Countries who feel neighbours may become UNSC members oppose expansion: India

India is “unsatisfied” with the pace of progress on Security Council reform, the country’s envoy at the UN said, noting that there are countries who prefer the status quo and those that oppose expansion in the permanent category “at all costs” as they feel their neighbours may have a chance to become a member.

“The Security Council structure, as it stands today, is a reflection of 1945. It does not reflect today's realities,” India’s permanent representative to the UN, ambassador Parvathaneni Harish, said during a conversation in New York on Tuesday, 19 November.

Harish delivered the keynote address on ‘Responding to Key Global Challenges: The India Way’ at an event at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA).

Harish gave an expansive overview of the “India way” on key global issues ranging from reformed multilateralism, terrorism, demography, India’s digital revolution to the country’s youth, climate change, democracy, healthcare and vaccines.

The event was co-sponsored by the MPA programme in Global Leadership and the International Organisation and UN Studies programme (IO/UNS) and attended by students, faculty and policy experts.

He noted that the United Nations does “great work" in the humanitarian field, addressing the humanitarian requirements of hundreds of millions around the world as well as in the development domain — children's health, public health, and labour through its specialised institutions.

“Yet for the common man on the street, their perception, the lenses through which they view the UN is neither the humanitarian dimension nor the development dimension or the public health dimension. They only look at the inability of the UN to stop conflicts in areas like Ukraine and the Middle East. That is the view they have and that is probably the only yardstick by which they are assessing the efficiency of the UN,” he said during a panel discussion after the keynote address.

Harish underlined that there is consensus that the UN Security Council should be reformed.

“Yes, it needs reforms. It needs expansion. However several countries prefer the status quo. Those who are already permanent members do not wish to vacate it. Those who are already permanent members do not wish to give up the veto. Those who feel that their neighbours may have a chance to become a member would oppose expansion in the permanent category at all costs,” he said.

“This is the way nations behave, very much like people, in terms of motivations.”

Pakistan is part of the group 'Uniting for Consensus' that opposes permanent seats for India and other G4 nations Brazil, Germany and Japan.

Of the five permanent members of the Council, France, Russia, the UK and the US have voiced strong support for India’s bid for a permanent seat in a reformed Council.

China has said that Security Council reform is an important part of the reform of the multilateral governance architecture but also pointed to the “practice of a few countries and interest groups who pursue their own selfish and small-circle interests when it comes to Council reform”.

Harish described the process as being “very difficult” and “complex”.

“Yes, we are unsatisfied with the pace of progress in the last 15-16 years and urging the co-chairs of the Inter-Governmental Negotiation process to decisively move forward on this.

"Is it going to be easy and will it happen tomorrow? Probably not. What should we do? We should keep at it because eventually, things will not remain the same. Nothing remains the same. Change is a natural order of things. It will happen, if not today, tomorrow. If not tomorrow, the day after. We are engaged with this process because we need a multilateral system that works, and is fit for purpose to deal with today's challenges, problems and also opportunities."

Harish emphasised the institutions of multilateralism that “we have today are a product of the post Second World War.

“The reality of 1945 is long gone, the institutions remain. They are not fit for purpose for dealing with today's challenges and opportunities. Yet they have not been reformed, whether it is the UN, the UN Security Council, international financial institutions, trade bodies, each one of them needs to be made fit for purpose for today's realities,” he said.

Harish said that changing the status quo is not easy. “You have a lot of status quo supporters, and you need to build consensus for this. It's a difficult process which is still ongoing,” he said.

“We are a multipolar world, and we in Asia are clear that a multipolar Asia in a multipolar world is the way ahead,” he said.

Summarising the “India way”, Harish underlined that the “world is not a zero-sum game”.

The ‘India way’ that has emerged is a “proactive India playing on the front foot”, he said, using cricket terminology.

He said the strategy is one of "Go ahead and engage, manage difficult partners, cultivate new friends that you have not dealt with before, reassure old friends with whom you have had many years of productive partnership, draw in new stakeholders to all the things that you want to bring about, reach out both to old friends and new partners as you come up with new approaches of dealing with things, extend a hand of friendship and collaboration to all, and finally, expand the outreach, the footprint, and hands of friendship to everybody.

“No to dogma. Don't get caught out just because you did something in a particular way” over the last several decades, he added.

“Consistency is not a virtue. Yes, to calculated risk-taking, because increasingly, we are dealing with a young population, that wants prosperity as of yesterday, that has great aspirations, that wants innovation and wants transformation. If we don't change the way we do business, we will not be in a position to meet their aspirations,” he said outlining the 'India Way'.

“India is a bridge between the developed and the developing world, between the established and the emerging, a friend of the world that believes in participatory institution building without confrontation. We don't want to impose anything on anyone. Global commons for global good. This is what we work for.”