Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.
Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
So something doesn't work or has not produced any results, but we should continue to fund it or expand it. I would like to do your home improvement project.
Don't you think such initiatives itself an achievement, and don't say they are performing nothing (not mentioning achievement). So what do you say about the resistance in Georgia?
Don't you think such initiatives itself an achievement, and don't say they are performing nothing (not mentioning achievement). So what do you say about the resistance in Georgia?
So it's the thought that counts. That's like any and all welfare programs. They do nothing, but let's expand them because their existance is an achievement.
Which is to serve their country, their people, and not to mention the government that pays their pension, the medical bill, and the housing of their families.
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
So it's the thought that counts. That's like any and all welfare programs. They do nothing, but let's expand them because their existance is an achievement.
Yes, it's existence is an achievement , unlike the NATO Vs Warsaw... an ally vs ally scenario, the UN and UNSC are for the well being of all nations as a true world body, and such an organisation if not functioning to its fullest should be revived such that a better way of it performance could be achieved not just shut down like a business in loss.
Which is to serve their country, their people, and not to mention the government that pays their pension, the medical bill, and the housing of their families.
The govt. pays not because one is serving the nation or its people, but because he is performing his entitled task. The Govt. serves the people and the people serves the govt. in return.
India should disengage from the UN with the same reasons and fervor that it never signed the NPT.
1. Underrepresentation of 1/6th of humankind.
2. Inclusion of dictatorships with veto.
I have always wondered why India is in the UN. It's a useless and third rate organization. IMO for example has murdered progress in the Shipping industry.
Yes, it's existence is an achievement , unlike the NATO Vs Warsaw... an ally vs ally scenario, the UN and UNSC are for the well being of all nations as a true world body, and such an organisation if not functioning to its fullest should be revived such that a better way of it performance could be achieved not just shut down like a business in loss.
Who determines what's good for the world? What if the UN calls for sacrificing one region of the world for the good of the planet? Will you support that if it calls for India to sacrifice for the world?
The govt. pays not because one is serving the nation or its people, but because he is performing his entitled task. The Govt. serves the people and the people serves the govt. in return.
So why would I pay one of my bureaucrats to serve in the UN if he's not there on behalf of MY interest?
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.
I think those personnel of the UN should be loyal to the UN as an organization with respect to any country they came from. All countries as we all know has its own representative to the body to express and lobby for the interest of their respective countries.
UNSC is no SC because it doesn't provides any security to anyone, specially if the threat is from one of the P5s. Dilawar is correct in this respect. Not only India, even countries like Japan, Germany, Brazil, South Africa et al shoud stop lobbying for getting a permanent seat and rather concentrate on consolidating their own politico-military clout.
sigpicAnd on the sixth day, God created the Field Artillery...
UNSC is no SC because it doesn't provides any security to anyone, specially if the threat is from one of the P5s. Dilawar is correct in this respect. Not only India, even countries like Japan, Germany, Brazil, South Africa et al shoud stop lobbying for getting a permanent seat and rather concentrate on consolidating their own politico-military clout.
Then what is your opinion regarding a representative world body? Should there be any body for international cooperation like UN/UNSC ?
Then what is your opinion regarding a representative world body? Should there be any body for international cooperation like UN/UNSC ?
There needn't be any international body for any security stuff. If you want you may very well carry along with UNESCO kind of stuff, but as far as international security is concerned you simply needn't have a SC thingy.
Nation states are guided by their political/military strategic interests and the beautiful thing is that thses interests keep changing. Alliances like NATO/Warsaw etc have been more practical and relevant than organizations like the SC. The former acts whereas the later does nothing.
sigpicAnd on the sixth day, God created the Field Artillery...
The reform process of the UNSC is going to take forever because admitting new permanent members would lessen the power and influence of the current permanent members.
But a good start would be to give the G-4 permanent seats.
India is the world’s second most populous country, and it will for sure become the most populated country on earth in less than 2 decades. It is also one of the largest contributors of UN peacekeeping troops.
Brazil makes sense because there is no South American representation on the permanent council.
India should disengage from the UN with the same reasons and fervor that it never signed the NPT.
1. Underrepresentation of 1/6th of humankind.
2. Inclusion of dictatorships with veto.
I have always wondered why India is in the UN. It's a useless and third rate organization. IMO for example has murdered progress in the Shipping industry.
Sir, IIRC India's participation with the UN and other multi-lateral organizations ensured critical aid in 1950s and 60s... which in turn has prevented the kind of mass famine and drought deaths that used to plague India in the 19th Century (and as recently as 1940s), where millions used to die regularly. Otherwise India could very well have either splintered, or succumbed to a fascist/communist dictatorship under such massive pressures. Mass famines and droughts were very much a reality in the 1950s and 60s Asia, as was massive deaths (Great Leap Forward). Your shipping industry - and a whole bunch of other things - was the price India paid to keep itself alive and somewhat decent. No such thing as a "free lunch", if the price is not paid up front... it is extracted from other means. :( But that was the reality then. Now of course you can completely renegotiate the contracts, or just walk away from the market altogether.
Comment