2007-02-10 18:34:34 · 7 answers · asked by BESTPAL R 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
It will never happen. Ok. if we have a new world war and whole International political scenario changes with restructuring of power. Than yes, otherwise no!
2007-02-12 00:15:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It won't happen purely because of 1 country: China. You have to realize that allowing another country onto the permanent UN security council will require all five members to give up a little bit of power. The United States had concerns in the past due to the fact that India is a nuclear nation that has had three wars with a fellow nuclear nation Pakistan. This however has changed because there was a India-U.S. Nuclear deal. In a Post 9/11 world, India has become a strategic power in the region, being a democracy and also has a problem with terrorism. India and the U.S. will have a healthy relationship for quite some time. Britain has already approved a previous vote when India tried to join the UN council. Russia and India have a relatively strong relationship, and UK and France are already onboard. Only group that would be against India join the Council would be China, because there is still animosity between those too nations. Problem is, one veto power is all it takes :(
2007-02-11 03:43:53 · answer #2 · answered by arkainisofphoenix 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The UN was created at the end of world war two..before it was the league of nations which was basically the same thing but failed because of many things...mainly it was to slow.
To understand why india cant get a seat as a permanant member (if it did it would be highly unlikely) you must understand the very nature of the UN.
Another international organization was to be created to help police the world...however the world powers that won world war II (the allies) had to be persuaded to the council. Thus they were given permanant seats on the council...otherwise there was no incentive to come. Permanant seats have unparrelled power and although India, indeed qualifies as a world power both economically and militarily, it cannot persuade all countries to grant it permanant seat status. In doing so it would open the flood gates for other countries who are qualified as well.
In addition the US alone does not have the power to instate that kind of power in the UN on india. All 5 permanant seat members must...learn more about how the UN is built up online...its my contention that because of this unfair balance of power...this permamnt seat status that the UN is inherently unfair.
I tried to answer this as quickly as possible however there are many more details and more complicated reasons however these are the main points
2007-02-11 02:41:01 · answer #3 · answered by namsu 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd rather have India than several. However, I think we just don't want the whole world to have a veto on the Security Council.
As a matter of fact, however, I don't think the UN is that highly regarded by US minds. We confer with countries directly.
2007-02-11 10:54:45 · answer #4 · answered by DAR 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Get serious about the goal. You cant say "I want this" and sit back to wait for it to happen. Make changes, implement policy, and contribute! The more worth you create, the more indispensable you will be as a society. Then people will stand with you...
2007-02-11 02:39:49 · answer #5 · answered by X-1 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For AMerica to approve, you need to be Americas puppet. If you don't do what AMerica say, your their enemy. Besides, India won;t get much credit having a nuke and worse not signing the non-nuclear proliferation thingy. Beside you have to convince China too. You might have to hand over disputed territories for their approval.
2007-02-11 02:46:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Is that an immigration question?
2007-02-11 04:26:42 · answer #7 · answered by gokart121 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