A "very important" question making rounds on most of the news channels on television is "Will Shashi Tharoor be the next UN Secretary General (UNSG)?" Will he, won't he? I don't know. I don't know anything about him apart from him being the author of a book titled "Riots", that my friend adores and that is from some little village in Kerala. Oh! Flash news...He has been with the UN for 28 years (just saw that on television as I'm writing this). Now to the bigger question of Shashi Tharoor's candidacy...the cost. You must be wondering why cost and what cost?
The cost is India giving up its aspirations of becoming a permanent member of UN Security Council, as only a person from a non permanent member of the UN Security Council is an eligible candidate. So India is giving up its long term objective for a short term gain? Is it really a short term gain? How much of a power does a UNSG have? The powers were very evident during the lead up to Bush's Desert Bash.
India had once rejected the permanent when it was offered on a platter for reasons that are best not discussed. Yet, we are doing it again. I know the context and the circumstances are completely different, but it's the same when you see the bigger picture. What are we conveying to the world? We are just showing how serious we are about the permanent seat.
Few would argue that it is politics. Yes, I do agree as we have seen such flip flop acts a number of times in National and State politics. The buck has got to stop somewhere! It is time we tell the international community when it comes to world politics and we are a strong and resolute country.
Anyway, Good Luck Mr. Shashi Tharoor!
The cost is India giving up its aspirations of becoming a permanent member of UN Security Council, as only a person from a non permanent member of the UN Security Council is an eligible candidate. So India is giving up its long term objective for a short term gain? Is it really a short term gain? How much of a power does a UNSG have? The powers were very evident during the lead up to Bush's Desert Bash.
India had once rejected the permanent when it was offered on a platter for reasons that are best not discussed. Yet, we are doing it again. I know the context and the circumstances are completely different, but it's the same when you see the bigger picture. What are we conveying to the world? We are just showing how serious we are about the permanent seat.
Few would argue that it is politics. Yes, I do agree as we have seen such flip flop acts a number of times in National and State politics. The buck has got to stop somewhere! It is time we tell the international community when it comes to world politics and we are a strong and resolute country.
Anyway, Good Luck Mr. Shashi Tharoor!
Posts
2 comments:
Does being a member of the UNSC makes any difference to the world order??
Is it gonna change the attitude of US?
for that matter China??
I don't know if getting the UNSG post necessarily means that India will be disqualified from getting a permanent seat on the UNSC. I think it is just a convention that 'small' countries get the post. I think the view India is taking is that the process of UNSC reform will be a long-drawn one, so why not get our man into an important post. Do agree though that we have been spineless for too long - your link with flip-flops is so apt - a state that is soft at home will obviously be soft outside!
Post a Comment