The Great Game Changer: Belt and Road Intiative (BRI; OBOR)

[Indus Pakistan]

India will win whole wars against big countries soon? gonna ride to Mars again under US supervisor?

It is called living on "paste tense" like this move "Back to the Future" but your from the past living in the future.

 

[Srinivas]

You have no idea how these things work !

It look like you have some comprehension issues, please read again. Why Modi ji wrote long letters of 193 pages to all countries???

US backs China & Russia, blow to Indian UNSC dream

Aug 11, 2015, TOI

NEW DELHI: India's official dream of getting a permanent seat in the UN Security Council was dealt a decisive blow with the US teaming up with China and Russia to oppose negotiations for changes in the body.

After a long and laborious process of discussions, countries have finally come out with a framework text which could be the basis of negotiations to reform the Security Council — not only to admit more countries as permanent members, but also to make its working more transparent. The text was the result of inter-governmental negotiations (IGN) and was introduced in the UN General Assembly by its president Sam Kutesa on August 1.

The text, which may continue to be debated, however, has a short effective life after three biggies —US, China and Russia — came out against it, making any negotiations little more than an academic exercise.

The US stand was a blow largely because its has been what New Delhi believed the most recent and important voice supporting India's permanent UNSC membership. In a letter, the US said, "The IGN is the most appropriate forum for these discussions. It is critical that any reform proposal enjoy broad consensus among member states." Sources said it's just diplomatese for pushing the can down the road.

Indian officials say the IGN was really not going anywhere, but it has become the flavour of the season with all the nay-sayers like US, Russia and China. Washington is willing to consider specific countries for entry into the UNSC but only after they have proved their credentials in their "ability and willingness to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security and to other purposes of the United Nations". But it will not agree to "any alteration or expansion of the veto".

While India will not stake its partnership with the US on its non-support, it does make things awkward. PM Narendra Modi has recently written a long letter to all 193-member countries of the UN pushing India's case in the UNSC. Indian diplomats believe text-based negotiations are its best chance to get into the UNSC.

Russia, India's oldest supporter for the UNSC seat, also supported the inter-governmental negotiations, rejecting the text-based one. "The intergovernmental negotiations on the UN Security Council reform should proceed in a calm, transparent and inclusive atmosphere free from artificial deadlines. If a consensus on this issue is not possible to achieve, then in any case it will be politically necessary to secure the support by the overwhelming majority of the member-states — a substantially greater number than the legally required two thirds of votes at the General Assembly," it said. That, say diplomats, will be almost impossible to achieve.

China has remained a steadfast opponent to the process of UNSC reform, and has been the unofficial sponsor of the 13-nation group UfC. So China's opposition to the negotiations is not a surprise. Beijing has used its considerable clout in Africa, Asia and Latin America to build opinion against the text process.

In its response, Beijing said it would refuse to "populate" the document. Outlining its position, China said, "Member-states are still seriously divided on the Security Council reform. No general agreement has been reached on any solution so far. Member-states still need to engage in patient consultations to find a solution that accommodates each other's interests and concerns. Any solution or reform model should enjoy general agreement among member-states.

The five clusters of key issues concerning Security Council reform are interrelated, and should not be addressed in isolation of each other. It is imperative to stick to the approach of a package solution." Indicating that it might be difficult to ever get China's support, it put out what appears to be an impossible position — "No solution on which member-states are seriously divided or approach that may cause division among member-states will have China's support."

 

[GURU DUTT]

Poor India, if the master US says no, then it's a no.

whose nations ex president and field marshal wrote a book called "friends not masters" for USA

which nation gave its peshawar air base to CIA to snoop on USSR in 1950s

which nation faught against USSR for USA in 1980's

which nation even after so much harm caused deu to USA's WOT still fights for USA and gives them there bases and terriotories as a passage to afghanistan in exchange of war remmitence and CSF

ever wonderred which nation was imposed with shamefull US acts like "kerry lugar bill"

 

[VelocuR]

You have no idea how these things work !

Oh really, what is it? Tell us more.

 

[Mr.Nair]

Poor India, if the master US says no, then it's a no.

US taunt in your backyard, why are you still trading with them ! what, are u a slave of US or you look self interest first?

We trade with Iran even under US sanction,US regret over incident of one of our diplomat ill treatment,India still deal with Russian military hardware and power plant projects .India does not support sanctions against Russia.Too much master buddy.

You can sell your bullsh**t to some where else !

 

[Speeder 2]

I'd love to the Chinese reactions in Chinese-language forum threads on this... must be hilarious. Anyone got a link?

