Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

Revealed: how Pak and China didn’t want India at UN high table

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Security Council Seat: the long haul

    Sept 2004: G4 — India, Brazil, Germany and Japan — back each other’s claim for permanent membership of Security Council.

    Mar 2005: Kofi Annan calls for expansion to 24, with 5 new permanent members.

    July 2005: G4 calls for 25 seats with 6 permanent members. Group led by Pak, Italy say no expansion in permanent category.

    Dec 2005: Ghana, Nigeria and South Africa present African proposal: expand to 26 with six permanent members having veto rights.

    Jan 2006: Three of G4 members, India, Brazil and Germany, table 2005 draft with support from Britain, France and Russia.

    Ads by Google

    May-Jun 2006: Africa insists on veto right while G4 willing to compromise.

    Jan 2007: UNGA appoints five facilitators to report on UNSC reform

    April 2007: Report supports transitional approach, immediate expansion as an “intermediate stage”.

    June-July 2007: African Union retains earlier position.

    June 2008: India circulates another draft resolution but this time with veto powers for permanent members.

    Previous1234
    Comments
    Post comment

    Be the first to comment.

    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.