Democracy never had these: Caste system Caste Certificates Hindu breast tax Musahar people dietary Caste related violences Oppression against the religious minorities etc.
@@adityasharan4934 France/Britain/US/UK supported India for a permanent UNSC seat.....just no veto powers 😅🤣😂😆Read the video description. The African Continent's GDP is approximately the same as India and population is probably much larger than India and its natural resources are far greater than India.....despite all this, they are nominated for 2 permanent UNSC seat but with no veto powers. Same treatment will apply for India😘😋
Seats should be by population. For 6 seats, 1.3 billion qualify for a seat. 4 votes gets a resolution adopted and enforced. No more veto power. China, India, Africa each gets one. (Israel and vassals US, Canada, UK, New Zealand, Australia, Europe, Japan, Korea, and Philippines) get 1. Rest of Asia gets one. The rest of the world share one. Multi-state conglomerates decide voting through internal, population-weighted pre-vote.
@@YeTao-i4vthank you. I partially agree. Not necessarily who gets the seat, or with your loaded terms (vassals…). But with the general structure and idea (population based, no veto, majority vote).
@@YeTao-i4v I believe countries with large population centers deserve a seat but just giving seats to single countries (easier to consolidate their seat power) compared to smaller countries sharing one seat (conflicting interests) isn't balanced at all. I believe adding an seat for India, seat for south America overall, and 2 seats for Africa with veto powers would be more balanced.
Maybe Africa could demonstrate their readiness by some UN peacekeeping. Start becoming a donor continent. Maybe they could secure Gaza and Lebanon. Maybe Haiti. After a few demonstrations I might think a conversation would be in order.
To be fair most of global instability is because of UN permanent members If USA and Russia stop funding wars world will automatically becomes more stable
@@emmisysquire9684 Since 1971, over 40,000 Chinese service members have taken part in 25 UN peacekeeping missions. They've been deployed as UN peacekeepers in over 20 countries and regions, including Cambodia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia, Sudan, Lebanon, Cyprus, South Sudan and Mali, according to UN Peacekeeping. -As the world's largest developing country and one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, China has over 2,000 peacekeepers serving in active missions currently, making it the largest troop-contributing country among the permanent members of the UN Security Council. It also foots around 15 percent of the total annual peacekeeping budget and 12 percent of the UN's regular budget, making it the second largest contributor of all member states.
The very fact that at this moment there are 144 armed conflicts and about 50 active wars of various intensities. Shows what this huge organization is worth. And what is the benefit it brings to the taxpayers of the world.0 and another 0 and another 0
Africa is the richest continent. Congo is the richest country in Africa in terms of minerals, and Somalia in terms of ocean access. Congo, Somalia, Egypt or Nigeria!
Actually it is a misnomer to say the Security Council has 5 Permanent Members. The Russian Federation was not one of the permanent members. The Soviet Union was. The Russian Federation does not represent all the nations of the old Soviet Union. The only way they should have veto power is if they can get all the nations that were part of the Soviet Union to agree with their stand. Otherwise they should just be one vote in the Security Council.
The UN has acknowledged that the Russian Federation is the successor state to the Soviet Union, and inherited all the Soviet Union’s privileges and responsibilities in the UN.
@@chrisohara2325 : Why should they have a say? They gave up their right to have a say when they declined to join the Russian Federation and declared full independence as sovereign nations.
it is five permanent members supporting the UN, not the UN supporting the five. It is the five manage the UN, not the UN manages the five. How to become the five? by talking? no.
It wasn't by duty, moral, initiative, righteousness and bravery that Indian troops did something in WW2. It was under the command of their British Masters that the Indians of British India did something. As such, India does not deserve a permanent UNSC seat.
Letting them join without veto power Africa should take a step back and view this as a wolf and she’s clothing. They’re not offering anything leave it alone.