 

[Huan]

Lots of foreign policy activism or lack thereof in case of India is driven by domestic sensitivities. With such a situation, India cannot be allowed to be a part of UNSC. Plain and simple.

On that table for big boys, we take decisions based on collective agreements and with a principle of give and take irrespective of how much fierce differences we have outside the table. India (when it talks about a diligent track record also brings with it a track record of dilly dallying indecisive behaviour ). Once again I must stress, UNSC cannot be a hostage to domestic turmoil in some place.

Also, India playing neutral most of the time hardly brings any marginal benefit in the working of UNSC.

We might reconsider after maybe 15 years.

It is like applying to be a part of a tight-knit elite group I suppose. Hard to get in.

 

[mike2000 is back]

well, guys ,pls remember:


1.it is because UNSC has P5 as its big daddies that UNSC is something important.

it is not because P5 has the veto of UNSC that P5 are somebody mighty
it is always because of their powerful industry/decent R&D ,instead of "Veto" ,that P5 are mighty


2. UNSC is just a tool of P5 keeping their political previldges.

if UNSC doesn't not obey P5 or are not useful any more , P5 would just set up another alternatives tool and abadon UNSC as used toiliet tissues..

In fact, they did so with "the league of Nation" last time.

It has much less to do with R&D or industry/infustrialization etc if it did then germany and Japan will be part of P5 OBVIOUSLY. China also didnt have a large industry(it was an agrarian society when the UNSC was formed) or R&D.

The UNSC simply came about after the second world war. The large major INDEPENDENT countries/powers who fought and emerged victorious automatically got access to the P5. OUT of these five just three actually got to write the rules of the post war world order, i.e U.K U.S,and U.S.S.R. These three powers were all industrial giants and world powers with interests and influence spanning the entire globe(Germany and Japan as well,but they lost the war), and Most of all THEY WERE THE VICTORS OF THE WAR. So winner take it all applied in this case and they wrote the rules which the world followed.
The other two powers i.e China and France got included in P5 as they were pary of the major independent countries who also took part in the war. but werent major stakeholders in the post war high tables/rule writers for different reasons.

For France even though it was an advanced european industrial world power with colonies and influence spanning from africa to indo china, it lost surprisingly fast to Germany and was occupied and ruled by the Nazis and its government had to cooperate with the nazis which greatly reduced its own influence/image.
CHINA on the other hand was an impoverished country/power with a little to no industry and made of warlords who ruled over their own territory, though it had a central governement. The governemnt KMT was also facing a rebelion by communist CCP supported by U.S.S.R and thus couldnt use all its resources to fully focus on the fight against JAPAN as it was fighting a civil war with communist rebels at the same time. So China after WWII still had to continue its civil war, which greatly affected the country from making full use if being a victor in the great war as the KMT was busy fighting the empowered CCP , so had little focus on negotiating/being at the high tables of writing the post world war rules. Had there been no civil war , then China would have got far more atter the war than it did e.g senkakus, taiwan, SCS ,maybe even mongolia etc.

So UNSC permanent seat was just as a result of the victors of the war. They were all INDEPENDENT powers at the time, though the power/industrial might/influence level varied.

In short there wont obviously be any change whatsoever in the P5+1 arrangement.

 

[Hypersonicmissiles]

Problem with India is that they actually believe the US is their ally and will do everything for them.

The reality is the US is a ruthless power that will do everything to prevent a rival power from challenging it. Russia and China are problematic enough, the last thing the US wants is India given the power to counter American actions.

India will never get UNSC veto power. America, Russia and China will make sure of it. Of course in public they will support India but when its decision time, they will back off from promises.

India isn't taken seriously on the world stage as they don't have an independent foreign policy.

 

[SrNair]

US backs China & Russia, blow to Indian UNSC dream

Aug 11, 2015, TOI

NEW DELHI: India's official dream of getting a permanent seat in the UN Security Council was dealt a decisive blow with the US teaming up with China and Russia to oppose negotiations for changes in the body.

After a long and laborious process of discussions, countries have finally come out with a framework text which could be the basis of negotiations to reform the Security Council — not only to admit more countries as permanent members, but also to make its working more transparent. The text was the result of inter-governmental negotiations (IGN) and was introduced in the UN General Assembly by its president Sam Kutesa on August 1.

The text, which may continue to be debated, however, has a short effective life after three biggies —US, China and Russia — came out against it, making any negotiations little more than an academic exercise.

The US stand was a blow largely because its has been what New Delhi believed the most recent and important voice supporting India's permanent UNSC membership. In a letter, the US said, "The IGN is the most appropriate forum for these discussions. It is critical that any reform proposal enjoy broad consensus among member states." Sources said it's just diplomatese for pushing the can down the road.

