and undergo reform. How likely is that to happen?

Answer to question 1: By playing long term and seeking to create a parallel more representative UN type body that for all intents and purposes will become more relevant/in-tune with the current global geopolitics at that time (instead of those concocted in 1945). This is of course over a really long time frame....1 or 2 generations maybe, not 1 or 2 decades.

To override that veto, the entire structure of the UNSC and UN must change and undergo reform. How likely is that to happen?

Less than 20% chance of happening in the short term. How this percentage will increase in the long term depends on various variables that cannot be accurately modeled right now. All my opinion of course.

 

[Post Colonnial]

Modi should not waste much time about the UNSC seat. It is not going to happen till India becomes a developed country. 10 years away I think.

 

[Nilgiri]

Modi should not waste much time about the UNSC seat. It is not going to happen till India becomes a developed country. 10 years away I think.

India is not going to be a developed country in 10 or even 20 years. 1 generation is the minimum it will take.

Though I guess it depends on your definition of "developed" compared to mine.

 

[RazorMC]

Answer to question 1: By playing long term and seeking to create a parallel more representative UN type body that for all intents and purposes will become more relevant/in-tune with the current global geopolitics at that time (instead of those concocted in 1945). This is of course over a really long time frame....1 or 2 generations maybe, not 1 or 2 decades.
...
Less than 20% chance of happening in the short term. How this percentage will increase in the long term depends on various variables that cannot be accurately modeled right now. All my opinion of course.

Reforms will come when there are more countries demanding them. Right now, there aren't enough countries that can raise such a demand aside from India, Germany, Brazil and Japan.

 

[Speeder 2]

Modi should not waste much time about the UNSC seat. It is not going to happen till India becomes a developed country. 10 years away I think.

10 years won't get you enough indoor-plumbing in your capital city, and you'll be "developed"? "Developed" what? Indoo sense of humour?

 

[Post Colonnial]

India is not going to be a developed country in 10 or even 20 years. 1 generation is the minimum it will take.

Though I guess it depends on your definition of "developed" compared to mine.

may be - who knows for sure. but the ingredients are 1) removal corruption as a way of life 2) removal of religion and caste as a primary factor in decisions 3) elimination of the need for the govt to be in so many industries - must privatize energy, transporation at a minimum 4) elimination of the need for permanent subsidies of any kind

10 years won't get you enough indoor-plumbing in your capital city, and you'll be "developed"? "Developed" what? Indoo sense of humour?

what is Indoo?

 

[Nilgiri]

Reforms will come when there are more countries demanding them. Right now, there aren't enough countries that can raise such a demand aside from India, Germany, Brazil and Japan.

Agreed. Hence my % chance I quoted is appropriately quite low in the short term.

However as time goes on, the more and more UN is out of tune with the real world situation means it gets closer and closer to the League of Nations fate.

So long term % chance replacement of UN system by another organisation or serious reform of UN itself is quite inevitable (after all nothing is permanent).

The actual debate lies with what time frame one thinks of in context to "long term" imho.

may be - who knows for sure. but the ingredients are 1) removal corruption as a way of life 2) removal of religion and caste as a primary factor in decisions 3) elimination of the need for the govt to be in so many industries - must privatize energy, transporation at a minimum 4) elimination of the need for permanent subsidies of any kind

These are some of the ingredients needed sure. But still need a longer time frame than 10 years to properly be "absorbed" into the society.

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

10 years won't get you enough indoor-plumbing in your capital city, and you'll be "developed"? "Developed" what? Indoo sense of humour?

@waz

Permanent UNSC membership is a long shot - The G4 specifically Germany and Japan are in a better placed position as of today to demand for a permanent membership in the UNSC. India needs to go step by step - India has applied for the MTCR membership and is expected to be granted one by year end. The next step should be get a membership of Zangger Committee - NPT and CTBT which wouldn't be soon due to the vows of our own nuclear program but still has much scope in the future. The ultimate step should be to get a NSG membership from which it had already got a one of its kind full NSG wavier back - such efforts will in turn legitimize our nuclear program and establish India as a more serious and responsible player in international politics.

Everything comes at a price - India will ultimately have to deviate from its policy of non-alignment. India is not willing to stick its neck out on the burning issues. Whether it was the case of Israel-Palestine, the government of Bashar Al Assad in Syria or the Russian annexation of Crimea, India was not able to give the vocal support that the US and other western powers or Russia for that matter demanded. In addition, India failed to speak its mind freely and boldly, aware of its new status in the world as a free market economy as well as a nuclear power. We will ultimately have to get away with this if we want a Permanent UNSC membership.