You say the council is dysfunctional and opaque: so why are you so adamant to join? Africa needs to look inwards and fix theirs. You have ECOWAS, OAU - develop it, develop your economy, your military, your currency, make your institutions functional instead of trying to force your way into an institution you self-proclaimed to be dysfunctional.
She was saying that they are only allowing the African continent to have 2 seats. So who would get it? She stated that this would be a tough decision and she is unsure what criteria they would look at (i.e. economy, population size or global influence).
Israel isn't a permanent member... maybe you should start reading and investigating a bit more Also... the USA is the world power and its the nation that mainly funds the UN, what doew Africa do to benefits the UN?
If Soviet union's permanent seat was given to Russia on the basis of Russia having a bigger population and a larger economy, then British empire's permanent seat too should be given to India as it had surpassed UK's economy 3 years ago .
Indiarrhea has no moral compass and thespine to make decisions on world affairs. Whenever there is a voting on world affairs, what did Indiarrhea did? Abstain, abstain, abstain?
As an Asian from Southeast Asia, I'm so sick of the Western double standards and hypocrisy. If this continues, I think all other nations should abandon international law, because it only serves the Western countries. So why should we follow the law in the first place if they don't?
A security council that is too big will be paralyzed by indecision. Perhaps increasing the number of rotating seats and assigning some to different blocks would be a better solution. Veto power should be reduced (in number or frequency of use), but honestly, it is a sort of vaccine against the abuse of the system.
Even the current members of the security council should be in favor of change. The current method benefits no one. Even opposing sides. Israel can’t be targeted because of veto, and in the other hand Russia can’t be targeted became of veto. This madness has to end. No veto power.
its not about how many seats in the 5 perm seats its the veto power, it should have a rule that for the veto to take place then it must be a majority and if 5 members then there must be 3 veto votes not 1 cowboy keep vetoing to save their paymaster
Forget about 2 ,they haven't given India 1 seat .India's population is just slightly less than Africa's ,India's GDP (both nominal and PPP) is more than entire Africa .India has the largest population of Hindus, sikhs, jains and Zoroastrians .India has the 3rd largest population of Buddhists .India is the biggest contributer of soldiers to UN missions and yet India wasn't given a permanent seat .
If India is so unhappy with the UNSC, they should withdraw from the UN completely and form their own Indian security council with the rest of the world. It would be interesting to see how many countries are willing to withdraw/rescind their UN membership or their UN permanent membership in favor of the Indian security council membership : )
Africans deserve a permanent seat on unsc and Ethiopia will definitely going to seat on it. As the only African country founder of UN and a Host country of AU and a winner of WW2.
If they add two African nations, then they should remove two NATO members /Russia resumes its war in Ukraine. It is advisable that the UK or US become the mediator.
It would be interesting to explore the effectiveness of the UN overall, Security Council, and the right of veto, before any country is qualified to (re) join. Same applies to any Organisation order or cult in the world mimicking this set up🥹 We all deserve to live in freedom and enjoy happiness🙏
@@mr.unknownindian1764 Aha. Well so it seems I hit the nail on its head. Thank you for confirming evidence of hacking identity theft retaliation and censoring 🙏😊🧘♀️
Even if Africa secure one or two seats, they may not be accorded the privilege of veto currently enjoy by the current permanent members. As you are well aware the U.S. might not be willing to share the power of veto with Africa, as the former's power and rights could be diluted, and so are the other current permanent member states. The fical point is the perception of the current permanent members that none of any prospective candidate from Africa wields power in economic, military and geopolitical strength sufficiently in the international system.
