Thesis Topic

“India’s Quest For Permanent Seat In The United

Nations Security Council With Or Without Veto
Power With Reference To Multi-Pronged
Diplomacy And Strategic Maneuver In Political,
Economic, Humanitarian And Defense
Preparedness”.
MANISH KUMAR YADAV.
Email: drmanishyadava@gmail.com
Cell No:+91-9871256919.
INTRODUCTION.
 
This subject is of a great importance because of its significance
and relevance to India and the contemporary world. Secondly,
the subject topic is so overlapping that it could not have been
dealt in compartments; hence it is discussed in overlapping
manner, a sort of Mosaic System was adopted where the
complete picture of the scenario emerged on the canvas.

India’s relationship with various countries particularly neighbors;

China and Pakistan and World’s only superpower (Hegemon)
United States of America as well as erstwhile superpower ally
and friend Russia is discussed at length.

India’s political influence in the world affairs, and India’s position

as an emerging economy is discussed.
India democratic credential’s(world’s largest functional
democracy) and India’s role in UN affairs and
humanitarian work undertaken by India all over the
world is discussed to bring out the fact that it now
deserves a permanent seat in the Security Council with
or without a veto power.

In mapping of the subject matter I have first discussed

the basic organizational set up of United Nation’s, It’s
principles, aim, objectives, features, system of
governance and its significance in the world affairs.
In this body of research work we have explored realistic
chances of India getting a permanent seat in UNSC with
or without veto power in the near future.

We have analyzed India’s multi-pronged efforts to

achieve this status of a great power. The true symbiosis of
theoretical and realistic angle of the subject matter is the
greatest strength of this research work.
Why We Selected The Proposed Strategy.

There were three main reasons for planning this proposed research
work: firstly it is an issue of National Importance and a crucial topic
in the International Affairs,

Secondly it is of high significance for India and other emerging

countries i.e.: Brazil, Japan, South Africa, Germany etc. vying for
UNSC seat and

Lastly fast contemporary international events are taking the world

towards a democratic way of life.
Objective and Hypothesis:
The objective of this research work is to explore the
possibilities of India getting a UNSC permanent seat
with or without veto power by 2014-15 and for that
matter there are concrete reasons of its
contemporary relevance, since there is a likelihood of
vacuum of power in South Asia by the end of 2014
when NATO forces leave Afghanistan and US is likely
to empower India in this region with a tacit
understanding of Russia to empower India and
marginalize China in South East Asia , this can only
happen if India is given a permanent seat with a veto
power.
 CHAPTER PLAN.
Chapter I. Introduction.

 The Genesis and origin of the United Nation’s. Its

Basis, Principle’s, Aim, Mission, Organ’s and
Structure. Specialized agencies: The General
Assembly ,the Security Council etc.

Chapter II. United Nations Reforms and

Restructuring.

 United Nations Reforms and Restructuring. Need

of Hour? And India’s Stand on It.
Chapter III. India’s Role in Political and Strategic
Diplomacy.

 India’s Foreign and Strategic Policy in context of World

an Overview.
 India’s relationship with China and Pakistan. Critical
Issues and Struggle for Geostrategic Dominance in
South Asian Region.
 India & US relations in Post-Cold War Era.
 India and Russia in a Changing World.
 India and Afghanistan vis-à-vis Pakistan.
 Regional Cooperation in South Asia (South Asian
Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC)
Problems/Prospects and India and the Indian Ocean
Rim Cooperation (IORC).
Chapter IV. India’s Role In World of Economic Diplomacy.

 India’s Economic Efforts – Role on the World Stage as

an Emerging Economy. India’s role in BRICS, G-8, G-
20,G-77, IMF, WTO, World Bank, NIEO, SAFTA, North-
South and South- South Cooperation.

 India’s Look East Policy. ASEAN, BIMSTEC, Mekong-

Ganga Project, Japan and S Korea.(Now Act East
Policy).

 India’s Engagement in Africa: ITEC Programs, Indian

Diaspora Engaged in Economic Life of the Continent
and Economic Engagements with EU, NAFTA, and Latin
America.
Chapter V. India’s Role In Humanitarian Diplomacy.

 Humanitarian and Economic Diplomacy with Special

Reference to Gujral Doctrine.

 India’s Humanitarian work in context of

Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh etc.

 India’s Vibrant and Functional Democratic

Credential’s and its Role in UN Peace Keeping
Mission’s, Peace Building and Preventive
Diplomacy.
.
Chapter VI Defense Preparedness and India’s Strategic Man
oeuvre.

 India’s renewed efforts in Defense preparedness – India is

World’s Largest Arm’s Importer. Launching of AGNI-V( India’s
First Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM), India’s Nuclear
Foray and Nuclear Policy / Doctrine. The Nuclear Deterrent,
Moratorium on Tests. Joint Military Exercises with US, Japan
Etc.

 Strive For A Blue Water Navy and Power Projection In Indian

Ocean.

 India’s role in Nuclear Disarmament. Stand on NPT, CTBT etc.

Role in Nuclear Security Summit at Washington DC and at
Seoul.
Chapter VII The Final Thrust for UNSC Permanent Seat.
“Eye On The Big Prize”.

 Where India Stand’s in terms of support for its

candidature in UNSC permanent seat with or
without veto power in the comity of nations.

