Long Road Ahead

Recently, when Mr. Obama supported India for the permanent seat in UNSC (United Nations Security Council), Indian media projected as though India is just few steps away from UNSC seat. There is no doubt that Obama's statement was significant event in Indian foreign affairs. However, that does not mean India will able to get UNSC seat very easily. There are many diplomatic and strategic complications need to be handled effectively to get into the UNSC. 

UNSC was established in 1946. It is a principal organ of United Nations. UNSC major functions are peace keeping, authorization of military action and international sanctions like diplomatic, economic, sports, etc. UNSC consists of 15 members, 5 permanent and 10 non-permanent members. Non permanent member tenure is two years. Only permanent members have vetoed power. A veto is a negative vote which prevents adoption of proposal even if it has received the majority votes in Security Council. At present, permanent members in UNSC are China, France, Russia, UK and USA, also known as P5 countries.  Permanent members play a vital role in UNSC, since they can veto any resolution. Being a permanent member of UNSC, a country can play a crucial role in world politics and protect its national interest.  With the increasing member countries in United Nations, many emerging countries are urging for UNSC reforms, which can give them an opportunity to become a permanent member of UNSC. India is one of the strong contenders for UNSC permanent membership.

India, the second largest population country, is ambitious to be part of Security Council. India's candidature is backed by France, UK, Russia, USA, Australia, Bangladesh and African Union, among other countries. Brazil, Germany, and Japan also desirous of be on Security Council board, formed an alliance along with India for cooperation to get into Security Council, this alliance is known as G4 group. The greatest impediments to India's candidacy are China and Pakistan. Pakistan is severely opposing the India's bid for Security Council and using all its diplomatic games and tactics to counter India's bid. One of them is offering support to other contenders (especially to G4 group) if they kept India out! Most of the western and South Eastern counties are backing India for Security Council membership; the main reason behind this support is to balance the regional power in Asia, to be specific, to counter China. China knows if India is going to be on board, then its supremacy over the region will end. Being a permanent member, China's support is required for India's bid for the permanent seat. China may support India, only for a permanent seat without veto power! How India is going to influence China will be the key issue for its candidacy. 

There are three major issues that are to be resolved before introducing any reforms in UNSC. First, basis for representation in council; there are many countries like Egypt, as the representative of Muslim majority nations, South Africa as the representative of African Continent claiming their stake in Security Council. Second, the number of new members to be added in UNSC. Third, veto power, whether to give veto power to new permanent members or not. Many dialogues need to take place among interested countries to resolve the above issues successfully.

So, there are many complications involved to introduce any structural changes in UNSC. Moreover, India has to play a suave and diplomatic role in world politics to achieve a strong position for its claim in UNSC. India is definitely a potential contender and most of the member countries in UN have a positive opinion about India. Mr. Obama's support is vital turn in India's journey to UNSC, still miles to go in its journey…

Colonial Hangover

During the period of about 200 years British rule, apart from plundering the natural resources of India and making India as a British colonial economy, British did help Indians in some areas. They united India into one single country, infused the modern administration, introduced education reforms, transportation services, etc. Certainly, they had vested interests in many of the policies and practices they adopted in India. They created many of the policies to enhance the imperial power than people's welfare. This non welfare and economic plundering policies subsequently led to the Independence struggle and downfall of British Empire in India. British left India in 1947, leaving their administrative methods, policies and practices.

After independence, India did very little experiment in administrative methods and followed almost the same structure and methods which were followed by its Colonial master. For example, Majority theme of the constitution of India is from Indian Council Act of 1935, which was prepared by British parliament. The basic structure of India resembles almost like Great Briton government structure. There are certain procedures established by British in India, which are being used effectively even today like organized land revenue system. The procedures which are effective were very nominal compared to the ones which exacerbated the administration system.

For example, Indian constitution adapted west minister model (parliament) of Briton and created President and Prime Minister Offices, where Prime Minister Office is given prominent position in the administration. President was given very nominal powers. Briton has same system but instead of president, they have Royal King\Queen office. Briton, Australia, Canada, Japan had to create PM post because they have to respect the imperial palace and they recognize imperial palace as the head of the state. Whereas, there was no need for India to create an additional office that has very less powers. India should have adopted presidential form of government instead of west minister model. The method of electing prime minister in indirect method is also influenced from British. In India, there is a vast diversity in culture, language, religion and region. Not surprisingly, many political parties emerged on these basis and forcing the necessity to firm collision government. Due to this only few states like Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Haryana, Punjab, and Bihar etc are able to get maximum resources from the union government of India. Due to this type of indirect election method of Prime Minister, neither PM is able to function rationally nor is national interest serving.

India's criminal and civil laws, revenue collection system, judicial methods, education system, election system, parliamentary methods, All India services, promotion system in government employees, government protocols, central state relationships, organization structure of government and many more policies and procedures can be traced back to the policies prepared by British. British prepared those policies and procedures according to the scenarios at that time. The policies, procedures and methods should not be static and they need to be updated according to the present situations. Unfortunately, this is not happening in India.

There are some excellent policies and procedures which are adapted from the colonial methods. There is nothing wrong in adopting good things which are suitable to the situation. Even if we adopt good things in a different situation that may not give you desired result and may even worsen the situation. Let us hope India will come out from its colonial hangover and adopt the methods which are suitable to Indian scenario.