India’s quest to become a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) has been rejected by America, Russia and China who don’t want anyone gate-crashing their party. In a letter to the President of the UN General Assembly (UNGA), US Ambassador Samantha Power has said her country remains opposed to “any alteration or expansion of the veto. “
This club of five is not much of a party but more a keep-your-friends–close-but-enemies-closer arrangement that has long outlived its relevance. In the best of the best of times, the UNSC is not very different from a glorified resident welfare association where people meet to exchange greetings, complain, promise action and go home. Diplomats squabble over commas and semi colons – and wait for instructions about them from their capitals - as if the fate of their countries depended on it.
In the worst of times, the five permanent members of this sclerotic club do as they please – bomb countries, impose embargoes, cut-off aid and the first one to blink pays for the drinks (peace talks) or damages, whichever comes first. France, Russia, United States, Russia and China who make up what is called P5 at the UNSC are all nuclear weapon states and hold a veto over any decision that the world body takes. There are ten non-permanent members each elected for a five-year term with no veto powers. This writer has written earlier about the meaninglessness of India’s attempts to be present at the high table. Read here.
Late last month Prime Minister Narendra Modi wrote to 193 nations in the UN on a range of issues including expanding the UNSC to reflect the international situation on the ground. All Indian prime ministers have made a permanent UN seat and article of faith even though it has increasingly become an embarrassing mirage.
The President of the UNGA wrote to the comity of nations asking for their views on UN reforms and expansion of the UNSC.
Russia, which reportedly supported India’s candidacy as a permanent member, has written to the President of the UNGA saying that “the prerogative of the current Permanent Members of the Security Council, including the use of the veto, should remain intact under any variant of the Council reform.” China has also pulled India down by saying “no solution on which Member-States are seriously divided or approach that may cause division among Member States will have China’s support.”
The question that begs an answer is – why does India want to go where it is clearly unwelcome? Surely a country that could be the world’s largest free-market has other cards up its sleeve.