Let alone any prospective candidate from the African Union for a seat in the permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council, even other candidates aspiring to join the club, i.e. Brazil, India, South Africa plus Germany and Japan, both of which supported by the U.S., they also face tough challenges ahead for more than a decade already, due to lack of support of the other U.N. member states i.e. two thirds support of the member states in the U..N. General Assembly, and ratification in domestic legislature of two thirds of U.N. member states, including the current permanent members in the U.N. Security Council. These requirements seem to suggest a long journey ahead.
|ndia is crying because she was denied an UNSC permanent membership over and over again despite begging for it since 1994. |ndia's Bollywood scripts may have changed over time, but intellectuals can see through the ploy of |ndia. |ndia's motive for an UNSC reform was never about peace or equity. It was all about satisfying the |ndian ego/jealousy and their inferiority comp|ex: If |ndia can't have a permanent UNSC permanent seat, all other countries shall not have it either. Thus, the |ndians are pushing this agenda, the "need" for an UNSC reform, on all social medias.
@@frenzyjamesRSA is way developed than your poor Nigeria with no proper infrastructure. Everyone in Africa knows South Africa is number one, the only country in BRICS and G-20 member. Google says RSA is the largest economy in 2024.
France/Britain/US/UK supported India for a permanent UNSC seat.....just no veto powers 😅🤣😂😆Read the video description. The African Continent's GDP is approximately the same as India and population is probably much larger than India and its natural resources are far greater than India.....despite all this, they are nominated for 2 permanent UNSC seat but with no veto powers. Same treatment will apply for India😘😋but with an added condition: they will have to get pass CHYNA's approval 😊😅
Oh ya, why doesn't Australia claim its divided into 150 states and each has a UN ambassador. Giving them massive influence in the UN - not. It's power not the number of countries that counts. Although it would be fair to have a new member appointed for Africa they would spend the next hundred years arguing about who it would be. Worse, the absolute corruption that exists in every African country would lead to their vote simply being bought or coerced by the strongest power. this would also require a member from S. America, India, Asean and the middle east to be fair.
The UN is a dysfunctional institution because of the veto powers in the Security Council, and this problem won’t be solved by adding more of them. The solution would be to abolish these veto powers. However, the UN would fall apart before something like that happens. Apart from that, Africa as a whole lacks the power and influence to claim a permanent seat, especially considering that no continent comprises as many countries. If anything, one should consider India, Brazil, or Indonesia. But then we come back to the point that each veto power makes the UN more dysfunctional.
UN is for all people doesn't matter if it's a developing country or a dictatorship or whatever, it represents the people of earth therefore it should mirror the distribution of earth
@@IndiaTides You don't seem to be very smart. You need 5 out 5 approval from each and every permanent UNSC members and in addition to that, you need 2/3 majority of votes from the entire UN. Get some education on "how to amend UNSC charters" before you bark.
Every country and the five UNSC permanent members should nominate India as the sixth UNSC permanent member and only then will India ever recover from it's inferior complex and truly be considered a real superpower (not just a superpower on the internet) and the Vishvaguru (global teacher of the world).🤭 And only then will every single netizen on the internet be spared from seeing the thousands/millions of "India superpower" or "why India deserve to be a permanent UNSC seat" videos.
If India did something in WW2, so does the entire subcontinent. And if India deserves a seat, all sovereign countries in the subcontinent and all countries which used to be part of "British India" deserve to have a permanent seat too.
They should build by no intervention from the West. Also, by your logic, Germany and Japan should not get the seat because they do not have nuclear weapons. Only India should get it because we have nuclear weapons.
@@anuragpatil4073 Well neither Germany or Japan are part of the security council right now. The security council in practical terms right now has two opposing sides, you have China and Russia vs USA, UK and France (and yes neither UK or France has nukes, but they are "protected" by the USA) Is all bureaucracy and politics at it´s finest.
India ought to have a permanent UNSC seat by now if they are really such a superpower country. What they have said/bragged/proclaimed on the internet simply does not mirror their power and influence on the global stage. 🤣 What kind of a superpower is India when it has to resort to begging for a permanent UNSC seat, repeatedly and consistently for over 30+ years, and still hasn't got it? Source: JSTOR Title of article: INDIA'S PERMANENT MEMBERSHIP OF THE U. N. SECURITY COUNCIL : CHANGING POWER REALITIES AND NOTIONS OF SECURITY Author: Manoj Kumar Mishra (Indian) What article said specifically: India has been bidding for the permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council since 1994 when India made its intention clear in the General Assembly that it was prepared to bear the responsibility of the permanent membership of the Security Council. First time doing it, we called it asking. Second time, appealing. Third time, pleading. Many times, begging
India has no moral compass and thespine to make decisions on world affairs. Whenever there is a voting on world affairs, what did Indiarrhea did? Abstain, abstain, abstain?