 Consolidation of G-4(India, Japan, Germany and

Brazil) and IBSA(India, Brazil and South Africa)Efforts
for The UNSC Permanent seat with or without veto
power.
Critical Evaluation of the Security Council:
The founders of the UN wanted to make the Security Council the strongest of all UN organs.
But the council could not fulfill the hopes of its mentors. Several structural and functional
weaknesses are responsible for a largely ineffective council. To begin with the structural
problems, the limited membership of the council had come under criticism. In an
organization that has currently 193 member-states, the council involves only fifteen
countries as its members, and they take all crucial decisions on issues relating to
international peace and security. The decisions of, the Security Council are, therefore, never
the decisions of the majority of countries of the UN. Moreover, the concept of permanent
membership to achieve great-power unity did not work at all due to Cold War politics. As a
consequence, the council could not function as per expectations. Some of the great powers,
identified six decades ago, at the time of the establishment of the UN’s, no longer enjoy
that status in the new international order. Britain and France may fall into this category.
Some other nations have become contestants in the great-power category. Germany, Japan,
Italy, India, Brazil and South Africa, to name a few, have put' forward their claims to be
included as permanent members in a reformed council. Further, there is a strong view that
permanent membership and veto powers are responsible for a crippled Security Council and
they should be done away with, in an enlarged council with more members, no permanent
membership should be allowed.
However, there would be points and counterpoints on these issues, as they are
controversial, but one point is accepted by all that the council certainly has
structural weaknesses. Functional weaknesses of the council stem from its
structural inadequacy. The veto power of the permanent members, conceived
originally to secure great-power unanimity, boomeranged during the Cold War,
when neither the USA nor the Soviet Union could agree on major international
issues. As a consequence, veto power was frequently used by the two super
powers and the council remained crippled. After the end of the Cold War, it is
alleged from different quarters; that USA has been using the council to serve its
own interests in the new unipolar world order. The Security Council, therefore,
always became a pawn in the power game of influential nations of the' World
making the council ineffective, as its potentials could never be realized. H. G.
Nicholas had rightly pointed out that 'of all the organs of the UN none has shown a
greater discrepancy between promise and performance than the Security Council'.
Source: Chatterjee .A, (2010), International Relations Today, Concepts and Applications, Longman (Pearson), The United Nations, pp-90-
115.
Chapter II. United Nations Reforms and Restructuring.
United Nations Reforms and Restructuring. Need of Hour? And India’s Stand on It.

Introduction:

The United Nations is the ‘Numero Uno’ among more than four thousand inter-
governmental multilateral organizations that exists in the world today.

Reforming the UN has emerged to be one of the burning issues confronting policy
makers across the world, keeping in view the more assertive and countervailing
role the UN is expected to play in the contemporary unipolar world. Interestingly,
of the six major organs constituting the UN, the focus of attention of the people
are drawn mainly, if not exclusively, to the structure and functioning of the
Security Council owing to the critical role assigned to this august body by the
Charter to maintain international peace and security. Hence, despite the need for
one or other types of reforms being carried out in all the organs of the UN, the
entire debate and efforts of the experts have boiled down to reform the structure
and functioning of the Security Council.
Source: Mani .V. S:(2004) Reform Of United Nations, United Nations: Multilateralism and Internal Security, Edited By Bhaskar .C .U,
Santhanam .K, Sinha .U .K, Meenai.T, Institute of Defense Studies and Analyses, Asian Strategic Review,2004, Published by Shipra
Security Council Reforms:
A very frequently discussed change to the UN structure is to change the permanent
membership of the UN Security Council, which reflects the power structure of the
world as it was in 1945. There are several proposed plans, notably by the G4
nations, by the Uniting for Consensus group, and by former UN Secretary-General
Kofi Annan.

UN Secretariat Transparency Reform at another level, calls for reforming the UN’s
administration (usually called the UN’s Secretariat or "the bureaucracy") more
transparent, more accountable, and more efficient, including direct election of the
Secretary-General by the people.

UN Secretariat/Administration Reforms seldom gets much attention in the media,

though within the Organization they are seen as widely contentious issues. They
run the bureaucracy of the UN, responding to the decisions by the Member States
in the Security Council and the General Assembly.
Source:Reform of the United Nations, From Wikipedia, the free Encyclopedia,Source:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_of_the_United_Nation
s
Options for India and Its Push for UN Reforms:
Something of the parable about crabs trapped in an open vessel, unable to
escape because the moment one crab starts climbing out the others pull it
down, is coming true in case of the proposed expansion of the Security
Council. The world has moved on since 1945, and the power structures of
those days are still frozen in the shape of the present-day Council. By
excluding many players on today's world stage from the club, it is unable
to be diverse and representative, and therefore devise effective structures
that safeguard international peace and security.

New entrants, however, are sought to be checkmated by their neighbors.

The G4, consisting of India, Japan, Brazil and Germany, invites the setting
up of the coffee club, where Italy does in Germany's claims, China and
South Korea gang up against Japan, Mexico and Argentina against Brazil,
and Pakistan against India. In that context the G4 has done well to push
for a vote on the floor of the UN General Assembly, overriding Chinese and
American objections.
But a two-thirds vote is needed there, and forgoing the veto power for a
period of 15 years may have a strategic adjustment to that reality. The G4
would have done better had they named and co-opted two African countries,
instead of leaving them unnamed in the draft resolution to be placed before
the General Assembly. That would have reinforced the case about seeking to
make the Security Council truly representative. While New Delhi needs to pull
out all the stops in making its case to General Assembly members, and work
in close coordination with other G4 members to this effect, it doesn't have to
put all its eggs in this basket. It must also work for inclusion in other powerful
world bodies, such as the G8 which could be expanded into a G10, including
China and India, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. As
long as New Delhi has a comprehensive strategy, a setback somewhere will be
compensated with a victory elsewhere.

Expanding the Club: New Delhi must work on UNSC and other fronts, The Times of India, Jun 14,
2005,Source:timesofindia.indiatimes.com/archive.cms
According to Ron Joy Sen India is up against a caste system that shows no
sign of disappearing. It's a hierarchy that is nowhere as ancient or complex
as our centuries-old Varna system but equally entrenched. The Brahmins of
this caste system are the veto-wielding permanent five (P5) of the United
Nations Security Council the US, UK, France, Russia and China. All the other
nations are lesser beings with no hope of making it to the charmed circle.

