US backs India on UNSC seat despite Syria vote

[Vibs]

I personally is highly critical of my Govt for wasting time and energy after the UNSC seat. There are far better things to do than this.

Who in this present world gives a flying f*** about resolutions passed in UN. UNSC can only pass resolutions against militarily weaker nations that P5 is sure of taking down & also stand to gain from its downfall and if countries have godfathers in the big table (like Israel has USA )they don't even give a damn. Even African warlords no longer care about UN let alone powerful sovereign country like India .

I think that the time has come for UN to reassess and reorganize or become obsolete like its predecessor- League of nations.

You are looking at only 1 part of the picture. That's always going to present a distorted image. India's push behind a UNSC seat is going on parallelly to it's push for a BRICS head for IMF, an IBSA (India, Brazil, South Africa) league within UNSC working as a 3rd front to NATO and China-Russia, seeking permanent membership into the SCO as well as proactive steps in global economic forums against developing nations. It's not going to pay off immediately.These things take years if not decades. It's aimed at a future point of time. Sitting on our behinds and looking inwards oblivious to the happenings outside is what we did from 70's to 90's. We lost almost all diplomatic muscle and were close to bankruptcy.

Unlikely.

The P5 and their allies make up most of the political power on Earth. Even just the two nations of America and Russia, have more "diplomatic" power than any other organization could dream of.

The UN also contains every single recognized nation on the planet.

It's gone beyond diplomatic powers of just 2 countries. The recent trend indicates that NATO alliance has been using the UNSC to push their own agendas. The other fronts have been mute witnesses. There is a growing realization in India,China,Russia and Germany that there is growing discontent around the world with the UNSC and there is a need to improve the credibility. It's functioning now seems to be a NATO autocracy with Russia and China unable to balance out the equation despite having veto powers.

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

It's gone beyond diplomatic powers of just 2 countries. The recent trend indicates that NATO alliance has been using the UNSC to push their own agendas. The other fronts have been mute witnesses. There is a growing realization in India,China,Russia and Germany that there is growing discontent around the world with the UNSC and there is a need to improve the credibility. It's functioning now seems to be a NATO autocracy with Russia and China unable to balance out the equation despite having veto powers.

That's right. The real driving force within the Security Council is NATO.

Russia and China will often use the veto simply for leverage, and to gain concessions from the other powers, in return for not opposing their motions.

All nations seek to follow their own national interests, and that is exactly how it works in the UNSC.

 

[Vibs]

That's right. The real driving force within the Security Council is NATO.

Russia and China will often use the veto simply for leverage, and to gain concessions from the other powers, in return for not opposing their motions.

All nations seek to follow their own national interests, and that is exactly how it works in the UNSC.

Glad you agree. The problem is that unlike NATO there is not a strong enough alliance within the UN to push other agendas. India's bid for the UNSC permanent seat was driven by the fact that it wanted it's voice to heard in a relevant forum expecially considering a large contribution of the peacekeeping force comes from India (and Pakistan and Bangladesh).
Recent trends within the UNSC seems to have caused it to rethink it's strategy and form an IBSA within the UNSC as well as attempt to be part of the SCO (an organization it earlier viewed with distrust). Unless there is a drastic change in the way the UNSC functions (including the permanent members) there is a strong likely hood of regional alliances taking up areas earlier debated at the UNSC. All this at a time when US is talking about cutting it's contribution to NATO and backing away from leading NATO campaigns.

 

[BigTree.CN]

If China goes back on its promise, then it will lose credibility. Are you suggesting China can not be trusted ?

There is no promise here, China along with the other P5s, promised nothing.

if you dont want to include india as a permenant member,then which country do you want to include ? somalia

All the P5s want to include no one.

 

[Awesome]

India is already a member of UNSC.

I didn't contradict that, read what I said again.

India is not a permanent member of the UNSC. Pakistan was this temp member a few years back, its always been rotational and new members are brought in every 2 years.

 

[BigTree.CN]

@Chinese-Dragon- As much as I hate to admit it, I agree with and understand what you're saying about the whole "way of politics" thing. Honestly, as the current situation stands, the Chinese ARE playing it really smart. Wait and see what the strategic advantages/disadvantages are of supporting India, and then act in due time. Sheisty and smart...:/

China is not the only country that is playing the "wait and see" tactic, actually none of them promised anything concrete to India. They are just doing lip services to make India happy, and sadly Indians are feeling happy.