Indian officials say the IGN was really not going anywhere, but it has become the flavour of the season with all the nay-sayers like US, Russia and China. Washington is willing to consider specific countries for entry into the UNSC but only after they have proved their credentials in their "ability and willingness to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security and to other purposes of the United Nations". But it will not agree to "any alteration or expansion of the veto".

While India will not stake its partnership with the US on its non-support, it does make things awkward. PM Narendra Modi has recently written a long letter to all 193-member countries of the UN pushing India's case in the UNSC. Indian diplomats believe text-based negotiations are its best chance to get into the UNSC.

Russia, India's oldest supporter for the UNSC seat, also supported the inter-governmental negotiations, rejecting the text-based one. "The intergovernmental negotiations on the UN Security Council reform should proceed in a calm, transparent and inclusive atmosphere free from artificial deadlines. If a consensus on this issue is not possible to achieve, then in any case it will be politically necessary to secure the support by the overwhelming majority of the member-states — a substantially greater number than the legally required two thirds of votes at the General Assembly," it said. That, say diplomats, will be almost impossible to achieve.

China has remained a steadfast opponent to the process of UNSC reform, and has been the unofficial sponsor of the 13-nation group UfC. So China's opposition to the negotiations is not a surprise. Beijing has used its considerable clout in Africa, Asia and Latin America to build opinion against the text process.

In its response, Beijing said it would refuse to "populate" the document. Outlining its position, China said, "Member-states are still seriously divided on the Security Council reform. No general agreement has been reached on any solution so far. Member-states still need to engage in patient consultations to find a solution that accommodates each other's interests and concerns. Any solution or reform model should enjoy general agreement among member-states.

The five clusters of key issues concerning Security Council reform are interrelated, and should not be addressed in isolation of each other. It is imperative to stick to the approach of a package solution." Indicating that it might be difficult to ever get China's support, it put out what appears to be an impossible position — "No solution on which member-states are seriously divided or approach that may cause division among member-states will have China's support."

We are not going anywhere .
They can resist for around 2 decades ,maximum.
We should check their response of these guys when we pass 5 trillion$ mark.
Manufacturing and own defence is already in full throttle .We dont have to waste money for these Seat .Just concentrate on our economy ,technology and military.That is all we need.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

And I constantly hear from Indian members that we just have to "wait and see", and that India will join the P5 in a few years time.

I would tag them, but I don't remember their names. No need either, all the old threads regarding UNSC reform are preserved on this site.

The basic underlying fact is that the P5 members are not going to dilute their own veto power. It makes no sense at all.

This is a 30 year project, not a 5 year project

We are not going anywhere .
They can resist for around 2 decades ,maximum.
We should check their response of these guys when we pass 5 trillion$ mark.
Manufacturing and own defence is already in full throttle .We dont have to waste money for these Seat .Just concentrate on our economy ,technology and military.That is all we need.

I think the decisive factor is going to be UK, their decline is so dramatic that they'll e a chicken-shit power in 15 years. Imagine if Norway/ Sri Lanka was a P5 member, it would be just lame.

 

[The BrOkEn HeArT]

"democratic UNSC" is not UN,but G7.

it has existed for decades......

if so, India has not been offter a seat of G7,purely because India's backward economy does not deserve it.

What was China's economy status when China got permanent seat in UNSC??

 

[Place Of Space]

When the Indian time and time again justify for Japanese crime during WWII, I almost realize India has little chance.
Firstly you need to know how the UN come out, how the UNSC established. The UN establishment was based on WWII victory over Axis. The world changes, but the origin can't be changed, at least for a long period, the present world rules won't change.

 

[Guynextdoor2]

When the Indian time and time again justify for Japanese crime during WWII, I almost realize India has little chance.
Firstly you need to know how the UN come out, how the UNSC established. The UN establishment was based on WWII victory over Axis. The world changes, but the origin can't be changed, at least for a long period, the present world rules won't change.

No Indian has justified Japanese War Crimes. That is a blatant lie.

 

[dy1022]

This is a 30 year project, not a 5 year project



I think the decisive factor is going to be UK, their decline is so dramatic that they'll e a chicken-shit power in 15 years. Imagine if Norway/ Sri Lanka was a P5 member, it would be just lame.

Yes sir, Just look at what's Mike 2000 is back said in here, we'll know one day ,There will be no Uk but India in the P5 club!


Maybe Mike should eat more Fish and chips for saving Briton where 300 days out of 365 are rainning!