Next week’s virtual summit will secure the support of the Global South for India's permanent UNSC seat while the conclusion of its G20 chairmanship in September will do the same with respect to the Golden Billion. Once the vast majority of the international community unites around this cause, India will then likely draft a UN General Assembly resolution on this issue in order to prove the overwhelming support that it has.
As has now become clear, this article sticks to the somewhat tiresome repetitiousness that infects all A K articles. And the same pro-India, anti-China biases that even an Indian born person like me can find unrealistic.
The simple fact is China's economy is between 3 and 5 times bigger than India's, with the same population, and China has developed technologically far further than India could and should have. It is not 'hegemonistic' to want to be accorded the superior respect from India that China deserves.
And India is unquestionably being used by the Golden Billion elite as a counter to China.. We know from a recent US article about the major communal fault line (200 Muslims in India) that the CIA has issued a subtle threat to India that it can only go so far in its 'neutrality' before nasty things might be triggered - directly or via the ISI or Al Shabab or whomever.
Nonetheless India is critical for the Global South's continues ability to support Russia (including indirectly by refusing to condemn it) without which the move to multipolar world will fail. The US is upto all its usual filthy crimes in Xinjiang, Taiwan and Hong Kong against China, and the seemingly unlimited financing and arming of Ukrainian Nazis will not stop or even lessen.
The key for all of this to succeed, including the lower priority goal of India getting a UNSC seat - is for Russia to decisively crush the Ukrainian proxy.
What is the mechanism for adding a new permanent member to the Security Council?
Is the number set in stone, in which case someone (hello, UK!) needs to give up its seat?
Or can the Security Council be enlarged, in which case which Article in the Charter deals with this?
As has now become clear, this article sticks to the somewhat tiresome repetitiousness that infects all A K articles. And the same pro-India, anti-China biases that even an Indian born person like me can find unrealistic.
The simple fact is China's economy is between 3 and 5 times bigger than India's, with the same population, and China has developed technologically far further than India could and should have. It is not 'hegemonistic' to want to be accorded the superior respect from India that China deserves.
And India is unquestionably being used by the Golden Billion elite as a counter to China.. We know from a recent US article about the major communal fault line (200 Muslims in India) that the CIA has issued a subtle threat to India that it can only go so far in its 'neutrality' before nasty things might be triggered - directly or via the ISI or Al Shabab or whomever.
Nonetheless India is critical for the Global South's continues ability to support Russia (including indirectly by refusing to condemn it) without which the move to multipolar world will fail. The US is upto all its usual filthy crimes in Xinjiang, Taiwan and Hong Kong against China, and the seemingly unlimited financing and arming of Ukrainian Nazis will not stop or even lessen.
The key for all of this to succeed, including the lower priority goal of India getting a UNSC seat - is for Russia to decisively crush the Ukrainian proxy.