Question- 2. What other the options available for India if it cannot secure a seat at the UNSC.
Answer: India, along with Brazil, Germany and Japan, has proposed an increase of six additional permanent seats, the other two being for Africa.
The G-4’s initial position was for the same rights as the present permanent members, essentially the veto right.
- Primarily at our initiative, the question of Security Council reform has been under consideration since the 1970s. There is near unanimous support for increasing the number of non-permanent seats.
- The controversial question is about the increase in the category of permanent seats. The rationale for expansion has been accepted in-principle by nearly all, but the difficulty arises when the actual numbers and their rights are discussed.
- The P-5 will never agree to give up their veto right, nor will they agree to accord this right to any other country.
- Even if the Americans are sincere in their support for us, they will simply not lobby for India alone; it will be unthinkable for them to try to get India in without at the same time getting Japan also in.
- It is equally unthinkable, for a long time to come, for China to support Japan’s candidature.
- If a permanent seat is not available, there are other proposals on the table.
- One proposal is for the creation of ‘semi-permanent’ seats, according to which members would be elected for six-eight years and would be eligible for immediate re-election.
Thus, given India’s growing prestige and respect, it should not be difficult for us to successfully bid for one of these seats; it might be a better alternative than to unrealistically hope for a permanent seat.
Tags: GS 2 (International relations)
By: Prashant Tiwari