In the meanwhile India needs to increase it's foreign aid to developing economies and to the UN in which it ranks #27 (0.534%) in funding. India's contribution to UN Peacekeeping Force is significant - ranks #3 after BD and Ethiopia and has supplied logistics to the same like the MINUSMA mission in Mali.

If India's claim comes to a vote, India will need the support of at least 129, or two-thirds, of the 193 member-states (apart from P5) which won't be probelem since many member have actually supported India's claim publicly.

​

India might have a high income inequality than most of the advanced economies but it does have the lowest among all emerging economies.

Income inequality in India lowest among emerging nations: OECD - timesofindia-economictimes

Well analyzed post, from what i read in the wikileaks, all G4 members had given up on UNSC veto expansion, except India, India last one standing

 

[Makaramarma]

If you think mankind won't defeat global warming, then why are you even bothering toc ontinue with this equality for the masses line?

Mankind created global warming due to the Myopic nature of certain civilization and their value system. Capitalism being one of them.

That's the thing about the mob, you cannot collect them and you cannot tell what to do or how to do it. You cannot tell it that you were only trying to help when they turn on you. Chaos is chaotic.

Then why fear the French revolution ? ......... see, you have nothing to fear. LOL.

Do you think that it is possible that all or even most people are paid well? The poorest American has a standard of life rivaling middle class Indians. However middle class Americans will still look at those doing better than them and try to tear them down. You can raise people's incomes but you cannot take away jealousy and impotent rage.

Nope. When income disparity in the US results in bottom 40% combine accounting for a paltry 0.3% of total wealth, its rather obvious that they are not well paid but being exploited

When the Walton family, has more wealth than 42% of American families combined then something ROTTEN and the Stink is spreading.

US survived due to due to slave labour from the Blacks, then from Asian emigrants and now from Mexican immigrants. But I am in no mood to educate you for free. Its quite funny to see you rant about jealousy and impotent rage while quivering in fear of the mob who is coming to tear down your privileges and facing your own impotence in dealing with it.

Good doctors are paid extremely well, their skills are rare. Good teachers are also paid well, their skills are less rare.

Highly capable persons from other professions with rare skill sets are paid proportionally in any market economy.

Less capable doctors are paid less well than good doctors, less capable teachers, etc.

Is that why the average annual earnings of the top 1 percent of wage earners grew 156 percent from 1979 to 2007 ? for the top 0.1 percent they grew 362 percent . In contrast, earners in the 90th to 95th percentiles had wage growth of 34 percent, less than a tenth as much as those in the top 0.1 percent tier. Workers in the bottom 90 percent had the weakest wage growth, at 17 percent from 1979 to 2007.

Spare me your school grade assessment of economic realities. One can very see the quality of intellect of the top 1% in your posts. Reminds me of Rahul Gandhi

o I don't think the wealthiest 1% of the world are also the smartest or the most hard working 1%. But I do believe that the wealthiest 1% of the world are the top 1% in the subset which includes luck, intelligence and conscientiousness.

If they are NOT the smartest or the most hard-working then ALL your arguments are self defeating

It means the top 1% are just "lucky", or in the real world we call it Exploitative and Immoral, not conscientiousness.

If you think the vast majority of kings and emperors from history weren't extremely capable individuals, you are smoking some serious shit.

So you now agree that the idea is not so "ludicrous" as you first claimed ...... the vast majority were just lucky to be born into it. Which is why that system does not exist anymore. So if you though they were "extremely capable" then maybe you should educate the world as to why we must make you our king and Emperor

 

[kbd-raaf]

Mankind created global warming due to the Myopic nature of certain civilization and their value system. Capitalism being one of them.

Yes, anthropogenic global warming is a result of industry. Industry gave millions/billions of people livelihoods. Mankind will also defeat global warming.

Then why fear the French revolution ? ......... see, you have nothing to fear. LOL.

I don't fear French revolution-esque movements. The '1%' will always be on top, in every society. They are the 1% subset of the population that live in the intersection space between the lucky, intelligent and most hard working. There is absolutely nothing that will change that. I fear for the working masses who will have gone through a bloody period of time to no avail.

Nope. When income disparity in the US results in bottom 40% combine accounting for a paltry 0.3% of total wealth, its rather obvious that they are not well paid but being exploited

When the Walton family, has more wealth than 42% of American families combined then something ROTTEN and the Stink is spreading.

You are talking about income/asset disparity again? Things I already know well, tell me again why it matters.

US survived due to due to slave labour from the Blacks, then from Asian emigrants and now from Mexican immigrants. But I am in no mood to educate you for free. Its quite funny to see you rant about jealousy and impotent rage while quivering in fear of the mob who is coming to tear down your privileges and facing your own impotence in dealing with it.