Now a gang of four is aiming to break the P5 stranglehold. The crux of the
G4 plan is to increase the Security Council's permanent seats from five to
11. Of the additional six seats, four would go to the G4. This proposal is,
however, floundering in the face of strong opposition. The US and China
have already voiced their disapproval of the G4's plans to gatecrash (the
party). There are traditional rivalries like Pakistan versus India that are also
a powerful obstacle to any expansion of the Security Council. Then there
are regional blocs like the 53-nation African Union, who hold the key to the
success of G4's proposal to seek a vote in the General Assembly, but are
unsure of the best way forward.
All this is, however, a meaningless charade. Even if the G4 does make it to the
high table of the Security Council, it won't get the coveted veto power; it would
have to wait another 15 years to possibly get the veto. But even that is not
guaranteed. In any case, the Security Council was showed up as toothless (Tiger)
when George Bush and his cronies invaded Iraq. So, why is India hankering for
something that comes with no real power? India and the G4 should, instead,
subvert the UN Security Council, which reflects the post-World War II global
power structure. India could even consider boycotting the UN rather than submit
to its caste system. New Delhi could then focus its energies on regional trade
blocs and to seeking a more powerful voice in organizations like the World Bank
and the IMF. Describing the "Genuine Reform" in the UN Security Council as
essential, India has strongly favored the G-4 proposal of expanding the
prestigious body by including six new Permanent Members having veto powers
and four additional non-permanent members.
 
Source: Sen. R: Boycott the UN, The Times of India, Jul 22, 2005,Source: timesofindia.indiatimes.com/archive.cms
"We remain convinced that this is the optimum expansion that meets both
the tests of representativeness and manageability," the Indian Ambassador
to the UN, Hardeep Singh Puri, said in his address to the informal meeting of
the UN General Assembly on start of the third round of inter-governmental
negotiations on Security Council reforms.

G-4 comprising of India, Brazil, Japan and Germany had made such a proposal
in 2005. "New permanent members would have the same rights and
responsibilities as existing permanent members, including that of the veto.
Nevertheless, recognizing the complexity of the issue, the G-4 proposal
offered to defer its utilization until a review is undertaken," "Looking back at
the first two rounds, two messages emerged loud and clear: first, that an
overwhelming majority of member states believe that the status quo is
untenable, in response to which genuine reform of the UN Security Council is
essential,"
 "Secondly, substantive reform requires an expansion in both permanent and non-
permanent categories of membership, and significant improvement of the
Security Council's working methods," Making a strong case for the expansion of
the Security Council, Puri said only an expansion of the membership of the UNSC
in permanent and non-permanent categories will be credible, effective and
genuine. "Only such measures will meet the aspirations of the membership at
large," he argued.
Source: India for "Genuine Reform" in the UN Security Council The Times of India, Sep 2, 2009, timesofindia.indiatimes.com/archive.cms

"There is a process of co-opting that happens with prospective members in the

anticipation of their election" to the UNSC, Hardeep Singh Puri, India's envoy to
the UN, told PTI.(2010).

"This is a very special year, he said. "We're going to be on the Council after a gap
of 19 years and India is ready to take on the responsibility." Puri and his team
have been canvassing for the spot for the past three years. To win, a country
needs two-thirds of the General Assembly vote, which adds up to about 128
counties saying yes to its presence in the Security Council.
Source: India Confident about UNSC Reform in next 2 yrs. The Economic Times Sep 19, 2010, economictimes.indiatimes.com/archive.cms
The Security Council:
 
The issue of restructuring the Security Council has attracted enormous attention
all over the world. How many members would a reorganized council have? How
many of them could be permanent, how many non-permanent? Who would be
the new permanent member, and on what grounds? Who among the existing
five permanent members (P-5) are no longer regarded as great powers? Would
the new permanent… questions are doing the rounds in world politics at this
juncture. It is obvious that the P-5 are no longer the main powers across the
globe, as they were in 1945, when the UN was formed. Britain and France are
regarded by many scholars as the countries that need to be excluded from the P-
5. But who would dare to exclude these veto-armed nations? A preferred choice
for reforming the council would be to retain the P-5 and include some more
permanent members. Germany and Japan are tipped to be the favorites because
of their emergence as major industrial nations after the Second World War. They
have also increased their financial contributions to the UN’s significantly.
But if these two ‘developed’ countries are included, what about representation
from the vast ‘developing’ world? Here arises the dilemma, because the
aspirants from developing countries are many. The politics of reforms also
revolves around this issue of inclusion of new permanent members from the
developing world. Who among Brazil, India, Argentina, Nigeria, Mexico, Egypt,
Indonesia, Pakistan, and probably others, should be included from this vast
terrain called the ‘developing’ world? One should also not forget some of the
‘developed’ aspirants like Italy, Canada and the European Union.

This brings us to the question of the composition of a revamped Security

Council. A twenty-four member council without permanent membership has
been suggested by many experts like Richard Hudson and Frank Barnaby. This
would enable each country to chair the council for one month during the two-
year term of the membership of the council. The idea of permanent
membership of the Security Council was mooted to achieve great-power unity
that was thought necessary to preserve peace and security in the post-Second
World War period. The super powers rivalry during cold war led the concept of
collective security fail miserably. As we know now, (the vision of) collective
security failed because it contradicted the prime factor of national interest.
The importance of national interest in world politics has not dwindled after the Cold War.
This compels one to discard the idea of any great-power bonhomie. This may be the
reason to disfavor permanent membership in a revamped Security Council. The end of
permanent membership will also solve the problem of veto power, the most widely
condemned power in the UN system. There will be no veto power for twenty-four non-
permanent members of the reorganized council. The proposals for inclusion of new
permanent members with or without veto are loaded with possible dangers. More veto-
wielding permanent members would only exacerbate confusion and inefficiency in the
council. Permanent members without veto would become second-class citizens, and
would lack in power to serve the council with confidence. Therefore, some reasonable
recommendations for a revamped Security Council are as follows: (1) it would be a
twenty-four member body without permanent membership; (2) the term of each
member would be two years, giving each member the chance to chair the council for one
month; (3) no member would enjoy any special power (veto); (4) decisions would be
taken by a majority vote of members present and voting, and the resolutions of the
council shall be binding upon all the members of the UN; and (5) the Security Council and
the General Assembly must work in tandem through regular consultations and working
parties. However, it should be noted here that any reform of the council would be
difficult, because any member-state from the P-5 may veto it, if the proposed reform goes
against its interest. Moreover UN’s Charter needs to be amended,(Through Article 109)
Which again is a big hurdle.