Boot out Britain, actually. Because after the end of the Cold War, Britain has not used its veto powers for once. Also, Britain is no longer a military power.
How much money did the Permanent 5 UNSC members and India contributed to UNSC Peacekeeping budget? United States (27.89% of total budget)💪P5 China (15.21% of total budget)💪P5 United Kingdom (5.79% of total budget)💪P5 France (5.61% of total budget)💪P5 Russian Federation (3.04% of total budget)💪P5 SuperPower |ndia (0.1668% of total budget) 🤭🤡 *Source: United Nations Peacekeeping (How we are funded)* |ndians on all social medias: We deserve to be a permanent UNSC member saar We are one of the largest contributors to UNSC saar (🚩this is a scam made by |ndians) We want equal veto rights saar UN/UNSC is useless/redundant saar Source: JSTOR Title of article: INDIA'S PERMANENT MEMBERSHIP OF THE U. N. SECURITY COUNCIL : CHANGING POWER REALITIES AND NOTIONS OF SECURITY Author: Manoj Kumar Mishra (Indian) What article said specifically: India has been bidding for the permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council since 1994 when India made its intention clear in the General Assembly that it was prepared to bear the responsibility of the permanent membership of the Security Council.
World's largest democracy India 🇮🇳 should get UNSC permanent seat ❤❤
Democracy never had these:
Caste system
Caste Certificates
Hindu breast tax
Musahar people dietary
Caste related violences
Oppression against the religious minorities etc.
Beggars can't be choosers.
Nope not happening. The two seats are reserved for BRAZIL and Africa union.
it is happening 😂
@@adityasharan4934 France/Britain/US/UK supported India for a permanent UNSC seat.....just no veto powers 😅🤣😂😆Read the video description. The African Continent's GDP is approximately the same as India and population is probably much larger than India and its natural resources are far greater than India.....despite all this, they are nominated for 2 permanent UNSC seat but with no veto powers. Same treatment will apply for India😘😋
We dont want those seats without veto power if thats the case Africa will leave the UN
Seats should be by population. For 6 seats, 1.3 billion qualify for a seat. 4 votes gets a resolution adopted and enforced. No more veto power. China, India, Africa each gets one. (Israel and vassals US, Canada, UK, New Zealand, Australia, Europe, Japan, Korea, and Philippines) get 1. Rest of Asia gets one. The rest of the world share one. Multi-state conglomerates decide voting through internal, population-weighted pre-vote.
@@YeTao-i4v 🤡🤡
@@YeTao-i4vthank you. I partially agree. Not necessarily who gets the seat, or with your loaded terms (vassals…). But with the general structure and idea (population based, no veto, majority vote).
@@YeTao-i4v I believe countries with large population centers deserve a seat but just giving seats to single countries (easier to consolidate their seat power) compared to smaller countries sharing one seat (conflicting interests) isn't balanced at all. I believe adding an seat for India, seat for south America overall, and 2 seats for Africa with veto powers would be more balanced.
Maybe Africa could demonstrate their readiness by some UN peacekeeping. Start becoming a donor continent. Maybe they could secure Gaza and Lebanon. Maybe Haiti. After a few demonstrations I might think a conversation would be in order.
To be fair most of global instability is because of UN permanent members
If USA and Russia stop funding wars world will automatically becomes more stable
What peacekeeping has China done to deserve a permanent seat?
Some African countries have participated in more peacekeeping than most UN members, and how many UN members have provided aid to Gaza?
