Although many countries support India to become a permanent member of the United Nations, there is no support from the five permanent members. As the undisputed giant elephant in South Asia, India has a population of 1.39 billion, is also the world's fifth largest economy and the world's fourth largest military power, but it does not have a matching status as a major power, which hurts India. Therefore, India dreams of becoming like China, the United States and Russia, including becoming one of the five permanent members of the United Nations, but this has been opposed by some countries. According to overseas reports, Russia’s Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations Yevski Gneeva said at the UN General Assembly meeting that Russia opposes any idea that would violate the privileges of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, including a veto. right.
Yevski Gneeva emphasized that for us, any idea of restricting the power of permanent members of the Security Council is unacceptable, including the veto. In her view, the use of veto power or threat of veto power has saved the world from war and political adventure more than once. Obviously, these words were deliberately told to India.
After all, this passage speaks to the heart of the world, that is, the UN Security Council is used to maintain world peace. It is reasonable for the five permanent members to have a veto power. If this privilege is abolished, the world will be messed up long ago, and the world may happen. There were more than two wars. More importantly, the one-vote veto power was allocated to the five countries of the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France through the contributions of World War II. For example, China, in order to defeat the Japanese fascist forces, paid more than 35 million military and civilian casualties, and its economic loss was as high as 500 billion U.S. dollars. At that time, India was still under British colonial rule, and its contribution to World War II was minimal!
Secondly, India has done little to maintain world peace. It is rare to hear which country India has saved and who it has helped. On the contrary, the international community often sees India making enemies everywhere and repeatedly expanding its geographical position, leading to the annexation or dismemberment of many countries and regions, including Sikkim. In contrast, Russia sent troops to Syria, controlled Crimea, protected Iran and Venezuela, and effectively maintained peace in these countries. For this alone, India is not worthy of permanent membership.
Third, from the perspective of national strength, the five permanent members have good economic and military capabilities, especially legal nuclear weapons. However, the five permanent members check and balance each other and can cooperate with each other. This model has guaranteed the world peace for more than 70 years. . Many countries have long recognized the status of the five permanent members and do not allow other countries to change the five permanent members into six permanent members. India has applied for membership of the United Nations permanent council five times, but all have been rejected by the five permanent members, and the five permanent members have treated India’s efforts to become a permanent member very tacitly.
India once submitted an application to enter the five permanent members and was rejected by Russia.
India's second application for entry into the five permanent members was rejected by France.
India submitted three applications for admission to the five permanent members and was rejected by the United Kingdom.
India's four applications for admission to the Five Permanent Residences were rejected by the United States.
India's five applications for admission to the Wuchang have been rejected by China.
Therefore, India's wish to abolish the five permanent privileges is simply overwhelming. But why does India know it can't do it? First of all, the mind of India to become permanent comes from the British colonial genes, which inherited the domineering character of Britain, and often bullied the small with big things, giving people a feeling of incomparability. This is a basic factor in India's desire to become permanent. Secondly, India’s rapid economic growth has become the world’s fifth largest economy, and coupled with a huge market of nearly 1.4 billion people, India has the confidence to enter the market. Third, with the support of the United States, France, Israel and other countries’ weapons, India feels that its own force has become stronger. Coupled with the continuous entry of the United States, Japan, Australia and other countries, India’s national self-confidence is extremely inflated.
Of course, there is also Russia's role in this. If it were not for Russia to sell weapons to India and indirectly support India's development of military enterprises, how could India be so arrogant. Therefore, at this time, Russia stepped up to accuse India, and it was a bit of a downfall.
Of course, in the international community, not only India wants to join the permanent membership, but even Japan, Germany, and Brazil want to join the permanent membership, but they were all rejected by the Security Council. It can be said that it is too difficult for India to join permanent membership. Even if India has superior economic and military capabilities, it cannot be permanent. On the one hand, there is no such opportunity as a world war for India to make a "contribution." On the other hand, once an opening is opened to allow India to become permanent members, it will inevitably trigger a chain reaction. By then, the UN Security Council’s threshold will be lowered and any country will learn from India to become permanent members. In this way, the five permanent members will be worthless. How about safeguarding world peace and self-interest? Therefore, instead of daydreaming like this, India should think about how to control the domestic epidemic and solve the nearly 300 million poor people as soon as possible!