Source: Chatterjee. A, (2010), International Relations Today, Concepts and Applications, Longman (Pearson), The United Nations,pp-
90-115.
Though it has proved to be impossible to reach agreement on new permanent
members. Should the European Union be represented instead of the United
Kingdom, France, and Germany individually? How would Pakistan view India's
candidacy? How would South Africa react to a Nigerian seat? What about
representation by an Islamic country? These issues are not easy to resolve.
Likewise, it is very unlikely that the P-5 countries will relinquish their veto.
 
None the less, while large-scale reform has proved impossible, there have
been changes in Security Council working procedures that have made it more
transparent and accountable.

Source: Taylor. P and Curtis. D,(2011), The Globalization of World Politics An Introduction to International Relations, Baylis .J ,
Smith. S and Owens. P ,Oxford, Fifth Edition, The United Nations ,pp-310-325.
 .
Country GDP % Population
%
UN dues
%
Likely Permanent/Renewable
members of
United States 32.7 4.6 22.0

Japan 12.6 2.0 19.6

“Model A” and “Model B”
United Nation’s Security Council.
Germany 6.2 1.3 9.8
Note: Italicized countries are Model B only; P5
United Kingdom 4.9 0.9 5.6
in bold.
France 4.5 1.0 6.5
Source: Fearon. J.D, Reforming International Institutions to Promote
China 4.0 20.4 1.5 International Peace and Security,2005, Department of Political
Italy 3.7 0.9 5.1 Science Stanford University ,Prepared for the International Task
Force on Global Public Goods,pp-1-54,
Mexico 2.0 1.7 1.1 Source:https://www.stanford.edu/…/fearon…/Reforming
International Institutions….
India 1.6 16.7 0.3

Brazil 1.4 2.9 2.2

Russia 1.1 2.3 1.2

South Africa 0.3 0.7 0.4

Egypt 0.3 1.2 0.1

P5 total (% of world) 47.2 29.2 36.8

Model A total (% of 69.6 54.0 69.2

world)

Model B Total (% of 75.3 56.6 75.4

world)
Finally, India needs to stake out a position that balances interventionism with
respect for local practice; it must also support strong safeguards against atrocities
while generally opposing military action except in the most rare and dire of
circumstances. Generally, the UN should allow maximum freedom of custom and
practice for peoples and groups everywhere, except where those practices
contravene with the International Covenants on Human Rights and other binding
international legal instruments. Breach of international law can be measured in
steps, so that a slight transgression might lead to a warning, while more serious
violations could risk greater intervention.

It is true that condemnation from any UN branch save for the Security Council
carries little weight anymore, and the Security Council is taken most seriously
when sanction or threats of force are implied. But to believe that military might
is the only solution to global affairs is to draw the wrong conclusion from these
facts. Rather, we must focus on the toothlessness of most UN’s arms, and work
to build up affiliated institutions that will carry effective, determinative powers of
their own. The International Criminal Court(Hague) is the best place to start, for a
more active, more trusted and fairer international judicial system can be very
effective in bringing perpetrators of horror to justice, and in shielding the
innocent from harm.
Chapter VII. The Final Thrust for UNSC Permanent
Seat. Eye On The Big Prize.
 Where India Stand’s in terms of support for its candidature in UNSC
permanent seat with or without veto power in the comity of
nations.

 Consolidation of G-4(India, Japan, Germany and Brazil) and IBSA

(India, Brazil and South Africa) Efforts for The UNSC Permanent seat
with or without veto power.

“A free India, with her vast resources, can be a great service to the
world and to humanity. India will always make a difference to the
world; fate has marked us for big things”-Jawaharlal Nehru.
Source: Nehru. J.L, 1939, as quoted in S. Gordon, India’s Rise to Power in the Twentieth Century and Beyond,1995,

New York: St Martin’s press, p-1.

The Final Frontier:
India’s concerted bid to be admitted as a veto-wielding ‘P’ member of the
Security Council is the single most watched issue within the country when it
comes to the UN’s organization as a whole. As the sanctum sanctorum and prime
custodian of international law with more political powers than any other entity
in the international system, the Security Council is a bull’s eye for India to target.
The demand for India’s inclusion in a reformed Security Council keeps getting
shriller as the country persists with large personnel contributions to UN peace-
keeping missions and leapfrogs out of mediocre economic performance into an
Asian giant with a pluralistic democratic political system to boot. However,
entrenched resistance and mixed signals of existing P-5 members have doused
high hopes …USA never openly supporting India’s candidature, and China is
reluctant to give a free pass to rivals like India or Japan to walk in with power
parity. Apart from the stonewalling of some P-5 veto holders, Indian diplomacy
has also struggled to secure endorsements from the prerequisite two-thirds of
members of the General Assembly to carve out new permanent seats.  
All has not been smooth sailing for the G-4 frontrunners (India, Brazil, Germany
and Japan) in cobbling together adequate bloc votes from within and beyond
their own regions.

