Russia, China support India’s UNSC aspirations

[Zebronic]

Ok tell me one place in the world outside of India where India has significant influence.

The Americans are running afghanistan. The Chinese have basically trumped India in Bangledesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Burma.

India is playing catch up in her own neighbourhood.

Japan is still waiting for India to become a major palyer in Asia for obvious reason.

Are you kidding...do you really thing we are playing catch up with our neighbors...you comment can't go through your Japanese flag...use UN flag(represent all nation) or your original flag....

 

[jha]

Ok tell me one place in the world outside of India where India has significant influence.

The Americans are running afghanistan. The Chinese have basically trumped India in Bangledesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Burma.

India is playing catch up in her own neighbourhood.

Japan is still waiting for India to become a major palyer in Asia for obvious reason.

only if international diplomacy were that simple...

everything which is visible in international diplomacy has an equal sized body which is invisible...

about cheap labor in indonesia and africa.-- they need decades to catch up the no. of skilled CHEAP labors available in INDIA...and in decades should i tell you where will india be , going by our rate of development..

about china TRUMPING india in backyard..
1. Bangladesh--AL is more of like india friendly govt...even their oppn. is not india hating atleast openly..
2. Nepal- No govt. in nepal can go against india..whatever any one sitting thousands of mile away may think..too much bonding ..
3. SRI-LANKA- better ask some sri-lankan president..plus keep in mind everybody here keeps good relations with everybody..
4. BURMA-- i need not say anything..

 

[kamakazi attack]

Are you kidding...do you really thing we are playing catch up with our neighbors...you comment can't go through your Japanese flag...use UN flag(represent all nation) or your original flag....

uhh playing catch up with the US and China in South Asia. Why did you think Obama and Hu had a communique in regards to South Asia while basicalyl sidestepping India? And India went ballastic with the US' asking China to play a more significant role in S Asia?

 

[Zebronic]

uhh playing catch up with the US and China in South Asia. Why did you think Obama and Hu had a communique in regards to South Asia while basicalyl sidestepping India? And India went ballastic with the US' asking China to play a more significant role in S Asia?

You want to say China shouldn't have and problem if India cooperate with Taiwan or Tibet..

 

[kamakazi attack]

only if international diplomacy were that simple...

everything which is visible in international diplomacy has an equal sized body which is invisible...

about cheap labor in indonesia and africa.-- they need decades to catch up the no. of skilled CHEAP labors available in INDIA...and in decades should i tell you where will india be , going by our rate of development..

about china TRUMPING india in backyard..
1. Bangladesh--AL is more of like india friendly govt...even their oppn. is not india hating atleast openly..
2. Nepal- No govt. in nepal can go against india..whatever any one sitting thousands of mile away may think..too much bonding ..
3. SRI-LANKA- better ask some sri-lankan president..plus keep in mind everybody here keeps good relations with everybody..
4. BURMA-- i need not say anything..

You're absolutely right that internationally diplomacy is far from being simple.

Because if it was simple India would and should deserve a UNSC seat by now.

No need to get roudy up at me. I am all for India.

The truth to the matter is that India is not a significatn player in the world's stage. Youc an argue about the future all you want. I am talkign about the present day.

With all the impressive stats you've mentioned you will not be able to explain why India is not apart of the G8

If India doesn't have the clout to be apart of the G8 then it is far and away of having the clout to be UNSC member with veto.

 

[kamakazi attack]

You want to say China shouldn't have and problem if India cooperate with Taiwan or Tibet..

I am sure the Chinese would have a problem with anybody co- operating with Taiwan and Tibet.

The Chinese are in Sri Lanka, Bangledesh and so on because they can offer what India can't provide.

What is India going to offer Japan or Taiwan? Nukes? These countries can build nueks if they chose to. Taiwan and Japan economic livelyhood is ever dependent on China.

I don't think India would ever be brass enough to do anything in Tibet. Perhaps the US but India would find itself in huge trouble internally with kashmir, maoist if India stuck it nose in Tibet.

 

[jha]

You're absolutely right that internationally diplomacy is far from being simple.

Because if it was simple India would and should deserve a UNSC seat by now.

No need to get roudy up at me. I am all for India.

The truth to the matter is that India is not a significatn player in the world's stage. Youc an argue about the future all you want. I am talkign about the present day.

With all the impressive stats you've mentioned you will not be able to explain why India is not apart of the G8

If India doesn't have the clout to be apart of the G8 then it is far and away of having the clout to be UNSC member with veto.

i dont beleive in d*** measuring contest . so be assured whatever i told above was not intentioned to hurt in anyways..

The thing is that When JAPAN was going great guns two major superpowers were at loggerheads ..so JAPAN did not get the notice it deserved..the kind of growth it showed in those days , if it would be showing now, neither america nor any other country would have stopped it from bein a super-power..because now a days situation is much different from that time..no SOVIET and comparatively less dominant AMERICA..

