India’s application for permanent membership in the United Nations Security Council has received a boost.SEXI News
India’s application for permanent membership in the United Nations Security Council has received a boost.
India’s long quest for the Holy Grail, a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, has gained momentum due to the expected changes in the world order.
Permanent members, who vehemently opposed the idea of adding new permanent members to the board, began to take a more flexible approach to the issue.
The American president, keeping silent on Asia and Europe, made a tantric proposal for permanent membership of African and Latin American countries. Russia went further and identified India and Brazil as potential candidates for permanent membership.
Strategic movement of the United States and Russia?
The change in position of the United States and Russia comes against the backdrop of the changing world order in the wake of 21st century global tragedies such as 9/11, the economic recession, the pandemic and the Russian-Ukrainian war.
The paralysis of the United Nations towards them is appalling. They must have realized that they could convince some developing countries if they accepted a small increase in the number of permanent members of the Council.
But it is uncertain whether any of the many sources of enlargement on the table will attract a minimum two-thirds majority in the General Assembly and nine votes in the Security Council, including the votes of the five permanent members. It is at most a strategic move with an open mind on the subject because their support alone will not ensure expansion.
India’s opening bid
I remember the turmoil among the permanent members when Indian Ambassador to the UN Brajesh Misra, on behalf of non-aligned countries, introduced a resolution at the UN General Assembly in 1979 to increase membership non-permanent from five to five. was recommended to reflect the balance between the two countries. General Assembly and Security Council.
The permanent members strongly opposed this decision and, year after year, the proposal was abandoned. There was a debate, but no vote took place.
P-5 Response to Proposals
After the end of the Cold War, Brazil proposed that the number of permanent and non-permanent members be increased to five each to reflect changing global circumstances. But the permanent members refused to accept any enlargement formula proposed by member states.
Japan, Germany, India and Brazil emerged as the main contenders alongside two unnamed African countries. At one point, the P-5 proposed the inclusion of Japan and Germany as a first reform, but no agreement was reached among the others. At one point, a semi-permanent category was considered.
The candidates made a major concession to not insist on the veto power for them for a few years, but that too was overruled. A report by the Secretary-General offered two alternatives, but both were not deemed acceptable.
No proposal came close to consensus. Various working groups and composite committees did not produce results, but discussions continued in different formats each year.
In addition to the objections of the permanent members, about forty members of the General Assembly have come forward to maintain the status quo. It became clear that the majority in the General Assembly would not support the addition of permanent members. The addition of some non-permanent members was considered, but that too was not considered.
Unanimity unlikely, again
Amid the standoff, US President Joe Biden and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov have shown some flexibility on the matter. There is no new formula in them and they are against the inclusion of large countries.
Although the US and Russian proposals to expand the Council are unclear and a consensus around the mentioned countries is not possible, the Indian Foreign Minister has responded to the proposal, welcoming the emphasis on the India during the current session of the General Assembly.
He said it was not common for country leaders to mention other countries in their statements and thanked the United States and Russia for their attention to India. He himself lobbied for the expansion, advocating for the inclusion of the G4, Japan, Germany, India and Brazil and one African country as permanent members.
expansion is essential
At the United Nations, this is not the time to discuss the enlargement of the Security Council when a major war is raging with the threat of the use of nuclear weapons. Therefore, this decision should be seen as part of an effort to make friends and influence people at a time of major change in the world order.
Once the war is over and a major economic collapse averted, discussions on reform can continue. But it is certain that there can be no enlargement of the Security Council within the framework of the current Charter.
A thorough review of the performance of the UN and the willingness of the world to accept drastic changes is essential for an effective and just UN system.