Stefan Schirm has coined a telling phrase for the G-4’s vain hunt: ‘leaders in
search of followers’, i.e. rising powers that fail to convince their respective
neighboring states and regional organizations that their elevation will be a win-
win proposition that would benefit the said neighboring states.

Pakistan and the rest of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC)
countries remain barriers to India’s race to find its cherished spot at the horse
shoe table in New York, an objective reality that New Delhi cannot easily
overcome.

Some diplomatic insiders suggest that India needs to show greater flexibility on
key security issues for its Permanent Membership drive to regain momentum.
Hints were dropped by US Senator John Kerry in the run up to the 2006 time-
line for Security Council enlargement, that India must sign the Nuclear Non-
Proliferation Treaty (NPT) for Washington to approve New Delhi’s candidacy.
Is India A Great Power?
 
As former Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee stated, ‘India is now a
nuclear weapon state […] it is not a conferment that we seek; nor is it a status
for others to grant […] it is India’s due, the right of one- sixth of mankind’.

This greater sense of International Relation’s (IR) realism and realpolitik

supplanted the earlier idealism and ahimsa typical of Nehru and the Congress
Party, yet maintaining the core principles of India gaining Great Power status,
namely the protection of India’s autonomy and independence in late 90’s. As
such, India could withstand the pressure of sanctions, as her financial linkages
to international corporations and other countries would protect her from
complete economic isolation.

Indeed, while the USA (and Japan) issued sanctions in the aftermath of the
nuclear tests, Russia, France, China and the United Kingdom did not. By
questioning the dominant global nuclear consensus (and being the first
country to proclaim a new nuclear status since China in 1964), the Pokhran
tests brought India into the global political, economic and strategic
mainstream.
India in a Futuristic Scenario:
India’s very destination is contested and so is the route and intended pace.
While many may wish India to be potentially counted among the developed
states by 2030, it is also seen as a case of a ‘bridge too far’ by those privileging
indices of poverty and inequality in the reckoning.

The political tussle between the three positions-realists, liberal and radical-
would continue and would in turn impact the route and pace. India, therefore,
would likely exhibit some schizophrenia in its strategic policy. One end of the
spectrum would prefer a ‘hands on’ engagement with strategic issues such as
rise of China, the nature of strategic partnership with the US, the contours of
India’s regional power status. The logic advanced is that India must play up to
its weight. It must learn to navigate with strategic finesse since it cannot escape
the additional responsibilities that come with ascending the global power
hierarchy.

Source: Ahmed. A,(2011), Asia 2030: The Unfolding Future, Editors: Lele. A, Goswami. N, Dahiya. R, Lancer, New
Delhi, Frankfurt, IL., India 2030: With History As Guide, ,pp-91-113.

 
India should market the skills of its young population to emerge a winner
among other competitive countries. By the end of this decade, India, at its
present growth rate, should also expect to get a seat in the Security Council and
have chaired the IMF or the World Bank at least once. But what will be India’s
foreign policy priorities by 2020? China will remain its primary challenge. How
both manage their economies and globalization projects will determine how the
power equations stack up. India should have a break through in its inertia or
infrastructure development and achieve the necessary breakthroughs in high
end manufacturing, innovation and skills.

India is poised to overtake China demographically by 2025, but the way it

handles the thorny issues of education and skill development will determine
whether it remains of top. China will be an ageing nation, as will be Japan,
Russia and Europe. So the real game of technology and innovation will be played
between India and the US. To a great extent, this will be the driver for India’s
foreign policy-how it uses a skilled population to push in to new markets. The
threat from China is another one. It will use a weakened Pakistan to play spoiler
with India. India’s foreign policy priority will be to neutralize one of them.
Source: Bagchi. I, Buck Up If You Want to Be A Global Power; Imagining the Republic India in 2020 ,Jan 25,2012, The Times of India,
New Delhi, p-19.
G-4 Push and Credentials for United Nations
Security Council Permanent Seat:
Most of the leading candidates for permanent membership are
regularly elected onto the Security Council by their respective groups:
Japan and Brazil were elected for nine two-year terms each, and
Germany for three terms. India has been elected to the council seven
times in total, with the most recent successful bid being in 2010 after
a gap of almost twenty years since 1991–92.
 
As of 2011, the current "P5" members of the Security Council, along
with the G4, account for 9 of the world's ten largest defense budgets,
according to SIPRI. They also account for 9 of the 10 largest economies
by both nominal GDP and Purchasing Power Parity GDP.
Source: G‑4 Nations, Source: Wikipedia the free Encyclopedia, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G4_nations

Quick Comparison of G4 and P5 Members

  Population GDP1. UN funding2 Defense Activemilitary Nucleararsenal

budget1

Brazil G4 4190,732,6 $2,395 72.934% (10th) $33.1 (11th) 6 327,710 N NO

94 (5th) (7th) (14th)

Germany G4 782,329,75 $3,400 37.141% (3rd) $45.8 (9th) 7 250,613 N NO3

8 (16th) (4th) (22nd)

India G4 21,210,193 $1,824 90.666% (27th) $46.1 (8th) 31,325,000 Y YES

,422 (2nd) (10th) (3rd)

Japan G4 6128,056,0 $5,963 210.833% (2nd) $59.3 (5th) 8 230,300 N NO

26 (10th) (3rd) (24th)

 China P5 11,347,338 $8,227 65.148% (6th) $166.0 (2nd) 12,285,000 Y YES

,352 (1st) (2nd) (1st)

France P5 865,821,88 $2,608 5.593% (4th) $58.9 (6th) 5 352,771 Y YES

5 (21st) (5th) (13th)

Russia P5 5143,056,3 $2,021 82.438% (11th) $90.7 (3rd) 41,027,000 Y YES

83 (9th) (8th) (5th)

 UK P5 963,047,16 $2,440 45.179% (5th) $60.8 (4th) 9 197,780 Y YES

2 (22nd) (6th) (26th)