@@emmisysquire9684 Since 1971, over 40,000 Chinese service members have taken part in 25 UN peacekeeping missions. They've been deployed as UN peacekeepers in over 20 countries and regions, including Cambodia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia, Sudan, Lebanon, Cyprus, South Sudan and Mali, according to UN Peacekeeping.
-As the world's largest developing country and one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, China has over 2,000 peacekeepers serving in active missions currently, making it the largest troop-contributing country among the permanent members of the UN Security Council. It also foots around 15 percent of the total annual peacekeeping budget and 12 percent of the UN's regular budget, making it the second largest contributor of all member states.
Africa do alot of peace keeping its a cheap way of getting the UN to fund their army
No one should have a veto right or a permanent seat at the security counsel. The u.n claims to be for equality but prefer to treat most of us as less.
If i had to choose two? Nigeria and the east african community, as a joint seat. But first, Brazil and India. Maybe a joint ASEAN seat too.
The very fact that at this moment there are 144 armed conflicts and about 50 active wars of various intensities. Shows what this huge organization is worth. And what is the benefit it brings to the taxpayers of the world.0 and another 0 and another 0
Africa is the richest continent. Congo is the richest country in Africa in terms of minerals, and Somalia in terms of ocean access. Congo, Somalia, Egypt or Nigeria!
South Africa must be there. Very vocal on international stage
LMAO South Africa the biggest hypocrite in the world. Against genocide but supports Russia, the double standard 😂
Bunch of BS
Actually it is a misnomer to say the Security Council has 5 Permanent Members. The Russian Federation was not one of the permanent members. The Soviet Union was. The Russian Federation does not represent all the nations of the old Soviet Union. The only way they should have veto power is if they can get all the nations that were part of the Soviet Union to agree with their stand. Otherwise they should just be one vote in the Security Council.
The UN has acknowledged that the Russian Federation is the successor state to the Soviet Union, and inherited all the Soviet Union’s privileges and responsibilities in the UN.
@@timonsolus Did any of the other countries that were part of the Soviet Union have a say in it? Either way, why?
Olodo. Read a book
@@chrisohara2325 : Why should they have a say? They gave up their right to have a say when they declined to join the Russian Federation and declared full independence as sovereign nations.
@@chrisohara2325 They were and are still consider minor powers. That´s why only Russia was taken as representative of the USSR.
Lets just give them ours, and we get out of the UN all together. It serves no purpose any longer...
it is five permanent members supporting the UN, not the UN supporting the five. It is the five manage the UN, not the UN manages the five. How to become the five? by talking? no.
The UN should stop Israel. It should not limit itself to condemnation. Effective action should be taken.
It wasn't by duty, moral, initiative, righteousness and bravery that Indian troops did something in WW2. It was under the command of their British Masters that the Indians of British India did something. As such, India does not deserve a permanent UNSC seat.
Letting them join without veto power Africa should take a step back and view this as a wolf and she’s clothing. They’re not offering anything leave it alone.
You say the council is dysfunctional and opaque: so why are you so adamant to join? Africa needs to look inwards and fix theirs. You have ECOWAS, OAU - develop it, develop your economy, your military, your currency, make your institutions functional instead of trying to force your way into an institution you self-proclaimed to be dysfunctional.
We are all africana,whoever can be a leader for that UN structure dont say Nigeria, South Africa or Ethiopia,its painful to hear that me as african
She was saying that they are only allowing the African continent to have 2 seats. So who would get it? She stated that this would be a tough decision and she is unsure what criteria they would look at (i.e. economy, population size or global influence).
Why not 2 members elected by the AU become a member with veto power for the elected duration
AU leader could have the seat.
@@kathibaba7665 Tha is what is happening
First step US and Isreal out. Then start to build a UN for the benefit of all.
Israel isn't a permanent member... maybe you should start reading and investigating a bit more
Also... the USA is the world power and its the nation that mainly funds the UN, what doew Africa do to benefits the UN?
