印度不能成为联合国吗（为什么印度代表着五分之一的人类却没有联合国否决权）

成为联合国常任理事国是一个国家在国家上身份地位的象征，这也是印度一直以来的目标。印度作为南亚次大陆最大的国家，地大物博人口众多，自从上个世纪八十年代开始便开始改革开放，随后印度的经济也发生了飞速的发展，也让近年来印度逐渐有了底气。印度认为自身有能力肩负常任理事国的责任，于是多年来想要重振印度往日雄风，便多次申请加入联合国常任理事国，试图圆了自己的大国梦。而印度本身国家综合实力并不符合要求，所以实际上印度想要入常还需要克服众多困难。在美版知乎Quora上，印度网友提问道：为什么印度代表着近五分之一的人类却没被赋予联合国否决权？这个问题引起各国网友的围观和热议，我们看看他们的观点。

问题：为什么印度代表着世界五分之一的人类却没有联合国否决权？

美国网友阿希克•戈萨里亚的回答

"This position is not for those who claim it, but for those who deserve it."

“这个位置不是给那些提出声索的人的，而是给那些应得的人的。”

After the Second World War, India once became the fourth largest industrial power in the world, and its political, economic and military strength improved. At the peak of the war, 250000 Indian soldiers fought for the allies aroUNd the world, but at that time it was under British rule.

第二次世界大战后，印度一度成为世界第四大工业强国，政治、经济和军事实力都有所提高，在战争高峰期，25万名印度士兵在世界各地为盟军而战，但当时它处于英国的统治之下。

Therefore, after India was free and independent, the UN Security Council provided it with a permanent seat with veto power at different times and in different ways. However, nehruji rejected the proposal on the ground that the people's Republic of China should obtain the seat, which was a major mistake in his policy.

因此，当印度获得自由并独立建国后，联合国安理会在不同的时间通过不同的方式向其提供了拥有否决权的常任理事国席位，但尼赫鲁以中华人民共和国应该取得该席位为理由拒绝了这一提议，这是他在政策上的重大失误。（经考证此为印度国内的谣言）

For several years, India has been striving for permanent membership, but it has failed to achieve its goal due to the following reasons:

几年来，印度一直在争取常任理事国席位，但由于以下原因未能实现目标：

1. The five major countries do not want to share power:

1.五大国不想分享权力：

Every Indian thinks that China is the only obstacle on our way to obtain seats. However, the United States, Britain, France and even Russia (I agree that Russia is India's closest and powerful friend, but Russia is different from the Soviet Union) do not want to give India this seat because they do not want to share power. For example:

每个印度人都认为只有中国是我们获取席位道路上的障碍，但美国、英国、法国甚至俄罗斯（我同意俄罗斯是印度最亲密的强大朋友，但俄罗斯毕竟不同于苏联）都不想给印度这个席位，因为他们不想分享权力，举个例子：

Josh earnest, the press secretary of the White House, publicly stated that "President Obama will support the inclusion of India in this process (UN Security Council reform)", but the cable leaked by Wikileaks quoted Hillary Rodham Clinton, former US Secretary of state and Democratic presidential candidate, She ridiculed India and other countries as "self appointed candidates" for permanent members of the UN Security Council.

白宫新闻秘书乔希·埃内斯特（Josh Earnest）公开表示，“奥巴马总统将支持将印度纳入这一进程（联合国安理会改革）”，但维基解密泄露的电报援引了前美国国务卿、民主党总统候选人希拉里·罗德姆·克林顿（Hillary Rodham Clinton）的话，她嘲笑印度等国家是联合国安理会常任理事国的“自封候选人”。

维基解密

Basically, international diplomacy is based on "giving and taking". Therefore, we can exchange interests and we will have opportunities.

基本上，国际外交是以“给予与索取”为基础的，所以我们可以进行利益置换，我们会有机会的。

2. Competition from Japan, Germany and Brazil:

2. 来自日本、德国和巴西的竞争：

These countries also want to get their seats, and they are fighting fiercely.

这些国家也想拿到自己的席位，他们正在进行激烈的斗争。

3. India needs four seats, not one:

3.印度需要4个席位，而不是一个：

India is a part of the G4. Japan, Germany, India and Brazil need to advance and retreat together to lobby the five permanent members of the United Nations, and take the opportunity to amend the Charter of the United Nations and reform the UN Security Council. However, this is also the main reason for the delay.

印度是G4的一部分，日本、德国、印度和巴西需要共同进退，一起向联合国五常国家游说，并趁机修改《联合国宪章》，改革联合国安理会，但这也是迟迟未能实现的最主要因素。

联合国宪章

But our prime minister modi is making every effort to achieve this goal. I believe we will achieve it soon, because "we deserve it".

