As we look into the History of the Security Council when the league of Nations turned into UN, the permanent members were the victors of WW2. Now, Both India and Pakistan can be morally victors of the second world war as well considering the amount of man power that the Indian Sub-continent provided the British (My own ancestors fought in that war). But that's not the whole case anymore, not even the right justification to be the part of the SC permanently. India's permanent entry into the UNOSC will be a challenge to the writ of the International Law and all in all it's very importance. You see, all the members of permanent members of UNOSC had acquired Nuclear weapons. Hence Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty was imposed which meant no state would acquire nuclear weapons or disarm as much as it can from it's Nuclear arsenal. India, Pakistan and Israel, never signed. Hence all these countries made Nuclear weapons or have their own nuclear program. The fuss about Iranian and North Korean nuclear weapons is going on because North Korea was a signatory to the treaty (later withrew) and Iran is still a signatory, hence it's facing sanctions.
Having said that, apart from not following main Tenants on the UN. Pakistan will lobby against such a step and China for one, would never like to share power with India and it's obvious, Pakistan lobbying against such a step would obviously force China to veto it. Moreover, Pakistan is considered by China. A counterweight to India.
The reason why USA and Other in the UNOSC are lip servicing India is because of it's huge market size. Even one 1% there is equal to around 10million people. The developed world wants to Liberalize the protectionist policies of the Indian government so it can export there.
However, a prosperous India is good for the region in the long run but such a step right now should not be India's concern. India should rather focus more on Welfare and developing poor states like UP and Bihar to catch up with other states should be their goal, if they succeed. A permanent seat in UNOSC may just come up on it's own.
But only focusing more on Economic Growth might not help. Increasing relations with it's militarily strong and with many economical prospects neighboring Pakistan will improve it's chances even more. Having said that i strongly believe that ending the peace process with Pakistan was a wrong decision by India in the long run. Firstly, it's not very easy in increasing relations when the most of the citizens are hell-bent on nuking each other. Which takes us to my second reason, before the abolition of the peace process by India over the action of Pakistani non-state actors. Absolute success was taking place. Never before trade was crossing billion dollar mark. Never before were the two countries working towards SAFTA. Never before were the two countries serious in resolving Kashmir like this.
But, India is not solely responsible for this. Pakistan's political instability itself has caused a lot of problems in the relations between the two countries. It is really a risk taking insurance for India, if it has to be, it's uncertain for Pakistan to know if they will ever see a General Zia. again or not. The fundamentalists in Pakistan have created and now are condoning the challenging elements of the Indian Establishment in the Indian Kashmir side, the instability in Kashmir. The use of Military and Civil Mob craze is not helping in anyway. Still the actions taken by India in no way solved the problems, rather made them even worse. Going on the blaming road is really easy. Both the sides can be blamed for infiltrating and be held responsible for funding groups which cause the instability in the regions of the two countries.
It's like, we do not know. Who came first? The egg or the chicken? As long as there will be no trust such things will continue and if such things will continue there will be no trust and then again, no matter how much one denies. The problem will always lie in Religion. It's the religious right in both the countries which is causing the problems. Positive and friendly relations between the two countries can be really useful for both the countries in the long run. There are little or no differences.
No comments:
Post a Comment