Fact: the UN should not exist at all.
If Soviet union's permanent seat was given to Russia on the basis of Russia having a bigger population and a larger economy, then British empire's permanent seat too should be given to India as it had surpassed UK's economy 3 years ago .
2 permanent sits without any Veto power, this is a waste of time!
Indiarrhea has no moral compass and thespine to make decisions on world affairs. Whenever there is a voting on world affairs, what did Indiarrhea did? Abstain, abstain, abstain?
Dont worry one country has already decided its fate. 😉
As an Asian from Southeast Asia, I'm so sick of the Western double standards and hypocrisy. If this continues, I think all other nations should abandon international law, because it only serves the Western countries. So why should we follow the law in the first place if they don't?
A security council that is too big will be paralyzed by indecision. Perhaps increasing the number of rotating seats and assigning some to different blocks would be a better solution. Veto power should be reduced (in number or frequency of use), but honestly, it is a sort of vaccine against the abuse of the system.
You're right, me and a Queen should be the two lifetime seats on UN as we guide the world.
Even the current members of the security council should be in favor of change. The current method benefits no one. Even opposing sides. Israel can’t be targeted because of veto, and in the other hand Russia can’t be targeted became of veto. This madness has to end. No veto power.
its not about how many seats in the 5 perm seats its the veto power, it should have a rule that for the veto to take place then it must be a majority and if 5 members then there must be 3 veto votes not 1 cowboy keep vetoing to save their paymaster
if africa has 1.2B people and they want 2 seats, then does that means that both india and china get 2 setas ?
Forget about 2 ,they haven't given India 1 seat .India's population is just slightly less than Africa's ,India's GDP (both nominal and PPP) is more than entire Africa .India has the largest population of Hindus, sikhs, jains and Zoroastrians .India has the 3rd largest population of Buddhists .India is the biggest contributer of soldiers to UN missions and yet India wasn't given a permanent seat .
She didnt answer the question asked by the host lol
If India is so unhappy with the UNSC, they should withdraw from the UN completely and form their own Indian security council with the rest of the world. It would be interesting to see how many countries are willing to withdraw/rescind their UN membership or their UN permanent membership in favor of the Indian security council membership : )
DW does not represent Germany.
DW is a US media, although it is called Dutch...
@@jianyang6281 DW is funded by german tax payers but run by Washington fishy
Africans deserve a permanent seat on unsc and Ethiopia will definitely going to seat on it. As the only African country founder of UN and a Host country of AU and a winner of WW2.
Everyone does except those noble countries with veto.
If they add two African nations, then they should remove two NATO members /Russia resumes its war in Ukraine. It is advisable that the UK or US become the mediator.
It would be interesting to explore the effectiveness of the UN overall, Security Council, and the right of veto, before any country is qualified to (re) join.
Same applies to any Organisation order or cult in the world mimicking this set up🥹
We all deserve to live in freedom and enjoy happiness🙏
@@mr.unknownindian1764 Aha. Well so it seems I hit the nail on its head. Thank you for confirming evidence of hacking identity theft retaliation and censoring 🙏😊🧘♀️
Even if Africa secure one or two seats, they may not be accorded the privilege of veto currently enjoy by the current permanent members. As you are well aware the U.S. might not be willing to share the power of veto with Africa, as the former's power and rights could be diluted, and so are the other current permanent member states. The fical point is the perception of the current permanent members that none of any prospective candidate from Africa wields power in economic, military and geopolitical strength sufficiently in the international system.
Let alone any prospective candidate from the African Union for a seat in the permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council, even other candidates aspiring to join the club, i.e. Brazil, India, South Africa plus Germany and Japan, both of which supported by the U.S., they also face tough challenges ahead for more than a decade already, due to lack of support of the other U.N. member states i.e. two thirds support of the member states in the U..N. General Assembly, and ratification in domestic legislature of two thirds of U.N. member states, including the current permanent members in the U.N. Security Council. These requirements seem to suggest a long journey ahead.