The biggest contributor in development in coming times is going to be HUMAN RESOURCE...thats where INDIA wins hands down..60% of indian population comprises of youth..
As much as capital is concerned there are many economical powerful countries who are ready to invest here and are investing..including JAPAN and CANADA..
SO when there is going to be investments , skilled labor to drive the economy , there is going to be major development..thats the main impact ...LABOR + MARKET (huge)..

 

[jagjitnatt]

$32 billions is still a drop in the bucket. Getting back to the topic here. Japan had all the money in the world, a democracy and one of US closest ally. Yet for all that worth it was enver close to getting a UNSC seat.

Simply put, Japan foreign policy has always look like the US because the American basically told Japan what to do internationally.

If India falls in line(like voting against Iran) this will look good in the eyes of the Americans, but it will only reiterate the fact that India doesn't have any choice but to fal in line.

The main reason that Japan never got a seat was because the number of permanent seats was fixed at 5 till 2004 when a proposal was made to extend it to 10.

And all the 5 permanent members were appointed after WWII, when Japan lost.

Only the Allied countries were appointed as permanent members.

Also Japan was not US's ally since dawn. Remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki?? That wasn't a kind gift I guess.

It is only when Japan lost all its power that US agreed to help Japan but in doing so it had its own objectives. They got the tech from Japan, they also restricted Japan to a small powerless nation.

Japan before WWII was way way more powerful and were feared all over the world.

US is just using India and China to disturb the regional harmony. That is its only hope of remaining the undisputed king in the future.

Sorry if my post sounded offensive. I didn't mean it to be so.

 

[kamakazi attack]

I am very aware of the beginning of the UN and its 5 permannt members.

I am bringing up Japan as an example because somebody here brought out that with India's economic might it should meet the criteria of beign a UNSC veto member.

Japan has met the economic aspects for decades but geopolitic wise it Japan's economic prowess was never commensurate with it geopolitic influnces. While it is one of the biggest donour to the UN it has really no say.

This question has been ask for years within Japanese political circles is why all the money being put into the UN equal no power.

Of course everybody in Japan knows that everybody else in the world see Japan's foereign policy as an extension of US' foreign policy. The relationship between the US and Japan have worked out for both side where the US have a trusted ally against the Soviet and now a counterbalance to China in East Asia, and Japan got to make money and develop a world class economy.

In conclusion Japan have the money, is well respected and well-liked outside of East Asia. However, because for years it been basically a junoir partner of the US it has basically no geopolitica clout to think of.

With a crazy Kim Jong il with Nukes with a China that's still holding onto WW2 with nukes, any other country with the money and nuke capabilities that Japan has woudl arm themselve to the teeth by now, but Uncle Sam says no.

That speak volumes right there.

 

[jagjitnatt]

I am bringing up Japan as an example because somebody here brought out that with India's economic might it should meet the criteria of beign a UNSC veto member.

If someone said that, then he is mistaken.

India is eligible for becoming the next permanent member because of the following reasons:

- it is an economic power
- it is diplomatically powerful
- it is stable politically
- it has a great record with the UN
- it represents 1/6 population of the world (there is no other regional permanent member. China is there but we are completely different people. Diff culture, diff traditions, diff race, we are separated by Himalyas. )
- it is a military power
- it has been involved in peacekeeping missions, humanitarian aid, been helping poor all over the world and contributing its bit in every field.


The combination of all the above makes us eligible. There is not a single hard and fast reason.

Regards.

 

[faithfulguy]

...If India would disappear today, the developed world would lose the biggest arms importer, biggest open market, cheap labor, and most of all the lose the potential that a billion of us hold.

US has the world's biggest open market. Not India.

 

[faithfulguy]

Ok tell me one place in the world outside of India where India has significant influence.

In the Indian reservations 30 minutes from my house. The casinos and the spa we went to just recently.

 

[faithfulguy]

If for some reason UN doesn't have proper representation of the world's powers. Then it will come to an end and a new organization setup. Until then, UNSC is the world's primary political organization

 

[Abhiras]

Thats what wikipedia says on india's bid

India has the world's second largest population and is the world's largest liberal democracy. It is also the world's twelfth largest economy and fourth largest in terms of purchasing power parity. Currently, India maintains the world's third largest active armed force. India is the third largest contributor of troops to United Nations Peacekeeping missions after Pakistan and Bangladesh.

India's bid is unequivocally backed by permanent members France, Russia and the United Kingdom. The Chinese government in Beijing has recently advocated the candidacy.Also, several countries like Bangladesh, Chile, Australia, and the African Union have openly supported India's candidacy. However, India's bid is roughly opposed to Pakistan.