 US P5 3312,913,8 $15,684 122.00% (1st) $682.0 (1st) 21,458,219 Y YES

72 (3rd) (1st) (2nd)
1
US$ billions 2Percent contributed to total UN budget 3Takes part in NATO nuclear weapons sharing agreement
India at UNSC ‘Full Dress Rehearsal for Permanent Seat
at the Horse Shoe Table, 2011-2012’:
 
In January 2011, India joined the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) for its Seventh
two-year term as a non- permanent member. Expectations were high, many in the
country and abroad expected India’s tenure to serve as “a rehearsal for permanent
membership”. Accelerating expansion of the permanent membership of the UNSC to
include India was among New Delhi’s top priorities for its term. India’s strategy,
however, was rapidly blindsided by crises in Africa and the West Asia, which also
exposed deep divisions between the five permanent members (the P-5) in the
UNSC itself.

India worked hard to cope with a stream of global events. In doing so, however, it was
unable to pursue the originally charted strategy of demonstrating responsible
diplomacy in the leagues of the great powers while also making the UNSC a more
legitimate and representative organization .At the end of 2012, India exited the UNSC
on a less than celebratory note, with some analysts castigating the Ministry of External
Affairs (MEA) for wasting an important opportunity on the international stage.
India’s performance on the UNSC in 2011-12 on the basis of five goals that we
believe, after wide consultations, have dominated the Indian agenda.

Two of them making the UNSC more effective and legitimate, and enhancing
India’s standing as a responsible world power are emphasized by non-Indian
scholars and analysts because they focus on India’s contribution to the global
order. Three other goals expanding the UNSC’s permanent membership,
reforming the UNSC’s working methods, and protecting the primacy of state
sovereignty from United Nations (UN)-sanctioned military interventions are
connected to India’s own interests and ambitions in the international order.

Although India faced significant challenges, our evaluation of its performance

along these five dimensions is nowhere near as gloomy as some observers
proclaim. These challenges were exacerbated by three factors – insufficient
Indian government resources devoted to multilateral diplomacy; insufficient
engagement with the normative aspects of many UNSC issues; and an over
reliance on entitlement as the foundation of India’s claims to permanent
membership, at the expense of more hard-nosed realpolitik bargaining in the
UN’s.
According to Mukherjee and Malone it is important to keep India’s most recent
term on the council in perspective, recognizing that Delhi has proved to be
a more responsible actor and constructive interlocutor in the international
system than many other states.

Former Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran lays out the simple logic behind this
observation, “India sees its interest best served in a rule-based, multilaterally
structured and democratically governed international system. The UN’s is
obviously the logical platform for such a system, although its limitations and
infirmities are all too evident”.

Whereas Nehru’s faith in the UN might have been utopian (to the detriment of
Indian interests), Indian policymakers today are far more pragmatic, viewing
the UN as one avenue among others through which to advance India’s
international interests. In this sense, India has matured into a responsible
stakeholder in principle, though it is a long way off from navigating the multi-
lateral system for its own benefit as other major powers do.
Keeping this in mind, there are three strategies that India can
simultaneously follow to better secure its interests in the UN.

First, given that the P-5 are likely to block any efforts at expanding the
permanent membership of the UNSC in the near future, India might
devote considerably greater resources than at present to wooing the
middle and smaller powers in the UN to increase the clout of the
General Assembly relative to the council, a tactic already evident in
India’s participation in the L-69 group. If this strategy is successful, the
P-5 might prefer to defuse the threat of a stronger General Assembly by
incurring the cost of expanding the permanent membership of the
UNSC.

Secondly, the MEA would benefit from a wider public dialogue on what
India’s positions should be on key aspects of international issues
today, including sovereignty, intervention and the use of force. The
multi-author Nonalignment 2.0 report (Khilnani et al 2012) provides
a valuable stepping stone, ideally to be followed by wider
consultations, especially on multilateralism.
Particularly on issues of sovereignty and intervention, India would gain from a
deeper understanding of its own constraints rather than hewing to the positions
of western members of the P-5 on some occasions, and the eastern members on
others. India’s unique circumstances among the rising powers as a liberal democratic
state with serious internal and regional security challenges merit a domestic
dialogue on how best to engage with and respond to the growing international norm
of contingent sovereignty and

Lastly, India should engage in coalition building with other rising powers that are
similarly placed in the international system, such as Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa
and Turkey. Given the P-5 and General Assembly’s lack of enthusiasm for G-4
proposals, a wider coalition representing a larger swath of powers might prove more
effective, at mid-range between the G-4 and the L-69.
Source: Mukherjee. R and Malone. D.M ,India and the UN Security Council: An Ambiguous Tale, July 20,2013,Vol
XLVIII,No.29,Economic and Political Weekly,pp.110-117.
From India’s perspective, it would represent a shift from being “leader of the
Third World Trade Union” to key member of a rising power cartel, a formation
better suited to India’s evolving capabilities and interests than is the G-4. Such a
grouping could successfully lobby for more frequent or even systematic middle-
tier membership within the UNSC, between the P-5 and other members, with a
view to translating this status into permanent membership over time.

There is widespread consensus among India’s intellectual elites that permanent

membership on the UNSC is only a matter of time. Moreover, few believe that
India’s performance in its most recent term will have any bearing on its future
prospects as a permanent member, which will be determined by the trajectory
of India’s economic growth and military development. By this reasoning, the P-
5’s obduracy dictates that India invest in relationships elsewhere to bolster its
international profile sufficiently so that UNSC permanent membership becomes
a logical corollary.

