The In-Security Council: Dump it or Grow it?

Chithra ji,

``with India, under Nehru, deferring its own claim of membership, to China``

Don`t you see how foolishly India acted in those days of world-peace and non-violence, concepts for which nobody else gave a damn.

India should move completely away from those impractical and high-minded times. For the next 50 years India should focus completely on building itself a strong and powerful country.

``India’s membership, if it happens, will make Pakistan and other South Asian nations feel more insecure. That will not be a good thing. Building bonds between blood-related neighbors and historically enmeshed partners is more important than Security Council membership.``

Why should India`s membership make anyone in South Asia feel insecure? If a country has adversarial relationship with India then it will feel insecure whether or not it is in South Asia. The argument that those who don`t like India will feel insecure so India shouldn`t build itself up is a naive, Nehruvian, worse Gandhian.

The security council is not going to change. China, for whose membership Nehru worked, will not let India in. So India should forget about security council. It should acquire the intellectual, political, economic, and military strength that nobody can ignore it, security council member or not.

For foreign policy and economic-military strength, our role model must be china. No more the humiliation of the American 7th fleet standing in the Indian ocean ready to bomb India.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts