




First, the authors find it hard to justify the death of Indian peacekeepers in the ‘service of an ideal’. On the contrary, an ideal justifies everything — from fighting for one’s country, exposing corruption in the badlands of Bihar or dying to bring peace in the Congo. It was to ‘serve an ideal’ that our forefathers fought for our freedom against colonial oppression. India’s participation in peacekeeping operations began under an ideal that was propagated by Nehru and earned it global goodwill with the conduct of the Indian army in Korea, Gaza and in numerous missions in Africa. If there are no ideals to serve, then no cause is worth fighting and dying for.
Second, the authors contend that despite being one of the largest troop contributors to the UN, we have not been suitably rewarded with a UN Security Council seat. But the reasons for not getting a seat in the Security Council lie elsewhere— namely in great power politics and the difficulty is redesigning the Council to reflect contemporary global powers. Participation in peacekeeping operations does not hurt the case for India. Exactly the opposite. The goodwill earned through the high rates of participation and sacrifices made by Indian soldiers will only help in securing India’s place on the high table. When — and not if — the Security Council does reform, India has a stronger case by virtue of participating in these missions.
Third, the authors advise that instead of gaining the sort of exposure that comes from UN missions, the Indian military...


Group Websites : Express India | Financial Express | Screen India | Loksatta | Kashmir Live | Biz Publications