但我们的总理莫迪正在尽一切努力实现这一目标，我相信我们很快就会实现，因为“这是我们应得的”。

---

印度网友温特•库马尔的回答

There are only two ways to obtain a permanent seat on the UN Security Council:

获得联合国安理会常任理事国席位只有两种方式：

1. Become the main members of the victors of the World War: the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China;

1.成为世界大战胜利者的主要成员：美国、俄罗斯、英国、法国、中国；

2. He won the war with the UN Security Council members. Before the founding of the people's Republic of China, he swept the Kuomintang army in Chinese Mainland and repelled the United Nations army composed of the United States and 15 countries in Korea. He was an important aid to Vietnam in the war of independence against France from 1949 to 1954.

2.赢得同联合国安理会成员国的战争，中华人民共和国成立前在中国大陆横扫国民党军，在朝鲜击退美国和15个国家组成的联合国军，是1949-1954年越南对法国独立战争的重要援助者。

The "veto power" and the "qualification for the closed meeting of the five permanent members" have nothing to do with the size of the territory and the population. "Large enough" and "important enough" are not the same thing. The Chinese people learned very well from the humiliating history of 110 years from 1839 to 1949. Fortunately or unfortunately for India, joining the UN Security Council needs to prove that it has real power to influence the world.

“否决权”和“五常闭门会议资格”与国土规模和人口无关，“足够大”和“足够重要”并不是一回事，中国人在1839年至1949年期间的110年的屈辱历史中学得很好。对印度来说，幸运或不幸的是，加入联合国安理会需要证明其拥有影响世界真正实力。

Five permanent members of the United Nations gained fame through a huge victory, which made their powerful enemies and themselves pay countless lives. They honed themselves day and night to keep their national strength ahead of other ordinary countries, so as to maintain this deterrence and ensure that the rest of the world could not challenge the order they established.

五常通过一场巨大的胜利获得了声望，这场胜利让他们强大的敌人和他们自己付出了无数的生命。他们日以继夜地磨砺自己，以保持其国家实力领先于其他普通国家，从而保持这种威慑，以保证世界其余各国无法挑战他们建立的秩序。

Since 1945, the veto power has been the basic idea of the United Nations Security Council, that is, the so-called "principle of unanimity of major powers". The reason behind it is to prevent another world war. According to this principle, the five powers do not need to use all-out war as a means to realize their will, because the United Nations Security Council will never legitimize any hostile act, nor will it legitimize any act of openly opposing the five powers. Legally, all countries are equal in international politics, but in fact, all decisions must be reached by the five major countries and other truly dominant stakeholders.

自1945年以来，否决权一直是联合国安理会的基本理念，也就是所谓的“大国一致原则”，其背后的原因是为了防止另一场世界大战。根据这一原则，五大国不必使用全面战争作为实现其意愿的手段，因为联合国安理会永远不会将任何敌对行为合法化，也不会将任何公开反对五大国的行为合法化。在法律上，各国在国际政治中是平等的，可事实上，所有决定都必须由五大国等真正占主导地位的利益相关者达成共识。

Yes, this is a privilege. It is unfair. It removes the gentle veil in the power game, but it reduces the possibility of the world ending to the greatest extent.

是的，这是特权，这是不公平的，它撤掉了权力游戏中那片温柔的面纱，但它最大程度上降低了世界走向末日的可能性。

So far, India has no such strength. She has not yet won the decisive battle with a real big country, and her industrial and technological capabilities are far from matching her land size and population. All evaluations of India are still limited to potential rather than power. Seats on the UN Security Council are not so "cheap", and India still needs a long time to qualify. You can estimate when she will be strong enough to shake the international order framework of corett, and that is the time.

到目前为止，印度还没有这样的实力。她还没有在与真正的大国的决战中获胜，她的工业和技术能力还远远不能同她的土地规模和人口相匹配。人们对印度所有的评价仍然局限于潜力而不是权力。联合国安理会的席位并没有那么“便宜”，印度仍然需要很长时间的努力才能获得资格。你可以估计她何时会强大到足以撼动科雷特国际秩序框架，那就是时候了。

---

印度网友开尔文•怀特的回答，他住在上海

In fact, as long as the United Nations continues to operate as usual, India will have no opportunity.

实际上，只要联合国仍像往常一样运作，印度就没有机会。

First, the P5 will never allow other countries to enjoy their privilege, the veto power. Even though they nominally support it, you can also foresee the delay of system reform in the foreseeable future. Even if the P5 finally allows India to join, as far as the United Nations is concerned, it may only be a "permanent seat" without veto power.