Racism
|ndia is crying because she was denied an UNSC permanent membership over and over again despite begging for it since 1994. |ndia's Bollywood scripts may have changed over time, but intellectuals can see through the ploy of |ndia. |ndia's motive for an UNSC reform was never about peace or equity. It was all about satisfying the |ndian ego/jealousy and their inferiority comp|ex: If |ndia can't have a permanent UNSC permanent seat, all other countries shall not have it either. Thus, the |ndians are pushing this agenda, the "need" for an UNSC reform, on all social medias.
Only men with guts and winners deserve to have the UNSC seat. India does not have these qualities.
Nigeria is the largest economy in Africa, not puny South Africa
South Africa is the largest economy Google it fool. Nigeria is just a village
@@MithaKomle that's just a projection, it's not actual, don't be delusional and if Nigeria is a village I guess SA is an uncompleted building 😂
@@frenzyjamesRSA is way developed than your poor Nigeria with no proper infrastructure. Everyone in Africa knows South Africa is number one, the only country in BRICS and G-20 member. Google says RSA is the largest economy in 2024.
100% right.
0:46 Phil Gayle's face expression gotta be the most iconic, and fully conveys my own feeling. What are these guys even talking about?
France/Britain/US/UK supported India for a permanent UNSC seat.....just no veto powers 😅🤣😂😆Read the video description. The African Continent's GDP is approximately the same as India and population is probably much larger than India and its natural resources are far greater than India.....despite all this, they are nominated for 2 permanent UNSC seat but with no veto powers. Same treatment will apply for India😘😋but with an added condition: they will have to get pass CHYNA's approval 😊😅
Why
So they can beg for more money
Begging more money is better that colonialism or invading countries to steal their resources. Western countries has nothing only stealing
Wrong. Reason being able to help the global majority to keep a leash on US-Foreverwars Inc.
It would help them renegotiate their IMF loans.
They won’t beg anything if stealing their natural resources stopped
Yea the west stealing African resources that's why
Well said by the Kenyan president. Opaque!!!
Oh ya, why doesn't Australia claim its divided into 150 states and each has a UN ambassador. Giving them massive influence in the UN - not. It's power not the number of countries that counts. Although it would be fair to have a new member appointed for Africa they would spend the next hundred years arguing about who it would be. Worse, the absolute corruption that exists in every African country would lead to their vote simply being bought or coerced by the strongest power. this would also require a member from S. America, India, Asean and the middle east to be fair.
The UN is a dysfunctional institution because of the veto powers in the Security Council, and this problem won’t be solved by adding more of them. The solution would be to abolish these veto powers. However, the UN would fall apart before something like that happens.
Apart from that, Africa as a whole lacks the power and influence to claim a permanent seat, especially considering that no continent comprises as many countries. If anything, one should consider India, Brazil, or Indonesia. But then we come back to the point that each veto power makes the UN more dysfunctional.
UN is for all people doesn't matter if it's a developing country or a dictatorship or whatever, it represents the people of earth therefore it should mirror the distribution of earth
India should get a permanent UNSC seat only after every single country has a permanent UNSC seat. 😆
4 of the 5 P5 members endorsed Indian membership. If there will be seat then Indian seat is final.
@@IndiaTides You don't seem to be very smart. You need 5 out 5 approval from each and every permanent UNSC members and in addition to that, you need 2/3 majority of votes from the entire UN. Get some education on "how to amend UNSC charters" before you bark.
@@IndiaTides 4 out of 5 approval isn't enough. You don't seem to be very smart and educated to know "how to amend UNSC charters".
