dear members,
justify your point of view with facts and sources(if u have)

"If india is granted permanent seat in security council ,what can be the options available to pakistan to mangage the india hegemony in south Asia?

Request to members before justifying also state pakistan is able to do it ???
"before india will be granted seat in security council."

what do you think why india is shizopherinic for permanent seat.

why not pakistan????

technically two things will create a hurdle here.

1.PAKISTANZ dispute with india over kashmir recognized by UNO.if they make india a permanent member india can veto any resolution moved against them regarding kashmir.so technically india should not be made a permanent member until and unless the issue of kashmir is resolved.


2.the setting of a criteria will be required as to who can enter security council and who cannot.because this is for sure that if the gates of security council are opened for india some other countries would also try to step in.germanya nd brazil etc are also candidates for a permanent seat in security council.and those countries and some more(may be) too would not allow india to get in their without them that easily.


for PAKISTAN china is the only option to be utilized for stopping india from coming into the security council...

PAKISTAN should not even think of getting a permanent seat in security council as it is in our benefit to stay away from security council as much as possible for the time being

__________________
Puppet,Slave,Lover

your points are valid..but its about effects.the video provide some information regarding discussion..

what are checks for Pakistan...
How India will manipulate its designs??
affects regarding south ASIA

__________________
"Wa tu izzu man-ta shaa, wa tu zillu man-ta shaa"

India's bid to join the UNSC does not threaten to destabilize Pakistan for the following reasons:

- The Kashmir issue has been on the back-burner at the United Nations for 63 years even without India's presence there as a permanent member. To state that India would block all discussion on the issue is therefore superfluous. Furthermore, at Simla in 1971, we agreed with India to resolve all outstanding issues bilaterally.

- The Indian paranoia inside Pakistan and especially within the military establishment is unrealistically excessive. India is now more than just a mere regional power, it is increasingly looking to become a "big" player economically and politically. India's foreign and defense policies stopped being Pakistan-centric after Pakistan's defeat and dismemberment in 1971. In other words, India no longer seeks to destroy Pakistan as its #1 unstated foreign policy initiative. It has bigger fish to fry now. China is one of them.

- India has come under the United State's wing now as its balancing power in the region visavis China. The evidence for that is the recent nuclear deal and the United State's increasing thawing up to India. Now it's in America's interest that India does not confront Pakistan because the US wants Pakistan to focus on its western borders and not its eastern. India won't act against the wishes of its biggest benefactor now. In fact, in 2002, India was about to attack Pakistan in response to the attack on the Indian parliament but it stopped because it was threatened by the United States that if it attacked Pakistan, all US corporations in India would immediately pull out.

- Pakistan supports the Kashmiri insurgency and India supports the Baloch insurgency. This is an open secret now. I don't see India's ascent to the UNSC permanent membership would change anything about this status quo.

__________________
He conquers who endures.

Good thread sadia shafiq.
I attempted this question in the paper of current affairs and my answer was exactly as follows:

INDIA AND SECURITY COUNCIL.
Introduction:
• There have been recent talks about the restructuring of the uno since 1990s.the need for the restructuring arose in the wake of its failures.it has failed on many occasions to achieve its objective.the glaring examples of its failures are wars in afghanistan and iraq and disturbances in kashmir and palestine.the u.s attacked afghanistan in violation of the u.n charter.till date the war has not ended.further the u.s attacked iraq under the garbage of weapons of mass destruction. no weapons were found.thus the u.n failed to prevent the u.s on both the occassions.there have been talks about various modes of the restructuring.some say that permanent memberes should be increased while others say that non permanent members should be increased.still there is third opinion that both,permenet and non permanent members should be increased.

Options available to pakistan if india is granted permanent seat:
• Align vantage point(point of view) with that of china.china ll never allow india the seat because india ll otherwise disturb china.also china ll otherwise lose hegemony in south asia.
• Bring yourself to the level of india economically.
• Have good relations with muslim world for help in pressing times.

