Will the USA ever risk their allegiance with Pakistan and back their bid? 3 permanent members - UK, Russia & France - would advocate, while china would probably abstain. VIEWS????
2007-01-10 01:08:45 · 8 answers · asked by DeZZy 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
India is still a third world country, not quite ready for a role as a world leader. They have one of the fastest growing economies but the number of people living in poverty is approximately 50% and there are human rights issues caused by the remnants of the caste system. India was not offered a seat on the Security council, they are campaigning for it.
Just because a country has nuclear weapons does not make them a world leader. Pakistan, India, North Korea and Iran need to stop being rewarded for further spreading the risks of nuclear wepons. Russia is in a similar posiition and only joined the UN with a permanent seat, and due to France's attrocities in Africa they should be forced tro forfeit their seat, so what they think is irrelevant.
2007-01-10 01:17:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
Dude,
A) There are 5 (NOT 3) Permanent Members of the Security Council. The USA, Russia, UK, France, China.
It was set up that way when the UN was started towards the end of WW2. If you know history you will see that these are the five strongest Allied powers during WW2. This is not an accident, because the UN was set up by the Allies.
B) Inida was still part of the British Empire when the UN was set up. India would not even have been considered for permanent seat on the Security Council at that time.
C) It is possible to get TEMPORARY seats on the Security Council. They rotate. I don't know how long the nation gets the seat or how they are allocated. I think they are elected somehow within the UN. Go look at Wikipedia or Google.
D) PERMANENT seats are not and never have been available. It is likely that they never will be. There was a lot of talk in the 80s about Japan getting a permanent seat. There was some talk about Germany getting one too. That's all it has ever been, just talk.
The thing is, if the UN started to monkey around with the UN Charter, the 5 nations that now have permanent seats might loose those seats. The UK and France aren't as big as they used to be, they might very well see themselves kicked off in favor of someone else, so they would veto any changes to the charter that might lead to them loosing their permanent seat someday. Russia is still pretty important, but they aren't #2 anymore like they were during the days of the USSR... they wouldn't loose their seat right away, but they can certianly see that if the permanent seats go away they might loose theirs someday... especially if the other permanent members ganged up on them and pushed for it. The USA would be worried about all the little Third World Countires going off on an "anti-imperialist" rant and voting them off. China probably has the safest seat of all.
So no, India did not reject a PERMANENT seat on the Security Council because no such seat was ever, or likely will ever be, offered to anybody.
2007-01-10 01:28:05 · answer #2 · answered by Larry R 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
In the present circumstances it is very highly unlikely that India will secure a permanent UNSC seat at least for the next 10 to 15 years.The formalities in this regard will be a long drawn out affair and will not be completed anywhere for a decade at least,by which time the whole equation may change and regional balances may be altered radically.So the answer to your poser is "may and then again may not". Have an Unambiguous Day.
2016-05-23 03:44:32 · answer #3 · answered by Nedra 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
India was never offered a seat on the Security Council. Secretly, India on the SC would probably be in the US's interests to help serve as a regional counterbalance to China.
For that reason, an Indian bid for an SC spot would almost certainly be blocked by the Chinese.
2007-01-10 01:28:09 · answer #4 · answered by MaybePOTUS 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
india was offered the seat in the 1960's to whoever illiterate about UN history but india wasn't ready top take on the roll
so stupidly our prime minister refused the offer from america and here we are today again applying for permanant membership
2007-01-10 16:35:04 · answer #5 · answered by YR1947 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
UN security council is not represent whole humans in the world. only ther selfish countries and make their own decitions. i feel coming the decad UN will be the ruber stamp of few nation and gone to a self death
2007-01-11 16:26:58 · answer #6 · answered by keral 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you dreaming? No one ever offered India a permanent seat on the UN security council. India just wishes it was so. Weird.
2007-01-10 01:13:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
First of all I wanna say to "stev" the idiot that they did get an offer which they declined at the time due to foreign relations.
(if u want proof>> mentioned under India here...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_of_the_United_Nations_Security_Council)
So you shouldnt comment without full knowledge...., looks like you were dreaming when it happened!
Research the G4... seems someone "could" get a seat, and India / Japan look like front runners
2007-01-10 01:37:38 · answer #8 · answered by JD 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