NEW YORK: Pakistan blocked Indian attempt to win permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and New Delhi also lacked support of even half of the required number of states at the global forum.
India’s dream of becoming a permanent member of the UNSC dashed as Pakistan’s stance was accepted by the global forum for the continuation of debate on the criteria of the membership.
Pakistan has opposed the awarding of UNSC’s permanent membership to India. Pakistan has insisted on a definite period of UNSC permanent membership and its election after every two or five years.
Pakistan gave its stance that India has always violated the UNSC resolutions. India lacks getting a two-third majority in the UN Charter, whereas, the Indian group also loses the backing of the United States (US), say media reports.
Moreover, India has also failed to meet the criteria for becoming a UNSC permanent member despite claiming to be a secular and strong economy.
India needs the support of 129 member states for becoming a permanent member. Diplomatic sources said that New Delhi has even failed to get the support of even half of the required number of states.
Sources added that Pakistan’s stance was supported by the Arab League and the African Union. Earlier in April, Pakistan had underscored the need for flexibility to achieve the required consensus among all United Nations member states to overcome the stalemate in the long-running negotiations to restructure the UN Security Council.
“The admittedly slow pace of progress in Security Council reform is not due to any deficiency in the process or procedures,” Ambassador Munir Akram said Wednesday in a resumed session of the Inter-Governmental Negotiations (IGN) aimed at making the 15-member Council more effective, representative and accountable.
The reason, he added, was “the inflexibility in the positions of a few individual states which have come into these negotiations with a pre-determined end goal of fulfilling their national ambitions to secure an elevated and privileged position within the Security Council, regardless of the principle of sovereign equality of states”, obviously referring to the relentless campaign by India, Brazil, Germany and Japan, known as G-4, for permanent seats in an expanded Council.
Full-scale negotiations to reform the Security Council began in the General Assembly in February 2009 on five key areas, the categories of membership, the question of veto, regional representation, size of an enlarged Security Council, and working methods of the council and its relationship with the General Assembly.
Progress towards restructuring the Security Council remains blocked as India, Brazil, Germany and Japan continue pushing for permanent seats in the Council, while the Italy/Pakistan-led Uniting for Consensus (UfC) group firmly opposes any additional permanent members.
As a compromise, UfC has proposed a new category of members, not permanent members, with longer duration in terms and a possibility to get re-elected.
The Security Council is currently composed of five permanent members; Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, and 10 non-permanent members elected to two-year terms.
Court asked appellants to satisfy it on next hearing that how decision of single bench was not right
Petitioner’s lawyer informed court that parliament had passed 26th Constitutional Amendment
CM urged people to choose between resisting oppression and embracing freedom or continuing under shackles of slavery
Committee emphasised need for effective legislation to safeguard rights of parliamentarians
Muzammil Aslam highlighted need for 5,000 watersheds in KP, requiring an investment of Rs 115 billion
Justice Shahzad observed that with support of appellant, 85% power theft was witnessed in his locality