In the words of a veteran observer of India’s role in the world, “The Security
Council will not be changed from inside, but from outside”.
This is almost certainly true but India would still benefit greatly from investing more
and more wisely in increasing its influence and footprint within the international system,
keeping in mind that for now this is the order within which important matters of
international peace and security will be determined in the near future.
Source: Mukherjee. R and Malone. D.M ,India and the UN Security Council: An Ambiguous Tale, July 20,2013,Vol XLVIII,No.29,Economic
and Political Weekly,pp.110-117.

According to Ramesh Thakur India should use its growing wealth, power and influence to
return the UN to its foundational values and ideals in the service of humanity. Poverty
strips human beings of dignity and is profoundly demeaning. It is an affront to the human
conscience. India must lead the UN community to make it history. That would justify
India’s claim to permanent membership of the Security Council and also leave a legacy
worthy of Indian history.
Source: Thakur. R, Strategic Analysis, Special Issue : Focus on the United Nations ,Volume 35,Number 6,2011,IDSA,New Delhi, Rout
ledge, Taylor and Francis Group, India and the United Nations, pp-898-905.

While in the opinion of Bhattacharya it may be logical to presume that India’s larger global
foot print will translate in to a permanent seat in the UNSC but given the tortuous process
of negotiations towards creating a document for meaningful long term reform of the
council, it may take months, if not years, before the direction of that change is outlined.
Only time will tell whether this was based on realism or wishful thinking.
Source: Bhattacharya. A (The Author Is A New York Based Writer and Television Professional) Back in The United Nations Security
Council, Vol. 24, No 4/2010,India Perspectives,pp-27-31.
 Concluding Observations.
The United Nations was created with two objectives i.e. to save the world from
the scourge and holocaust of the Third World War and to promote the
international cooperation in different areas among the members of the world
community. In view of dominant political, economic, nuclear and diplomatic
positions of five developed countries i.e. USA, USSR, China, UK and France post
IInd World War in 1945 were given permanent places with veto power much
against the principle of equality among member states given in the charter of
United Nations.

Since 1945 (The year of origin of United Nations) to till date international
scenario has undergone multidimensional transformations in which two
features can be underlined. One is diffusion of the democratic culture in world
community and emergence of global village where the national boundaries
seem to have lost their traditional significance.

Source: Current Events, July 1965, pp-33-36.

In this process the world became multipolar in which many countries like
India, Japan, Brazil, Germany, and Israel etc. have emerged as nuclear and
economic power. Many international groups came in to existence at various
levels which started to question the undemocratic structure of Security
Council. The demand of democratization of United Nations, particularly the
Security Council became more and more louder. Many countries including
India started to stake their claim for permanent place with or without veto
power in the United Nations Security Council.

Here in this study we have tried to enumerate the Indian credentials, on the
basis of which we have been staking the claim for permanent seat in the
Security Council. In different chapters of this study we have tried to present
our political, democratic, humanitarian, economic and defense credentials on
which we are demanding this status. We have been a sincere and responsible
member for the cause of world peace and development and have always
followed the directions and decisions of the United Nations even at political,
economic and diplomatic costs to us. We have tried to refer to all these
summits, conferences and meetings of the world institutions and leaders
which supported our claim.
 
In our opinion India getting a permanent seat at United
Nations Security Council with or with- out Veto power is no
longer a ‘Utopian Dream’ or a ‘Bridge too Far’ if India gets its
act together. India is not a wannabe super power like China
which bulldozed in to the elite club of P-5.

According to Professor: S D Muni ‘India is neither a restrained

nor a reluctant power rather India is a cautious and
constrained power depending on its economy’.. But we feel
having crossed the nuclear rub icon more then a decade and
half back it is ready to take on more responsibilities at the high
table of United Nations as a great power.

Source: Excerpts from National Seminar on (12-02-2014) on the theme “United

Nations Security Council Reforms: Perspectives and Prospects” organized by
Ministry of External Affairs and Institute of Defense and Strategic Analyses, New
Delhi
At the end we conclude that the above mentioned
credentials, arguments and discussions are the basis on which
our claim is substantiated for UNSC permanent seat with or
without veto power. Our record as a member of United
Nations is excellent and impressive and there are no second
thoughts about it; we hope this study will further strengthen
our position before the decision makers in this regard.

Lastly it can be safely suggested that to make our claim to

become the permanent member of United Nations Security
Council such studies as the present one are needed with
different outlook, dimensions and perceptions. More over on
the issue of big prize we opine that it’s a question of effort,
time and patience whether India will get the seat on the
horse shoe shaped high table in New York although its
credentials and record are just right for it.
Study Problems and Limitations.
Contemporary International Relations is in a highly fluid and
flux state; So we can’t predict the exact time when India would
get a UNSC seat with or without veto power.
 
 
Possibilities/Probabilities.(Case In The Point):
Expansion of UNSC overdue since last expansion.
In spite of the UNSC enlargement in 1965, its permanent
members still represent the global power structure that existed
after World War II when the institution was created. Though the
law of probability still holds good for India getting a permanent
seat at UNSC.
The organization of chapters were certainly not random, but conforms to a
logic that flows from a series of developing themes since the subject topic is
so overlapping that it could not have been dealt in compartments hence it is
discussed in overlapping manner, a sort of ‘Mosaic System’ is adopted as
earlier mentioned where the complete picture of the scenario emerged from a
broad canvas. A particular emphasis has been placed on ensuring the topics
and issues are fully and appropriately integrated so that we can grasp the links
between events, concepts and perspectives under discussion.

We have also tried to maintain chronological order and analytical frame work
through-out the research work. Objectively and systematically, tables and
charts have been added for enabling better comprehension of the subject
matter, We are sure the humble effort of ours in the research on this topic will
prove enlightening, stimulating, useful and of immense value to the
academia and students of international relations and strategic matters as well
as to society in whole.
Representation of UN Members States.
 
Year Member States UNSC seats

1945 51 11 (5 permanent, 6 non-permanent)

1965 118 15 (5 permanent, 10 non-permanent)

2015 193 ?