@@IndiaTides 4 out 5 isn't enough. Do you even know "how to amend the UNSC charters"?🤡
@@IndiaTides 4 out 5 isn't enough. Do you even know "how to amend the UNSC charters"?🤭🥱
Every country and the five UNSC permanent members should nominate India as the sixth UNSC permanent member and only then will India ever recover from it's inferior complex and truly be considered a real superpower (not just a superpower on the internet) and the Vishvaguru (global teacher of the world).🤭 And only then will every single netizen on the internet be spared from seeing the thousands/millions of "India superpower" or "why India deserve to be a permanent UNSC seat" videos.
I want to become the president of the USA
US proposes Africa for observer , what does it mean , it is just joke ??
The US hegemon are trying to buy time.
Useless nation not united nation
If India did something in WW2, so does the entire subcontinent. And if India deserves a seat, all sovereign countries in the subcontinent and all countries which used to be part of "British India" deserve to have a permanent seat too.
Germany , India , South Korea , Japan needs to be included with SA and Nigeria...
Ruto is a puppet of the west he doesn't represent Kenyans
Do they have nukes? If not then no.
They should build by no intervention from the West. Also, by your logic, Germany and Japan should not get the seat because they do not have nuclear weapons. Only India should get it because we have nuclear weapons.
@@anuragpatil4073 Well neither Germany or Japan are part of the security council right now. The security council in practical terms right now has two opposing sides, you have China and Russia vs USA, UK and France (and yes neither UK or France has nukes, but they are "protected" by the USA) Is all bureaucracy and politics at it´s finest.
France has Nukes
@@Krafanioyou have lack of knowledge uk France have nukes bro
India ought to have a permanent UNSC seat by now if they are really such a superpower country. What they have said/bragged/proclaimed on the internet simply does not mirror their power and influence on the global stage. 🤣 What kind of a superpower is India when it has to resort to begging for a permanent UNSC seat, repeatedly and consistently for over 30+ years, and still hasn't got it?
Source: JSTOR
Title of article: INDIA'S PERMANENT MEMBERSHIP OF THE U. N. SECURITY COUNCIL : CHANGING POWER REALITIES AND NOTIONS OF SECURITY
Author: Manoj Kumar Mishra (Indian)
What article said specifically: India has been bidding for the permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council since 1994 when India made its intention clear in the General Assembly that it was prepared to bear the responsibility of the permanent membership of the Security Council.
First time doing it, we called it asking.
Second time, appealing.
Third time, pleading.
Many times, begging
India has no moral compass and thespine to make decisions on world affairs. Whenever there is a voting on world affairs, what did Indiarrhea did? Abstain, abstain, abstain?
yes 👍 take razzia's seat 😎
and another from UK seat.
@@jianyang6281Correct
Boot Russia and give two to Africa.
Boot out Britain, actually. Because after the end of the Cold War, Britain has not used its veto powers for once. Also, Britain is no longer a military power.
@@anuragpatil4073 And boot France too.
@@Memovox Why to boot France ?
@@anuragpatil4073 Due to Macron of course.
How much money did the Permanent 5 UNSC members and India contributed to UNSC Peacekeeping budget?
United States (27.89% of total budget)💪P5
China (15.21% of total budget)💪P5
United Kingdom (5.79% of total budget)💪P5
France (5.61% of total budget)💪P5
Russian Federation (3.04% of total budget)💪P5
SuperPower |ndia (0.1668% of total budget) 🤭🤡
*Source: United Nations Peacekeeping (How we are funded)*
|ndians on all social medias:
We deserve to be a permanent UNSC member saar
We are one of the largest contributors to UNSC saar (🚩this is a scam made by |ndians)
We want equal veto rights saar
UN/UNSC is useless/redundant saar
Source: JSTOR
Title of article: INDIA'S PERMANENT MEMBERSHIP OF THE U. N. SECURITY COUNCIL : CHANGING POWER REALITIES AND NOTIONS OF SECURITY
Author: Manoj Kumar Mishra (Indian)
What article said specifically: India has been bidding for the permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council since 1994 when India made its intention clear in the General Assembly that it was prepared to bear the responsibility of the permanent membership of the Security Council.