Something Indians must understand is, none of the P5 wants to include India into this special club, that is the main factor that will stop India from getting a UNSC seat. China may seem to be playing the bad guy on the surface, but underneath all the P5 are bad guys. I hope Indians can see that through.

 

[harpoon]

You are looking at only 1 part of the picture. That's always going to present a distorted image. India's push behind a UNSC seat is going on parallelly to it's push for a BRICS head for IMF, an IBSA (India, Brazil, South Africa) league within UNSC working as a 3rd front to NATO and China-Russia, seeking permanent membership into the SCO as well as proactive steps in global economic forums against developing nations. It's not going to pay off immediately.These things take years if not decades. It's aimed at a future point of time. Sitting on our behinds and looking inwards oblivious to the happenings outside is what we did from 70's to 90's. We lost almost all diplomatic muscle and were close to bankruptcy.

And what have we done recently. We had a golden opportunity to be seen as the champion of the under dogs if we had supported the resolution against Qaddafi at UNSC... but instead we chose to abstain, as the Govt was afraid of reaction back home where in some quarters (no need to explain who) where words like NATO, America are considered blasphemy. Now the Libyan rebels openly said that those countries who abstained like India, China, Russia will not get any future oil contracts. We lost out not only on the diplomatic front but also on the economic front. Libya was home to thousands of Indian expats. Now their future also seems doubtful.

This is the reality bro. Our govt cannot take hard cold decisions expected of a world power even when fate give us the opportunity. It seems we are much happier in fence sitting, non-interference diplomacy. So first let the Indian political leadership grow a strong spine, then we can talk of big things like UNSC seat.

 

[Awesome]

The thread doesn't say that. Can you quote an official statement from US which supports your claim?

Can you quote something otherwise?

UNSC: US warns India not to seek veto power - Democratic Underground

 

[Vibs]

China is not the only country that is playing the "wait and see" tactic, actually none of them promised anything concrete to India. They are just doing lip services to make India happy, and sadly Indians are feeling happy.

Something Indians must understand is, none of the P5 wants to include India into this special club, that is the main factor that will stop India from getting a UNSC seat. China may seem to be playing the bad guy on the surface, but underneath all the P5 are bad guys. I hope Indians can see that through.

That's precisely the reason why India has created a third front. Remember India's demand is not only for it'sown inclusion, but for expansion of the council. This means added lobbying by other hopefuls like Germany, Brazil, Japan and South Africa. Media releases by India is a tactic to add pressure and create an image that suit's it's agenda. Every nation does that.

---------- Post added at 10:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:21 AM ----------

And what have we done recently. We had a golden opportunity to be seen as the champion of the under dogs if we had supported the resolution against Qaddafi at UNSC... but instead we chose to abstain, as the Govt was afraid of reaction back home where in some quarters (no need to explain who) where words like NATO, America are considered blasphemy. Now the Libyan rebels openly said that those countries who abstained like India, China, Russia will not get any future oil contracts. We lost out not only on the diplomatic front but also on the economic front. Libya was home to thousands of Indian expats. Now their future also seems doubtful.

This is the reality bro. Our govt cannot take hard cold decisions expected of a world power even when fate give us the opportunity. It seems we are much happier in fence sitting, non-interference diplomacy. So first let the Indian political leadership grow a strong spine, then we can talk of big things like UNSC seat.

You still stuck on Gaddafi? read the thread title bro. We are now on Syria. India along with Brazil and South Africa pro-actively went to Syria and engaged in diplomatic dialogue while the UNSC bickered.

 

[harpoon]

Unlikely.

The P5 and their allies make up most of the political power on Earth. Even just the two nations of America and Russia, have more "diplomatic" power than any other organization could dream of.

The UN also contains every single recognized nation on the planet.

The same can be said about League of Nations, but that didn't stop the WW2 from happening..

I am only saying that an Organization is only powerful as the member's belief & Confidence in it. If the member states of UN begin to think that they are being taken for a ride by P5, their confidence in UN will wither and so is the organization as a whole.

