Hello_10
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2011
- Messages
- 1,477
- Reaction score
- -2
and thats simply because China is a peaceful nationnumber of veto
Russia:128
US:83(59 Individual Combat, in which 42 of them for Israel)
England:32(22 times with US)
France:18(13 times with US and England)
China:9(1971-1978:one for Pak, one for Palestine;2001-2012:4times with Russia for Myanmar, Zimbabwe and Syria )
India has nothing to do with major issues like taliban and Alqaeda and Nuclear Iran, India should solve its own issues first.
sir neither India nor even Indonesia, Brazil have much to say in many of the war conflicts related to Taliban, Al Qaeda, Iran etc, most of the time we find Indian foreign policy is very happy while being as it is. but here we are discussing the case, "how Veto holding of UK, France is justified whose population is hardly around 60mil, very small countries as compare to Indonesia. and in case of an 'expected' economic fall of these two and likely 'high' growth of Indonesia during this decade which would make its economic size well above these two European countries, then from here, why a four times bigger country like Indonesia won't get Veto which may use its Veto in the cases to defend interests of Muslims? even if we don't find India, Brazil, Indonesia to be active in any of the war politics......"
India is very happy while being with russia, many of Russian/SU's Veto were used in favor of India itself. but if there will be any expansion of UN's security council, if, and if we know that Indonesia is going to be a dominant economy by 2020 while Japan has a heavy resistance from CHina also then how expansion of UN's security council may be done without offering Veto to Indonesia, Brazil, India even if these 3 are not very active in war politics? and also we do keep a space for Turkey for its claim, as we do know that this world will have been dramatically changed by next 7-8 years