首先，五常永远不会允许其他国家享受他们的特权，否决权。即使他们名义上支持，但在可预见的未来，你们也可以预见制度改革的延迟。即使最终五常允许印度加入，就联合国而言，它可能只是一个没有否决权的“永久席位”。

Second, national strength. History may have given the five permanent members an opportunity to become the dominant force since World War II. However, it is their own national strength that makes them the respected five permanent members. The pure national strength is how China replaces the Taiwan authorities and proves that they are the only legitimate government in China. India has various shortcomings, ranging from infrastructure to key technologies, as well as a lack of economic diversity, which is far from the P5. A big country does not mean a strong country. If you are not strong enough, how can you persuade them to let you join?

第二，国力，历史可能给了五常一个自二战以来成为主导力量的机会，但正是他们自己的国力让他们成为受人尊敬的五常，纯粹的国力就是中国如何取代台湾当局，并证明他们是中国唯一合法的政府。印度有各种各样的缺点，从基础设施到关键技术，以及缺乏经济多样性，与五常相去甚远。大国并不意味着强国，如果你不够强大，你如何才能说服他们让你加入？

The Wuchang has a nuclear arsenal, a complete trinity of nuclear strike capabilities, and almost all types of domestic military machinery, from tanks to warships, from jet aircraft to submarines. However, India has not been able to convince the world that it can accomplish all or most of the tasks that the P5 can accomplish, and the P5 can determine India's arms supply.

五常全都拥有核武库，拥有完整的三位一体核打击能力，几乎所有类别的国产军事机器，从坦克到军舰，从喷气式飞机到潜艇。而印度还没有能力说服全世界他们可以完成全部或大部分五常可以做到的任务，而五常可以决定印度的武器供应。

Somehow, India is in a very unfortunate situation. They fought under the rule of the British Empire during World War II, not the independent Republic of India. The constraints of the democratic system and strong religious beliefs ensure that Indian leaders cannot abolish the caste system at will. Perhaps one day, the caste system will be abandoned and the brain power of the low caste population will be released. Indians, don't be too optimistic about everything. They should remain focused and develop their own strength.

不知何故，印度的处境非常不幸，他们是在二战期间大英帝国的统治下作战的，而不是独立的印度共和国。民主制度的约束和强烈的宗教信仰确保了印度领导人不能随心所欲地废除种姓制度，也许有一天，种姓制度将被抛弃，并释放低种姓人口的脑力。印度人，不要对每件事都过于乐观，要保持专注，发展自己的力量。

---

荷兰网友奥斯汀•麦克马洪的回答

1. Voting - as a general rule of the United Nations, only with the support of 2 / 3 of the general assembly (basically 2 / 3 of all 193 countries) and all five permanent members will permanent members be included in the UN Security Council. Although the first standard may be relatively easy to obtain, the second standard is basically difficult to achieve. If any country uses one vote of veto, the bill will be rejected by default. Although the United States, France and Britain have shown subtle signs in the Security Council that they can accept India, China still relatively does not welcome India and Japan to join.

1.投票-作为联合国的一般规则，只有在得到大会2/3（基本上是所有193个国家的2/3）和所有五常成员支持的情况下，才会将常任理事国纳入联合国安理会。虽然第一个标准可能相对容易获得，但第二个标准是基本难以实现。如果任何一个国家使用了一票否决权，那么议案将被默认拒绝。尽管美国、法国和英国在安理会上表现出可以接受印度的微妙迹象，但中国仍然相对来说并不欢迎印度和日本的加入。

2. G4 countries. It is hard to say whether the G4 alliance has brought any considerable benefits to India in recent years. The group of four countries composed of Brazil, Germany, India and Japan are the four countries that support each other in striving for permanent seats on the UN Security Council. The group has a basic idea, that is, if the permanent members are to be included in the United Nations, it will be either the whole group of four or none, and both will prosper and lose.

2.G4国家。很难说G4联盟近年来是否给印度带来了任何可观的收益，由巴西、德国、印度和日本组成的四国集团是相互支持争取联合国安理会常任理事国席位的四个国家。该集团有一个基本理念，即如果要将常任理事国纳入联合国，它要么是整个四国集团，要么一个也没有，一荣俱荣，一损俱损。

This largely limits India's agenda, because China opposes the inclusion of Japan in the G4, and Japan is a part of the G4, so it opposes it as a whole. As mentioned above, no major decision of the United Nations will be adopted without the vote of the five permanent members.

这在很大程度上限制了印度的议程，因为中国反对将日本纳入G4，而日本是G4的一部分，因此反对将其作为一个整体。如前所述，未经五常成员国投票，联合国任何重大决定都将不予通过。

3. Objection. Although their support is broad-based and consists of about 90 countries, there are still some forces that strongly oppose the actions of India and the G4. The most important thing is UFC. The United for consensus movement (UFC) is a movement nicknamed Coffee Club. It developed in the 1990s and opposed the possible expansion of the permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council.

