24
UNITED NATIONS: The United States, Russia, China, Britain and France closed ranks and gave a deadly blow to the aspirants of a permanent seat in the expanded UN Security Council, by refusing to contribute to a reform text in the UN General Assembly dealing with expansion issue.
For the G-4 countries—India, Brazil, Japan and Germany—it is a major setback while for the Uniting for Consensus Group (UFC), led by Italy and Pakistan, it is a vindication of their position.
The UFC supports the expansion in the non-permanent category of the 15 member Security Council, which could enable all member states to sit on the powerful body by rotation from two to six years stint. Non-Permanent members do not have veto powers while the permanent five could stop any measure by their veto.
On Wednesday Russia’s UN Ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, weighed in on the expansion issue at a press conference saying more permanent members will not make UNSC more effective.
“This is now the acutest and most important issue of reforming UN,” Churkin observed in a interview reminding that UN Security Council was last expanded in the 1960s.
Published in Dawn, September 4th, 2015
On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play
Read more
On DawnNews
Comments (24) Closed
Sep 04, 2015 10:59am
Congratulations Mr. Modi the selfiman
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 11:00am
Reform why? so each country can make the world see its biased view points? I know Brazil, japan, Germany wont stoop so low but there is this one country that is always running around punching its own nose and showing the world bleeding and blaming others.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 11:35am
Text based UNSC reform has been refused not the UNSC reform of adding new permanent and non permanent members.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 12:06pm
The Indians' silence is deafening !!!
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 12:24pm
The UN has no influence today due to the veto powers of the Big Five in SC as it is not able to solve major problems
When major countries like Germany Brazil Japan India KSA and S Africa are not permanent members then its not representative of the world.The Big Five can gang up but how long as the economies of Russia USA Britain are declining
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 12:24pm
India and Brazil do not deserve permanent seats on the UN Security Council. They have so many internal issues. How are they meant to tackle global issues?
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 12:37pm
How long they will hold back. This wall is also going to give way one day. The other powers will keep knocking.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 12:48pm
Win of Pakistani Diplomacy
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 12:54pm
@rehan Indian silence?? Well you forgot that India always has solution to everything and UNSC is not new.India looks in different prism and don't worry G4 will be there in UNSC sooner or latter.There was a setback to India in 2008 from IAEA and NSG as well but as time passed by India came out with a weaver and was accepted a declared 6th world nuclear power.India or G4 don't consider it as setback but only as a mere concern but they will be there.Just wait and watch.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 01:18pm
@kashor, There are many more countries in the line. Like Japan, Indonesia, Israel, Saudi Arabia, other European countries etc etc. Only US will decide who can become member of SC in the UN, if US decide. By that time Conress will be in power not BJP/RSS.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 01:25pm
India should not try to acquire the permanent position in Security Council anymore. They have seen how the P-5 manipulate things. We should focus on Economic development and resolving the Internal issues such as Corruption, lack of reforms etc which contribute to problems like insurgencies and poverty. Once we have made an economic stand for ourselves, the P-5 itself will be rendered useless.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 02:08pm
Without Pakistan as decision maker , world is in dire straits.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 02:09pm
@FACT
Then neither do Russia and China. Especially China which is definitely not a democracy and has no right to meddle in international affairs given the way it treats its own citizens.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 02:16pm
atleast their are legitimate dreams for India.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 02:46pm
Let me clear the fuss here!
P5 are opposing the text based UNSC reform not UNSC reform of adding new permanent and non-permanent members.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 02:48pm
I thought this blow was dealt quite a while ago: http://blogs.rediff.com/mkbhadrakumar/2015/08/18/un-security-council-reform-is-a-pipe-dream/, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/US-backs-China-Russia-blow-to-desi-UNSC-dream/articleshow/48431319.cms
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 02:53pm
The best response by these four countries would be to resign their membership of the United Nations and start building a new world organization. Without these four, UN will be Hamlet without the Prince of Denmark.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 03:29pm
@vinayak - keep dreaming, day and night for next 500 years at least.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 04:42pm
@Dr Ahmad - Melbourne, Looking at the treatments of the minorities in India, I think India should forget about this forever.,
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 06:15pm
The day is not far when UNSC will look incomplete without india and with a bunch of spent forces like Russia, Britain , France etc . Also it's time for reality check for US and China.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 06:51pm
@vijay salem Yes Agree, UNSC should be reconstituted and existing membership should be purged, China,India,US should be only members in UNSC.
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 08:10pm
t@APakistani .Half the population is dying because of vested interest of BIG-5. UKREN,TAIWAN,PLO, SYRIA, Yemen, Egypt, Iraq, Pak, Afghan, India, Nigeria, Yemen,
INDO PAK friendship can change the world
Recommend
0
Sep 04, 2015 08:18pm
Half of the Hind-Muslim population dying. BECAUSE OF BIG-5 'VESTED INTREST. India,Pak,PLO,Afgan,Syria,Iraq,Iran,Egypt,Nigeria,Yemen,MUSLIMS IN CHAINA, Libya n no.of countries are victim of these 5.
Recommend
0
Sep 05, 2015 12:07am
I think it's pathetic the way we scout for nations to back our bid. We should work as a nation to be in a position where the Council will be incomplete without us. I don't think a permanent seat matters to millions of our compatriots who struggle to make ends meet.
Recommend
0