Recommendations:
• Non-permanent seats should be increased only and the same should be allowed to india.
• Improve economic postion to the level of that of india.
• Align your vantage point(point of view)with that of china.
• Muster support from the world,especially third world,regarding your view.your view is that non permanent members should be increased-it will be more democratic and representative.


Plz assess my answer.

south Asia=china,indönesia,malaysia,india,bangladesh,jap an,sirlanka,bhutan korea,veitnam and minors.

You totally negate the idea of any checks.if there should be no checks than international player never voted for india.and politics is"give and take"
or compromise and give that like chess board.,behind every move there is a check sometimes directly or indirectly.
So what u opined for checks?

@ahmed _cool.
You mentioned"nuclear deal"
why pakistan was not given?
Inspite of fact pakistan demanded.US promised pakistan for energy.what about energy? And pvs year pakistan refuted any agreement of pipeline?this year have signed.
Kashmir was made international issue after kargil war.so greatest ever uprising is recorded.these are facts.

@faraz this question is not about UN specifically,but dealings should be in a sphere of south Asia and checks.UN always failed as in kashmir,veitnam,korea,palestine,cyprus, etc.UN Succeded only in Iraq but now a bleak failure is a blemsish unless"kurdistan"will formed.In iraq Noor ul maliki was not won its major support.But Barak Obama tele phonic call made him PM.SO here and nowhere is UN.HERE pakista,saudi Arab=iran,China,korea=japan india,
will come.

__________________
"Wa tu izzu man-ta shaa, wa tu zillu man-ta shaa"

I attempted this question in following manner.

Introduction

Reasons if India is granted a permanent seat

a- Indian Relations with U.S
b- India: an emerging power of Asia
c- U.S foreign policy in the Region

Impacts on Pakistan

a- Indian Hegemony in the area
b- India Role in Afghnaistan will increase
c- The Kashmir issue will not be resolved
d- India will grab the International Markets
e- Threat for Pakistani Nukes

What Pakistan can do?

a- Pakistan must have cordial relations with India to put moral pressure
b- Pakistan must built friendly Relations with China
c- Highlight all the misdoings of India internationally to let the international community know the reality of India
d- Make itself economically better to compete with india
e- Alliance with Muslim countries

Conclusion

__________________
Sangdil Riwajoon ki ya Imart-e-Kohna Toot bhi Tou Skti hay
Yeh Aseer Sehzadi Choot bhi tou Skti hay

sister sadia- plz elaborate ur reply;i could not understand.

i did not discuss about the U.N specifically but U.N must be introduced atleast in intro because the question was set in the context of recent talks about the U.N restructuring.

and i do not agree with ur argument on the U.N success in iraq. if the U.N had succeeded in iraq, the U.S would not have attacked iraq.

and what do u mean by checks?

@call for change,

your points are impressive and you pointed checks too.why it is asked in paper,India pakista friendship will never developed.99%no.
1.india,saudi arabia and America.
2.pak,china Iran,
so these triangles are repulsive in each and every respect.
3.It means Raymand Case and Haj scam are examples of paki relations with US and saudia.
Now question how it be managed?
This is the real and major question

as dear brother i am unable to understand your points.Here Iraq is out of context.and what i have said about Iraq its from rely able source.
And i can't make out your recommendation sense.plz show me ,clearly, your points.
Thank u.

__________________
"Wa tu izzu man-ta shaa, wa tu zillu man-ta shaa"

there are so many hurdles anyway.

1.acquiring permanent membership needs amendments, rather changing in the United nations charter and that's one onerous task.

2.china and India have conflicts over arunachal pardesh and aksai,so china's veto power will definitely come into action.keeping in mind that America is liable to pay Rupees 800 billion to china,so china has alot to exert on America.

3.A country must not have conflicts with neighbors but india has with pakistan i.e; kashmir,sir creek and kargil etc

Solution if somehow the other India gets there:

Pakistan should eschew any sort of conflicts with India,even at the ideological level and dwell on its economic growth.


America at the moment is eying $60 million Indian markets,and wants to use India as her proxy in the region,so that's why supporting India,else she is not sincere in her friendship.