 

[harpoon]

You still stuck on Gaddafi? read the thread title bro. We are now on Syria. India along with Brazil and South Africa pro-actively went to Syria and engaged in diplomatic dialogue while the UNSC bickered.

Your link is not working. So checked TOI, but anywhere in it is said that India is talking with Syria.

In a preview of things to come, the UN Human Rights Council approved a resolution that called for an investigation into possible rights violations committed by Syrian security forces. But four nations including Russia and China voted against it, while India and eight other countries abstained.

Assad is killing Syrians like crazy and India is opposed to any resolution against Syria.What the hell?
I can only say that it is a childish move by India so that we are not seen as American lackeys and enter the good books of nations with anti-American sentiments. Again we sacrificed the greater good of the humanity for our selfish needs.

 

[Vibs]

Your link is not working. So checked TOI, but anywhere in it is said that India is talking with Syria.

In a preview of things to come, the UN Human Rights Council approved a resolution that called for an investigation into possible rights violations committed by Syrian security forces. But four nations including Russia and China voted against it, while India and eight other countries abstained.

Assad is killing Syrians like crazy and India is opposed to any resolution against Syria.What the hell?
I can only say that it is a childish move by India so that we are not seen as American lackeys and enter the good books of nations with anti-American sentiments. Again we sacrificed the greater good of the humanity for our selfish needs.

I'm surprised the link doesn't work. Google for IBSA heads to Syria for talks. You'll know what I am talking about. You can check this link. India, Brazil, South Africa on peace mission to Syria | World | DAWN.COM

Meanwhile this will be a good read.
NEW DELHI: India justified it decision to abstain from a vote on a UN human rights resolution on Syria, saying engaging the country in a constructive dialogue was a more pragmatic option. The government said in a statement that India does not regard ``spotlighting and finger -pointing'' at a country for human right violations as helpful.

``We believe that engaging the country concerned in collaborative and constructive dialogue and partnership is a more pragmatic and productive way forward. This is what India along with its partners in IBSA, Brazil and South Africa has done,'' it said.

India regretted that the country-specific resolution had been proposed without evolving any consensus. ``However, since some members of this Council have found it necessary to propose a country-specific resolution, it would have been desirable had this been done by consensus, without resorting to a vote, to reflect the shared perspective and unanimous views of the Council. This has regrettably not happened,'' it said.

``We hope that our position on the vote is not misconstrued as condoning violations of human rights in any country, including Syria. On the contrary, we believe that it is imperative for every society to have the means of addressing human rights violations through robust mechanisms within themselves. International scrutiny should be resorted to only when such mechanisms are non-existent or have consistently failed,'' it added.
India justifies move to abstain from UN rights vote on Syria - The Times of India

 

[no_name]

I think if India work on their economy/compresensive power sooner or later her influence will guarantee a ticket to the UNSC. But critical mass needs to be reached first.

 

[Awesome]

Why would the P5 dilute their powers?

A more honest strategy would be if all these nations fought to get the UNSC removed or at least remove the veto powers of these countries.

Totally unfair system, the entire world should get a chance to vote on issues.

 

[DSingh04]

China is not the only country that is playing the "wait and see" tactic, actually none of them promised anything concrete to India. They are just doing lip services to make India happy, and sadly Indians are feeling happy.

Something Indians must understand is, none of the P5 wants to include India into this special club, that is the main factor that will stop India from getting a UNSC seat. China may seem to be playing the bad guy on the surface, but underneath all the P5 are bad guys. I hope Indians can see that through.

Woah, woah. Don't get me wrong, I never called China the bad guy here. In looking out for one's national interests, there's really no "bad guy," or so I believe. And yeah, the other members of the P5 probably are doing just that, wouldn't be surprised in the slightest. Hell, even the whole issue CD and other members have brought up about the veto and how it's not present in any of the "promises" by the P5 is something I agree with. As much as some of my fellow Indians would like to think otherwise, logically it makes sense that the P5 don't want to dilute their power. PERFECT sense. And I've said this before, but this whole "permanent seat" thing is a bunch of bull. We should not worry about this, and just focus on more pressing matters, like poverty reduction and raising the literacy rate. That would be so much nicer than a permanent seat in my eyes.