Nobody is coming to tear down anybody's privileges. I will continue to excel and you will continue with your Robin Hood antics.

Is that why the average annual earnings of the top 1 percent of wage earners grew 156 percent from 1979 to 2007 ? for the top 0.1 percent they grew 362 percent . In contrast, earners in the 90th to 95th percentiles had wage growth of 34 percent, less than a tenth as much as those in the top 0.1 percent tier. Workers in the bottom 90 percent had the weakest wage growth, at 17 percent from 1979 to 2007.

Spare me your school grade assessment of economic realities. One can very see the quality of intellect of the top 1% in your posts. Reminds me of Rahul Gandhi

I haven't checked your numbers but you are probably right. My question remains, so what? Are you jealous that the rich are now making more than ever?

If they are NOT the smartest or the most hard-working then ALL your arguments are self defeating

It means the top 1% are just "lucky", or in the real world we call it Exploitative and Immoral, not conscientiousness.

You misunderstood. They are the 1% subset of the population that live in the intersection space between the lucky, intelligent and most hard working. Not that they are the top 1% of either. Not all who are intelligent are hard working, not all who are hard working are intelligent and not all who are intelligent and hard working are lucky.

So you now agree that the idea is not so "ludicrous" as you first claimed ...... the vast majority were just lucky to be born into it. Which is why that system does not exist anymore. So if you though they were "extremely capable" then maybe you should educate the world as to why we must make you our king and Emperor

What are you talking about? Sure, most kings/emperors didn't ascend to their thrones through politicking or through the clever application of force that doesn't mean they didn't have the best educators, the best training, etc, etc. Does this mean they were the best person for the job? More often than not, no.

It simply means they were given all kinds of training to ensure that they were quite capable at what they were destined to do.

 

[Makaramarma]

Yes, anthropogenic global warming is a result of industry. Industry gave millions/billions of people livelihoods. Mankind will also defeat global warming.

LOL...People had livelihood even before Industry. Did you think people in the past sat doing nothing waiting for maana from heaven ? Even animals make their livelihood.

I don't fear French revolution-esque movements. The '1%' will always be on top, in every society. They are the 1% subset of the population that live in the intersection space between the lucky, intelligent and most hard working. There is absolutely nothing that will change that. I fear for the working masses who will have gone through a bloody period of time to no avail.

The point was not about who's on top but about income disparity ..... have you not yet figured that out Mr. top 1% ?

You are talking about income/asset disparity again? Things I already know well, tell me again why it matters.

I have already told you, only you are too thick to get it. Go back to re-read my posts as many times as required, till you finally get it.

Nobody is coming to tear down anybody's privileges. I will continue to excel and you will continue with your Robin Hood antics.

Only in the real world, I will continue to excel wile you will live on your privileges till it whittles down to nothing as it has happened for 1000's of years.

I haven't checked your numbers but you are probably right. My question remains, so what? Are you jealous that the rich are now making more than ever?

Why is MY personal Jealousy so important ? ... you know what they say about "small minds discussing...."

You misunderstood. They are the 1% subset of the population that live in the intersection space between the lucky, intelligent and most hard working. Not that they are the top 1% of either. Not all who are intelligent are hard working, not all who are hard working are intelligent and not all who are intelligent and hard working are lucky.

Just so that we all understand, does Rahul Gandhi live in that same intersection too ?

What are you talking about? Sure, most kings/emperors didn't ascend to their thrones through politicking or through the clever application of force that doesn't mean they didn't have the best educators, the best training, etc, etc. Does this mean they were the best person for the job? More often than not, no.

It simply means they were given all kinds of training to ensure that they were quite capable at what they were destined to do.

Again, does this apply to Rahul Gandhi ? ..... best education, best training etc. etc... so that must mean he is on his path to Greatness

 

[Hindustani78]

My question is still unanswered.

A single veto will effectively block India's entry. How does India plan on addressing that issue?

To override that veto, the entire structure of the UNSC and UN must change and undergo reform. How likely is that to happen?

I dont think that any P5 would openly use Veto for denying the permanent UNSC seat for India.

 

[Nicky G]

Such exclusive clubs are not eased into but rather broken into or broken up to start anew. The long, painful but probably more fruitful alternative is to start building a parallel body that latest by the end of this century can make UN redundant if it does not adjust; unless we have something as catastrophic as another world war.

I dont think that any P5 would openly use Veto for denying the permanent UNSC seat for India.

Then they'll prevent it from getting to a vote.

 

[RazorMC]

I dont think that any P5 would openly use Veto for denying the permanent UNSC seat for India.

And China?
They have already declared support for India's bid, minus veto privilege.