Font size: 
France had only a small role in the war victory. As a matter of fact, it had to be liberated by Britain and the United States from the clutches of Germany. A still smaller role was played by China, which had already been overrun by the Japanese before World War II. These two nations were included because the underwriters of the U.N. constitution wished to give the new body a worldwide outlook. China was large and populous, although in the middle of a civil war.
India had no independent voice. It was a British colony in 1945. The indomitable Prime Minister Winston Churchill always wished India to remain a crown colony. His defeat in Britain's election resulted in his view being dumped and India gaining independence in 1947.
Hence one short year after World War II an evil against India had already been committed -- it had been excluded from the U.N. Security Council. Winston Churchill's views had prevailed in treating India as a British dependency. India had as much right as China to a Security Council permanent seat. Both were poor, populous and ravaged by civil unrest -- and together represented one-third of humanity. Hence, if China was to get such a coveted position, India should have had the same.
If being a wartime victor was the criterion for inclusion in the Security Council, India, whose sons died by the thousands for the Allied victory, had a greater claim than France. Then why was India excluded? Again the villain was Churchill, who had managed to counter Indian moves for independence and a role in world affairs. Churchill could not counter the French General Charles de Gaulle, who insisted that France be declared a victor.
Once an evil is committed, it is often perpetuated for one reason or another.
For 30 years, from 1945 to 1975, the United States objected to communist China's inclusion as a permanent member of the Security Council. It preferred to pretend that the Chinese nation resided in Taiwan and Chiang Kai Sheik represented all of China. The facts were otherwise. The communists ruled China; Chiang ruled a small island.
For the last 30 years, since 1975, India has made repeated attempts to be included in the U.N. Security Council as a permanent member, but all kinds of excuses have been offered. Also, India did not have the muscle to force its way in.
Now the situation is changing again. India has become an economic powerhouse in Asia, alongside China. Also India has the military muscle to back its search for greater recognition in the world body. But still it is a no go.
The United States does not want to alter the status quo by entertaining additional requests for Security Council seats from Japan, Brazil and Germany. These countries have as much right to be part of this exclusive club as France or Great Britain. But excuses have been found to continue the current policy.
China mildly opposes India's demands, entirely for strategic reasons. China does not wish to have another powerful Asian nation in this club, which would diminish its influence. To counter that, it has been encouraging Pakistan to seek inclusion on the basis of religion. Pakistan has the nuclear bomb, which is an important asset. Also, no Muslim state is represented in the Security Council. Pakistan, encouraged by China, feels it should have the same right as India. Moreover, Pakistan is a spoiler state for China, a task it seeks to accomplish with great diligence.
So, where does India stand in terms of gaining greater recognition at the United Nations?
Today, it stands nowhere, not even close. Its last diplomatic attempt was in 2004. It failed. The United States was too busy in Iraq. Moreover, China also privately opposes another strong candidate in Japan, which also wishes inclusion in this select body. If China were to choose between India and Japan, it would choose India. A more powerful Japan is not in the interest of China.
It is the United States that controls access to the U.N. Security Council. Other members, excluding China, are not deeply opposed to India's entry. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair is on record supporting India's candidacy. So are France and Russia. But the proposal is still no go. China says neither yes nor no. It is looking for major trade concessions from India before coming aboard.
In the last two years India decided to put this subject on the back burner in favor of the India-U.S. nuclear deal. This deal will be consummated within the next year or two, with great benefits to India. Then India will be catapulted into big power status, and the time will be right for a greater push at the United Nations. It may take another two to three years before the world body comes around and crowns India with a permanent seat on the Security Council. But upcoming changes are likely to help India's cause.
First, there will be a change of U.S. administration in 2008. It is most likely that the war-weary U.S. public will vote the anti-war Democrats into power. The new administration may be more amenable to the idea of having India on the Security Council. Second, India's economy will be at the US$1.5 trillion mark by 2010 -- which is about US$6 trillion under purchasing power parity calculations. It will have about 1.15 billion people to share this output. Both these figures are huge. It will be hard to ignore such a huge economy and mass of people.Third, there would be no need to worry about religious dissection of the Security Council membership, as is argued by the Muslim countries, specifically Pakistan. The latter must clean up its image as a center of worldwide terrorism and make rapid economic progress. That is the way into the world body's decision-making apparatus, not religion.
If ultra-conservatives in the West advance the argument of regional representation and limiting the membership in the Council to five, then Europe will have to give up a seat or two in favor of Asia, Africa and South America.
In the end, strong notice has to be given to the West that India will wait no longer. It will have to reconcile itself to India's presence in the Security Council. Anything less is unacceptable.
--
(Hari Sud is a retired vice president of C-I-L Inc., a former investment strategies analyst and international relations manager. A graduate of Punjab University and the University of Missouri, he has lived in Canada for the past 34 years. ©Copyright Hari Sud.)
