India to press for UNSC reform by next year

Betwa Sharma
United Nations, Nov 11 (PTI) India could get a permanent
seat on the UN Security Council before the end of its two year
term as a non-permanent member, Indian diplomats believe, but
US officials say it will take more time as the process is
"complex and lengthy".
President Barack Obama's endorsement of India for a
permanent seat on the reformed UN Security Council has led to
speculation about when real change will happen since the
reform process has been cranking on for nearly two decades.
India, which enters the Security Council as a non-
permanent member on Jan 1, 2011, will be pushing to speed
up the reform process during its two year term.
"We are entering the Security Council after a gap of 19
years... we have no intentions of leaving the Security
Council," said India's envoy to the UN Hardeep Singh Puri.
"In other words before we complete our two year term we
will be a permanent member... This is not going to take as
long as people think... it will be done more quickly," he told
PTI.
Noting that India would be a permanent member of a
reformed Security Council, a top US diplomat said that the
"process in New York is slow."
"It is complicated by the fact that there are very
different views among member states and so the reality is that
this will continue to be a complex and potentially lengthy
negotiations," said Susan Rice, US envoy to the UN.
"It is hard to conceive of a reformed security council
that includes new permanent members that wouldn't include
India as a permanent member," she told journalists.
"That is the significance of the President's statement
and reflects the United States view," she said.
Despite President Obama endorsing India's bid, most
analysts have reflected that real change in the UN Security
Council could still be years away.
Describing Puri's remarks as "ambitious," Teresita C
Schaffer, head of the South Asia Programme at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies in Washington, described
the endorsement as "an act of faith on part of President
Obama."
"I can practically guarantee you that the people in the
US government who work in the UN were not in favour of this,"
she said at the Asia Society yesterday.
Schaffer also pointed out the challenges the US and
India would face working together at the UN.
"Our relationship with India at the UN has actually been
very difficult," she said, pointing out that being a Security
Council member would be a "challenge" for India.
"They will be repeatedly asked to vote on an issue where
any vote they make is going to annoy someone they care about.
This is an uncomfortable position and one they haven't face in
20 years," she said, referring to the last time India was on
the Council as a non-permanent member.

Negotiations have shifted from the so called "Open Ended
Working Group" of the nineties to a text based negotiations
but basic questions still need to be resolved including how
many new seats should be added and should the new permanent
members have veto power.
Analysts have pointed out Obama did not commit to the
India getting veto power.
There are currently five permanent - Britain, China,
France, Russia, United States -- with veto power and 10
non-permanent members that are elected for a two year terms.
Responding to whether Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
would push for expeditious reform, his spokesperson Farhan Haq
underlined that the ultimately all the decisions had to be
made by the member-states of the UN.
"We do want all member states to see it in their own
interest to have a Security Council that can be viewed as
broadly representative," he told journalists.
"But again how they do it, the formula to achieve this
type of reform is up to them."
Another hurdle is presented by current permanent members
who would not like to lose their monopoly over global affairs.
The US has also endorsed the candidacy of Japan on the
Council, which China has opposed.
Although Beijing isn't happy with the new endorsement of
India, it has conceded some ground.
Schaffer suggested that China may not be totally opposed
to India's presence on the Council.
"China does not like to be the only country to veto
something," she said, noting that while Beijing lobbied
against Civil Nuclear Deal with the US, it did not block the
waiver for India during the voting of the Nuclear Suppliers
Group in 2008 in Vienna.
Pakistan, which is also against India entering the
Security Council, can also be expected to raise the issue of
Kashmir to drum up opposition against its neighbor.
While there is little chance of Islamabad being able to
block India's place on the Council, experts pointed out that
New Delhi would have more clout on the international scene if
a peaceful solution could be found for Kashmir.
"India has to figure out a better way of handling
Kashmir," said Ashutosh Varshney, who teaches political
science at Brown University. PTI BS
PRI