http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/strategic-insights/indias-magnificent-obsession-is-a-losing-cause/
India’s magnificent obsession for a permanent seat in UNSC is a losing cause December 26, 2015, 9:14 PM IST Sunil Sharan in Strategic Insights | World | TOI “We do not at all doubt Russia’s commitment to see India as a permanent member of the UNSC,” spouted Foreign Secretary S. Jaishankar on the eve of the prime minister’s recent visit to Moscow. Oh, how can you be so naïve, Mr. Foreign Secretary? In just August this year, Russia opposed, in writing, any new country to join the UN Security Council with veto powers. It also wants no deadlines imposed on the security council’s reform, an idea that India is vehemently opposed to. Subsequently, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov mouthed platitudes of support for India, but these open-ended verbal expressions have become the norm. For over a decade now, India’s foreign policy has hinged on winning a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. India has tried everything in its power — from courting the P5 members, to aligning efforts with three other wannabes: Brazil, South Africa, and Japan, in what is known as the G-4, to splashing its money around in countries like Afghanistan, Mongolia, and Bangladesh — in the dire hope that some of its spaghetti will stick on the wall, but all to no avail. Hopes were high in 2010 when all of the P5 leaders visited India and save for China, which bestowed only a grudging endorsement, everyone else got behind India. Alarm bells started ringing in Islamabad, where the then foreign minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi, panicked by saying that Hunooz Dilli Door Ast (Delhi is still far). Pakistan of course sees India’s ambition of a permanent seat as shutting the door forever on its claims on Kashmir. India, which seemed on the verge of a perma-seat, made a strategic mistake at this stage. It got entangled in the G-4 perma-seat strivers: Japan, South Africa, and Brazil, not realizing that each of them had its own hurdles to cross. China has visceral objections to Japan joining the council. Brazil is the only Portuguese speaking nation in a continent that otherwise speaks Spanish, and South Africa is not seen as a clear leader in Africa. Mouth what they will, the Security Council P-5 have no intention of letting go of the status quo. Since when did powers that be voluntarily relinquish their powers. The US, Russia, and China have outlined significant objections to any reform of the security council, specifically maintaining that the veto power must rest with them and that any new perma-members be without the veto power and therefore second-rate. France and the UK have supported India’s candidacy but India sees the attitude of the US and Russia as a stab in the back, especially since both Obama and Putin have publicly declared their support for India’s bid. In the meantime, Pakistan, Italy and others have formed a group of countries that is against any expansion of the security council. This development gives an excuse to those like China who cite that there must be general consensus in the UN before any expansion of the Security Council is undertaken, thereby nixing any new proposal. The Prime Minister in his mega speeches abroad has often spoken of how India is desperate to become a security council member, but his pleas seem to have fallen on deaf ears. Should the Indian Prime Minister humiliate himself thus? If not, what should India do? Modi of all people should know that power doesn’t come by begging for it. Instead there is a time and tide in the affairs of nations that catapult them to greatness. The time is not ripe as yet for India. All the carping about contributing to UN peace keeping missions does not help. Pakistan, and even Bangladesh, too have contributed enough forces. Should they too get a perma-seat on that basis? There is also a view, fostered of course by Pakistan, that if India gets a perma-seat with veto power, it will block any resolution on Kashmir. India has not been able to dispel this thinking. Of all the countries that have a chance of making it, it is not anyone of the aforementioned, but Germany. Germany is the anchor of Europe and no big powers oppose its bid. Were Germany to enter the security council, the council will become even whiter, and even more European, than it already is, but real-politik for the P-5 is not adequate representation for brown or black nations, but entry for one who they believe is like-minded, powerful, and non-controversial. It should also be noted that Germany has adopted a lone wolf strategy, not clubbing itself with any other nation and any baggage that they might carry. India’s magnificent obsession increasingly looks like a lost cause. Its foreign policy would be better served by improving its economy, defence, and contributing more to the UN. In 15 years time, the world will itself come calling on its doors for entry into the security council with veto powers. -- Peace Is Doable -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send an email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