This tabular representation of member states of United Nations

will make us think that its high time United Nations require
reforms and restructuring in keeping pace with the
contemporary times.
Selected Bibliography and Suggested Readings.
• Heywood. A,(2011), Global Politics , Palgrave Foundation, Macmillan, International Organizations
and United Nations, pp-432-455.
• Taylor. P and Curtis. D , (Fifth Edition,2011), Baylis. J, Smith. S and Owens . P, The Globalization of
World Politics An Introduction to International Relations, Oxford, The United Nations , pp-310-325.
• Bhagavan. M,(2012),Grand Strategy for India 2020 and Beyond; Editors: Venkatshamy .K and George.
P, Pentagon Security International, An Imprint Pentagon Press, Institute For Defense Studies &
Analyses, New Delhi, One World 2020: A Decade-long Vision for India’s Relations with the United
Nations,pp-253-260.
• Schoenbaum .T.J, (2006),International Relations The Path Not Taken: Using International Law to
promote World Peace and Security, Cambridge University Press, Institutional Reforms,pp-105-
106.,The UN Security Council,pp-106-109.
• Okhovat. S: The United Nations Security Council: It’ s Veto Power and Its Reform, CPACS Working
Paper No. 15/1,December 2011,Published by the Centre for Peace and
Conflict Studies, The University of Sydney, Source:
Sydney.edu.au/arts/peace_conflict/docs/working_papers/UNSC_papers.pdf
• Meier. C and Murthy. C. S. R, India’s growing involvement in Humanitarian Assistance, GPPi Research
Paper No: 13,Global Policy Institute, Berlin March 2011,pp-1-49, Source:
www.gppi.net/…/2011/meir_murthy_2011_india-growing-involvement..
• Parmar .S.S, Bekkevold. J.I , Ross. R.S, (Eds.) International Order At Sea: Work Shop 1, Anti-Piracy
and Humanitarian Operations, Published by Institutt for forsvarsstudler, Norwegian Institute For
Defense Studies, Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) in India’s National Strategy pp-
33-42.
• Price. G, Diversity in Donor ship: The Changing landscape of Official Humanitarian Aid, India’s
Official Aid Program, Humanitarian Policy Group Background Paper Sep 2005, Gareth Price is the
Head Asia Program, Chatham House, Overseas Development Institute, pp-1-26, Source:
www.odi.org.uk/HPG/Papers/India.pdf
• NORRAG: Emerging Aid Donors: India - Network for international policies and cooperation in
education and training, A Brave New World of 'Emerging', 'Non-DAC' Donors and their Differences
from Traditional Donors NN44, 13 September 2010,pp-43-45. Source: www.norrag.org/…/a-brave-
new-world-of-emerging-non-dac-donors-an
• Seethi .K.M:, Engaging With The World: Critical Reflections on India’s Foreign Policy: Orient Black
Swan,2009 Edited by Harshe .R and Seethi .K.M, India’s CTBT policy from ‘Text to Testing Times’, pp-
114.
• Gupta .A, Kapur .K.D: Editors, Forwarded by Kakodkar .A, Emerging Asian Nuclear Environment:
Implications for India,2012, Indian Pug wash Society, Lancer’s Books.
• Experts Call for Deeper Energy links Between South and Central Asia, The Hindu, New Delhi, Nov
29, 2006, p-15.
• Ahmed. A, India’s Limited War Doctrine, The Structural Factor, IDSA Monograph Series No:10, Dec
2012, pp-1-93.
• Anant .A, Handbook of India’s International Relations, Edited by Scott .D,2011,Taylor and Francis
(Rout ledge),London and New York ,India and International Terrorism,pp-266-275.
• The changing character of war-Oxford University
Press.UKcatalogue.oup.com>…..>Philosophy>Social and Political Philosophy.
• The changing character of war-The
Europaeum.www.europaeum.org/files/publications/pamphlets’/Hew Strachan.pdf.
• Baylis. J, Smith. S and Owens. P, The Globalization of World Politics An Introduction to
International Relations, (Fifth Edition, 2011), Oxford University Press, The Changing Character of
War, pp-214-229.
• Bahadur .M, Interventionism and Human Security, Strategic Analyses, Volume 38,Number 1 ,Jan-
Feb 2014,Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group,pp-6-11.
• Kainikara. S, The articulated strategy to Fight the Islamic State: Is it Self Defeating? Strategic
Analyses, Volume 39,Number 1 ,Jan-Feb 2015,Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group,pp-16-21.
• Rajiv S. Samuel. C, In Pursuit of a Chimera: Nuclear Imbroglio between Sanctions and Engagement,
Strategic Analyses, Volume 36, Number 6 , Nov-Dec 2012,Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group,pp-
911-929.
• Kumaraswamy. P.R, Israel: The Non-Parallel Player, Strategic Analyses, Volume 36, Number 6 , Nov-
Dec 2012,Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group, pp-976-985.
• West Asia in Turmoil, Implications for Global Security, Editors: N. S. Sisodia and A.K.
Behuria,@2007, Academic Foundation in association with Institute of Defense Studies and
Analyses, New Delhi.
• Middle East Peace Plans, Edited By Willard A. Beling @1986, Croom Helm, London and Sydney.
• India, Global Powers and West Asia-Political and Economic Dynamics, Edited By Anwar Alam
@2011,New Century Publications, New Delhi.
• Mudian P.R ,India and the Middle East, British Academic Press, An Imprint of I.B. Tauris, London.
New York.
• Nambiar. S, India and United Nation’s, Peace-keeping: A 2020 Perspective, Editors Venkatshamy, K.
George .P, IDSA, New Delhi,@2012,Pentagon Security International,pp-261-275.
• Murthy C S R, India’s Diplomacy in The United Nation’s, Lancer Books,@1993.
Thank You For Your Kind
Attenssion.