Power and Principle: UNSC Reforms

[The HBS Guy]

India is a potential UNSC member in my opinion though she may not be suitable to join the UNSC at the moment. But Germany and Japan, as former members of the Axis, they are both politically unacceptable as UNSC members.
BTW, my dear Chinese fellows, please don't needle the Indian with sarcastic remarks. It's no sense of laughing at India's backward domains .Doing that only shows how blinkered you are. Every time I saw India, I saw the past of China, It really is a complex feeling.

you r right, but most 'sarcastic' chinese members here are just having fun with their india friends``

We need more Chinese and Indian members like you guys.

 

[oct605032048]

I agree with Anima and I don't like the 'laughing at india' posts posted by Chinese members but I just don't like the idea that india become a permanent member of unsc.

 

[Speeder 2]

India is a potential UNSC member in my opinion though she may not be suitable to join the UNSC at the moment. But Germany and Japan, as former members of the Axis, they are both politically unacceptable as UNSC members.
BTW, my dear Chinese fellows, please don't needle the Indian with sarcastic remarks. It's no sense of laughing at India's backward domains .Doing that only shows how blinkered you are. Every time I saw India, I saw the past of China, It really is a complex feeling.

You couldn't be more wrong, my friend!

China was never like India, and never will be.

Artificial economic statue resemblance at certain points aside, Both Imperial and Modern CHina have been drastically different society from modern "India" - set up by the Brits recently.

Unlike India, China has never had caste system in her entire history. Confucius teaching prohibits that.

Being exactly opposite, China invented National Exam System where every male in the country has been treated equally in Imperial Examination Halls.

Unlike India, China has always been a fighter, even at her darkest moments in history, being the end of Qing Dynasty ( Boxer Rebellion, Dr. Sun, etc) or WWI or WWII (generalissimo Chiang, Chairman Mao, etc, etc).

Unlike India, China's history has been filled with world renowned strategists, philosophers, poets, warriors, generals, artists, sci-tech genius and their world-class inventions in every almost single Dynasty...

New China's independence has been won by the Chinese as unified people - Han Chinese People; whereas new India's independence has been achieved via begging their Brits Master by a person who even confused that he's classified as "Indian" until South Africans told him so.

China's history , no matter from which point you look at, has been ONE - One meticulously documented history; Whereas India's "history" has almost always been numerous, messy without clear documentation mostly - this is because this "India” doesn’t have history , the so called "history” was actually the history of their masters such as Mongol’s, Persian's , Arab's, Turk's and Britain’s.

Needless to say, China IQ= 105, India 's IQ = 85. Yes, this is not a joke, neither is an inflammable talk point. General IQ level of a populace has had a serious consequence in the historical course of a nation:

High IQ China almost always a fighter and a winner, because her average populace have been smart and hence mentally strong and disciplined;

whereas Low IQ India has almost always been a surrender and a loser - every nation/ state/dynasty/empire you can name of in or outside the region has colonised this so called "India" at contain point in the last 2000 years, because low IQ people on average have been dumber hence weak - unable to organise well due to lack of strong mental capabilities therefore being undisciplined by and large, either in areas such as defence, logistics in war time, or in areas of infrastructures building, long term planning and economic development in peace time.

China and India have NEVER been alike in the history in almost all spheres of the societies.

Rather, they have been at exact opposite end most of time.

I hate to say this: your remark that "India reminds you of what China was" is almost definitely the direct result of typical CCP-brainwashed propaganda that I've come across once in a while, because dark "India" you see has nothing to do with pre-historic Indus Valley Civilisation (note: Indus Valley was not India) which was setup by a totally different race.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

China was never like India, and never will be.

Exactly right.

The only remote similarity is the huge population sizes of both.

 

[S10]

I hate Chinese trolls that constantly feel the need to put down others. It really shows immaturity as well as a fragile psyche. The only way to satisfy their weak ego is to talk smack on others, like insecure teenagers (Hell, they probably are). I don't know what is worse. The idiot that started the trolling or the idiots that get riled up by it. China is already economically and militarily ahead, so why all the hate?

China has already stated that it does not oppose UNSC seat for India, and would support it. That came from the foreign ministry of China, and should have been the end of debate. Personally, I think India is a good choice for UNSC rather than Germany or Brazil. There are enough voices of the West in its current membership and more from Asia is needed.

Do China really need another American allie such as Germany or Brazil in the UNSC?

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

China has already stated that it does not oppose UNSC seat for India, and would support it. That came from the foreign ministry of China, and should have been the end of debate. Personally, I think India is a good choice for UNSC rather than Germany or Brazil. There are enough voices of the West in its current membership and more from Asia is needed.

China has not pledged to support India for a permanent seat at the UNSC.

Not one single P5 member has promised to give "veto power" to anyone else.

 

[S10]

China has not pledged to support India for a permanent seat at the UNSC.

Not one single P5 member has promised to give "veto power" to anyone else.

You do know the difference between non-permanent and permanent member of the UNSC right? Once India becomes permanent member, they have power of veto. They are going to get the whole package, and you need to stop trolling.

 

[tanlixiang28776]

You do know the difference between non-permanent and permanent member of the UNSC right? Once India becomes permanent member, they have power of veto.

Guess they are not permanent then.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

China has already stated that it does not oppose UNSC seat for India, and would support it. That came from the foreign ministry of China, and should have been the end of debate.

You claim that the Chinese foreign ministry said this?

Give me a source.

 

[S10]

You claim that the Chinese foreign ministry said this?

Give me a source.

Asia Times Online - The best news coverage from South Asia

Kindly go troll somewhere else.

 

[S10]

Guess they are not permanent then.

So you would like American allies such Japan, Germany or Brazil to get the seat?

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Asia Times Online - The best news coverage from South Asia

Kindly go troll somewhere else.

LOL ARE YOU SERIOUS!

That was written by "Siddharth Srivastava", not the Chinese foreign ministry.

And what the Chinese side actually said was this:

During his visit, Tang said, "The Chinese government is supportive of a reasonable and necessary reform of the UN Security Council, believing that the reform should take into account the interest of all parties, the developing countries in particular, follow the principle of equitable distribution, and give priority to increased representation of the developing countries. The Chinese government values India's influence and role in international and regional affairs and is willing to see a greater Indian role in the international arena, the United Nations included."

"We hope to see India playing a larger and constructive role in the Security Council for world peace and development," Tang said in response to questions by journalists. "China fully understands and endorses your country's interest in playing a bigger role in international affairs," he said.

 

[tanlixiang28776]

So you would like American allies such Japan, Germany or Brazil to get the seat?

No I would prefer no one else gets a seat

 

[S10]

LOL ARE YOU SERIOUS!

That was written by "Siddharth Srivastava", not the Chinese foreign ministry.

And what the Chinese side actually said was this:

Do I really need to spell it out for you or are you really that dense? India is already a non-permanent member of the UNSC and an expanded role would mean a permanent seat.

No I would prefer no one else gets a seat

5 members, 3 of them are members of NATO. Right, really great for China right there.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Do I really need to spell it out for you or are you really that dense? India is already a non-permanent member of the UNSC and an expanded role would mean a permanent seat.

The Chinese foreign ministry has not pledged to support India for a permanent seat at the UNSC.

S10, what does this mean?

I used to be quite favourable to India actually, but the more I learn about India, the less optimistic I get. The above quote describes that effort.