Recently, according to the Global Network quoted by Indian media reports, due to the fierce military conflict between Sudan and South Sudan again in the African region, the Indian side will send about 1 battalion of troops to the Abyei region, which is fiercely contested by the two warring sides, next month to participate in the United Nations peacekeeping operations. According to information disclosed by Indian media, about 570 Indian soldiers will be integrated into the UNITED Interim Security Force in Abyei to stabilize order on the ground and promote humanitarian assistance, which has been authorized by the UN Security Council to use force to protect local civilians and aid workers due to the volatile situation on the ground.
1) India's "peacekeeping" is not just for peacekeeping
The Sudan region of Africa is a complete "line of fire", perennial war has led to difficulties in the lives of local people, and humanitarian crises caused by war have occurred frequently, so the United Nations has long deployed maintenance troops on the ground to establish "safe zones" for the relief of ordinary civilians, but because there has been "repetition" in the local situation, it is also necessary for the United Nations to send security forces to maintain local order from time to time. From a purely peacekeeping point of view, compared with the past by bragging and gratuitously touching porcelain to prove that it is a big country, Aerospace Jun believes that India has sent soldiers to participate in overseas peacekeeping operations to help the Security Council control world contradictions and conflicts, which is the style that a real big country should have, which is worth affirming.
However, it should be noted that the purpose of India's military dispatch does not seem to be just to show its "great power style", nor is it simply to enhance its image in the international community, but hopes to send itself into the "permanent security position" through military peacekeeping, India's special envoy to the United Nations Tirumossi said in his speech last month that the Indian Army has participated in various peacekeeping operations and ensured stability around the world. Tirumossi believes that India's large-scale troop contribution has strengthened India's demand for permanent seats on the Security Council, but some Indian media have complained: "India's contribution to maintenance affairs has not produced any effect on India's efforts to seek permanent membership in the Security Council." ”
2. "Entering the norm" has become the main reason for India's repeated jumps in the international political arena
In fact, India has long regarded itself as a "global power" and has repeatedly made some shocking moves to prove its "great power identity". When Sino-US relations deteriorated, India actively moved closer to the United States and hoped to rely on the promotion of the United States to elevate its sense of international existence; when the relations between the United States and Russia deteriorated, India performed a mild "riding wall" between the United States and Russia, so as to make itself between the United States and Russia; even when the new crown epidemic ravaged India, India simply declared itself to be a "country actively fighting against the virus" and that it was going to become the world's "vaccine arsenal". Great power style".
Within the framework of the United Nations, "regularization" can almost be regarded as India's main goal in United Nations activities, and in order to achieve this purpose, India is proposing to relax restrictions every year and change the "five permanents" into "six permanents". Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has repeatedly stressed in public speeches that India's population and land area account for a very high proportion of the world, and India has actively contributed to the process of participating in overseas peacekeeping, so India should be awarded the "permanent member" qualification. Since every application for "regularization" in India is rejected by one country and one vote in the "five permanent", India also proposes to remove the "one-vote veto" of the permanent members through reform.
Of course, after India proposed to lift the "one-vote veto" of the permanent members, the relevant proposals were directly "vetoed by one vote", and it was Russia, which has maintained close military trade exchanges with India for a long time, which is a solid slap to India, and it is also a reminder to India that India does not have the qualifications to change the "five permanent pattern". Aerospace Jun believes that India has "self-motivation" in enhancing its international status and is willing to contribute to international peacekeeping, which are all worthy of affirmation, but India's hope of becoming a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council is probably very slim, in short, India has not really become a permanent member of the hard power.
3, the international game, the most important thing is strength
As is well known, the United Nations Federation is an intergovernmental international organization composed of sovereign States established after the Second World War and is an important basis for maintaining the post-war order and preventing the recurrence of world wars. Among the many UN agencies, the "Security Council" is the only body with the authority to take military action, in a sense, the Security Council can be seen as the core support of the UN's management of global differences. Since the founding of the United Nations, China, Britain, the United States, France and Russia have been established as "permanent members of the Security Council" because of their global influence and sacrifices in World War II, and have the highest authority to "veto" in the Security Council's proposals.
Looking closely at China, Britain, the United States, France, and Russia, in fact, the five permanent members can sit firmly in today's position, not only inheriting the historical contribution, but also having a strong influence in today's international community. First of all, Britain and France, Britain, as the empire of the sun never sets, although its national strength and prestige are not as good as those of that year, its political influence on the global scale cannot be ignored. Although today's France is no longer strong, it is still one of the leading powers in the EU and NATO system, And France's colonial influence in Africa still exists, and the economic lifeblood of many African countries is firmly controlled by France.
Looking at The three countries of China, the United States, and Russia, the aerospace jun can't help but ask, is there any country in the world with greater influence than China, the United States, and Russia? On the depth of strategy, China, the United States and Russia are among the top three in the world. In terms of economic impact, China and the United States are the two largest economies in the world, and although Russia is depressed, if it does not export oil and natural gas, the whole of Europe will have to endure freezing and burning firewood. Looking at military strength, there are more than five countries in the world with nuclear weapons, but looking at "comprehensive nuclear strength", China, the United States and Russia are undoubtedly more complete. From this point of view, there is indeed a gap between India and the five permanents!
The role of the United Nations itself is to maintain the post-war world order, to maintain world peace, and correspondingly it is also a platform for the five major powers to check and balance each other, to put it bluntly, the reason why the five permanent members can sit at a table is the embodiment of their respective strengths in place, "one vote veto" is not so much the united Nations to give the five permanent rights, to say that the five permanent give some face to other countries, because most of the international affairs, if one of the five permanent countries does not agree, then they really have the strength to prevent this from happening. Correspondingly, even if India is given a "veto power", can India play this power? In the view of the aerospace jun, India hopes to win international prestige for itself, which is "positive" in itself, but positive is not a "pipe dream", as a country that has not even been able to achieve unity in words and language, it is delusional to strive for a "permanent member" seat and to become the sixth "big player", which is completely fantastic.