Though initially opposed by the Chinese due to geo-political reasons (China being an ally of India's arch-rival Pakistan and the country also having fought a brief war with India in 1962), recent history has turned China's official support for India's candidature from negative to neutral to positive, in correlation with stronger economic ties.[citation needed] On 11 April 2005 China announced it would support India's bid for a permanent seat, but without a veto. Although the U.S. officially does not back India's bid — for various reasons, some of which remain decidedly unclear — it has privately been eager to work with India and to support the nation (which translates to not using a veto).[citation needed] However Indo-American relations are currently improving from the Cold War levels of de facto derision, marked by an alliance of mutuality, recently, in March 2006, by the US President George W. Bush making a visit to India, signing a civilian nuclear power sharing programme.

Taking into account its huge population and growing economic and political clout, India is a strong contender to clinch a permanent seat. Another factor which bolsters India's candidature is the fact it has participated in several of its activities, including UN operations in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Cyprus, Cambodia, Yemen, Somalia, Rwanda , Namibia, Sinai peninsula, among others.

 

[ao333]

Yes. US has been the grand daddy for quite a long period. But now its facing tough competition and that's why it needs to curb us till the time it can.

China, Russia, Japan and India has developed very nicely over the past decades and will someday tilt the power towards the east. That day would be very hard for the US. The US will do anything to avoid that day. Expect a Soviet type breakdown of one of the above countries.

That is one silly thing you said bro. India's GDP is the size of Russia's at the moment and at the pace it is increasing will overtake several major economies in the coming decade.

Also the whole developed world community today earns most of its revenues from exports and not domestic sales. These countries export to developing countries to earn billions. If India would disappear today, the developed world would lose the biggest arms importer, biggest open market, cheap labor, and most of all the lose the potential that a billion of us hold.

The main reason that Japan never got a seat was because the number of permanent seats was fixed at 5 till 2004 when a proposal was made to extend it to 10.

And all the 5 permanent members were appointed after the WWII, when Japan lost.

Only the Allied countries were appointed as permanent members.

Also Japan was not US's ally since dawn. Remember Hiroshima and Nagasaki?? That wasn't a kind gift I guess.

It is only when Japan lost all its power that US agreed to help Japan but in doing so it had its own objectives. They got the tech from Japan, they also restricted Japan to a small powerless nation.

Japan before WWII was way way more powerful and were feared all over the world.

US is just using India and China to disturb the regional harmony. That is its only hope of remaining the undisputed king in the future.

Sorry if my post sounded offensive. I didn't mean it to be so.

If someone said that, then he is mistaken.

India is eligible for becoming the next permanent member because of the following reasons:

- it is an economic power
- it is diplomatically powerful
- it is stable politically
- it has a great record with the UN
- it represents 1/6 population of the world (there is no other regional permanent member. China is there but we are completely different people. Diff culture, diff traditions, diff race, we are separated by Himalyas. )
- it is a military power
- it has been involved in peacekeeping missions, humanitarian aid, been helping poor all over the world and contributing its bit in every field.


The combination of all the above makes us eligible. There is not a single hard and fast reason.

Regards.

3) Economic power? Wait, aren't you guys in debt? Don't you guys have a negative account balance? I recall that you guys have a trading deficit with both Japan and China. So, what does that denote? No one wants ur crap, and your "domestic" economy is developing on loans, with interest, which will only grow in times to come. By the way, relying on domestic economy means no one outside your country want you BSOD critical error softwares. Japan's economy is slowing down because it made too much use of its domestic economy. It had no buffer when the Plaza Accord came. At the time of crisis, China lifted domestic consumption by lowering interest and increasing wages -- something India has been doing for the past decade. What buffer do you guys have? Your 65 years of life expectancy?

4) Oh my god! India is diplomatically powerful? Yes, if dependent was what you meant... When's the last time you guys spoke up to the United States and Russia? I remember China not willing to stop manipulating its currency and being reluctant to sanction Iran and Japan kicking the US off of Okinawa and doesn't give a **** about western protests regarding whale meat. Will the Ruskies come to your aid when China takes Arunachal Pradesh? They'd just neglect you like Vietnam, LOL

5) Oh no! The Russian Federation will collapse the moment India stops purchasing its soviet-era arms. What will the Russians do with all their oil reserves?!

6) Political stability? Wasn't an Indian politician shot in public just a few days ago? It doesn't happen in China or Japan, lol...

7) The last time I checked, you guys still have 1/4 of Japan or China's economy. Mind you that India has 9 times the population of Japan and is growing at a much slower pace than China. I recall that the commies just grew 11.9% from Jan to Apr 2010, with Tokyo reporting their figures later this month.

8) Wasn't India still ruled by Britain years after WWII ended...? So, since India was a part of the British Empire, which was a part of the Allies during WWII, you guys should be permenant members of the UNSC too, right? I follow your logic!

9) Great record with the UN: don't have veto powers to make any difference.

10) "Military power," correction: "Imported military power"

11) "represents 1/6 population of the world" with only 2% of the world's wealth.

12) I cannot comprehend PPP. Doesn't that just mean defects made and sold in India are cheaper?