3.反对。尽管他们的支持基础广泛，由大约90个国家组成，但仍然存在某些力量对印度和四国集团的行为强烈反对。最重要的是UFC，团结谋共识运动（UfC）是一个昵称为咖啡俱乐部的运动，在20世纪90年代发展起来，反对可能扩大联合国安理会常任理事国席位。

Under the leadership of Italy, its goal is to oppose the application of the group of four for permanent membership, of which about 15 member states oppose India's application. Although this does not necessarily lead to a vote fight, it will certainly become a political obstacle, especially considering that the organization has members such as Canada, South Korea, Italy and Spain.

在意大利的领导下，它的目标是反对四国集团提出的常任理事国席位申请，其中大约有15名成员国反对印度的申请。虽然这不一定会带来选票上的斗争，但它肯定会成为一个政治障碍，特别是考虑到该组织有加拿大、韩国、意大利和西班牙等成员国。

Most importantly, the above reasons have almost eliminated the possibility of India's permanent membership. Unless China supports India and the group of four, the situation will certainly remain the same for a long time to come.

最重要的是，上述原因目前几乎消除了印度的入常可能性。除非中国支持印度和四国集团，否则在相当长的一段时间内，局势肯定还会是这样。

---

英国网友布里安•科赫兰的回答

First of all, I would like to point out that any country that is a part of the United Nations can run for membership of the United Nations Security Council. However, five permanent members (the United States, Britain, China, France and Russia) have the veto power, while the other ten non permanent members elected after a fixed time interval do not have the veto power. The veto is clearly a very important tool, as we have witnessed time and again.

首先，我想指出，作为联合国一部分的任何国家都可以竞选联合国安理会成员。但有五个常任理事国（美国、英国、中国、法国和俄罗斯）拥有否决权，而其他十个在固定时间间隔后当选的非常任理事国则不拥有否决权。否决权显然是一个非常重要的工具，我们一次又一次地目睹了这一点。

Now I would like to talk about why India is not a permanent member of the UN Security Council.

现在我想谈谈为什么印度不是联合国安理会常任理事国的问题。

Military strength is not the only decisive factor. What India needs is to prove its ability to long claim to be "one of the leaders of the developing world". As you can see, the permanent members of the Security Council are all big powers that emerged before the 1990s. China can also be called a "big power" because of its successful nuclear test, its rapid economic development and other factors. Other permanent members are powerful countries after the Second World War.

军事力量不是唯一的决定性因素。印度需要的是证明其长期以来自称的“发展中世界领导人之一”的能力。你们可以看到，安全理事会常任理事国都是20世纪90年代之前出现的大国，中国也可以被称为“大国”，因为它进行了成功的核试验，其经济发展迅猛以及其他一些因素。其他常任理事国是第二次世界大战后的强国。

The United Nations was established after World War II to prevent another world war. Therefore, at that time, I thought that it was logical to include the winning country as a permanent member. However, from the perspective of permanent members, it represents the order of the 1980s, without considering the emerging influential countries (India claims to be one of them). But once you have a privilege, you are not willing to grant it to others. The same is true of the permanent members, who do not want countries with veto power to contradict their interests.

联合国是在二战后成立的，旨在防止另一场世界大战。因此，当时认为将获胜国列为常任理事国才合乎逻辑。然而，从常任理事国的角度来看，它代表了80年代的秩序，没有考虑到新兴的有影响力的国家（印度声称是其中之一）。但一旦你有了特权，你就不愿意把它授予别人。常任理事国也是如此，他们不希望拥有否决权的国家与他们的利益相矛盾。

In addition, in order to obtain a permanent seat, India needs to play a more confident role in world politics. Today's need lies in the improvement of the country to improve your international image. Most people associate India with poverty, corruption and other negative images. Therefore, before you can achieve your national goals, international leadership is a distant dream. Second, keeping silent on important issues will not help India to uphold its position. It is necessary to speak for justice and all its expected goals.

此外，为了获得常任理事国席位，印度需要在世界政治中扮演更加自信的角色。今天的需要在于国家的改善，以改善你的国际形象。大多数人将印度与贫困、腐败和其他一些负面形象联系起来。因此，在你能够实现国家目标之前，国际领导力是一个遥不可及的梦想。其次，在重要问题上保持沉默无助于印度坚持自己的立场，为正义及其所有预期目标发声是必要的。

Since the late 1990s, India has been lobbying for a permanent seat in the United Nations. However, I believe that it is not the time to aspire to become a permanent member. The focus should now be on economic, social and, most importantly, political improvement. Only in this way can India correctly declare its candidacy.

自20世纪90年代末以来，印度一直在游说获得联合国常任理事国席位。但我认为，现在不是渴望成为常任理事国的时候，现在的重点应该是在经济、社会和最重要的政治上进行改善，只有这样，印度才能正确地宣布其拥有候选资格。

,