There is a larger consensus among the member states that UN Security Council must expand to become more inclusive and its reform has been on the agenda for well over a decade now. However, they haven’t been able to agree as to how big the council should become and whether other nations should have veto powers. As a result, the Security Council continues to bank on the global power structure of 1945, when the Second World War winners the likes of US, UK, France, Russia and China acquired their privileged status. Political analysts and critics have long argued that the Council in its present form, is both undemocratic and anachronistic and is bound to lose its effectiveness and legitimacy unless it is transformed to deal with the growing challenging confronting today’s world. They propound that Security Council stands as an impaired organ. It has failed to act with clarity and credibility largely owing to its unrepresentative nature. Hardly anything tangible has been achieved by the Intergovernmental Negotiations (IGN) which is a group within the United Nations that is critically focused on UNSC reforms. There have been no serious endeavors to come up with a consolidated text to begin formal negotiations due to resistance by certain countries such as China that are opposed to the expansion of UNSC membership. Although for years, India, Germany, Japan, and Brazil have been lobbying tooth and nail to get a permanent seat to the UN Security Council yet the UN charter gives permanent members the veto power to kill any resolution, including the one about the expansion of membership. While the first four have kept India guessing about their support in its bid for permanent membership, China has repeatedly opposed it by laying down conditions to meet. China argues that there are palpable differences among UN members over UNSC reforms and insists that a “package solution” should be found to entertain the interests of all parties. The Chinese mission to the UN has questioned the need for reforms in “haste”. It doesn’t matter that the informal negotiations for reforms have been on for the last 10 years. “To start text-based negotiation in a haste or to impose a single document is not conducive to building a consensus and promoting unity,” the Chinese mission said in a statement. On the other hand, India told the UNGA president that the inter-government negotiation process had become a cover to hide for those who didn’t want to see any reforms in the Security Council, a tongue in cheek reference to countries such as China, Turkey and Pakistan. The world knows that India has waged 20 wars with its neighbours since independence and acted as a peace spoiler, fomenting terrorism and causing instability across the region, especially in Pakistan. The UN General Assembly in September, 2014 adopted a negotiating text, setting the stage for talks on the reforms. Since it was the first text-based negotiation after the inter-government negotiations were started in September 2009, some Indian media acclaimed that the nation’s bid for permanent UNSC seat has been boosted. The US, China and Russia at that time did not contribute to the text, a move which was seen as an attempt to thwart India’s bid for permanent membership of the global body. The US also strongly opposed the G4 proposals in 2005 and has remained non-committed to support the permanent membership of these nations till to-date. Biden administration’s non-committal on support for permanent UNSC seat for India is extension of US policy which always refused sincere support from inception of proposal back in 2008. India has long hoped to become a permanent member of the UN Security Council. On the other hand, it has arbitrarily violated the UN Security Council resolutions and trampled upon the authority of the international organization. India stands unqualified for permanent seat in the UNSC because the international community is cognizant of its dubious track record in human rights and flagrant disregard to various international covenants. China has also opposed the proposal of considering India for permanent UNSC seat on the same argument. The resolutions passed on Kashmir from 1947 to 1957 cannot be termed as recommendatory only. Pakistan continues to adhere to the UN resolutions on the disputed status of Kashmir. These are binding also on India. Pakistan has adopted a principled, clear and firm stance on the proposal of adding new permanent members to the UN Security Council (UNSC). It has reiterated its position on various occasions that India does not qualify for a seat on the 15-member body – permanent or even non-permanent. India in violation of UNSC resolutions in occupied Kashmir, had deployed 900,000 troops to crush the Kashmiris’ legitimate freedom struggle. Back in August, 2019 it has, unilaterally and illegally, ripped off the special status of Jammu and Kashmir by abrogating articles 370 and 35A. It continues with its malicious designs to change the demographic structure of the occupied territory in clear violation of international law, including the 4th Geneva Convention and has, reportedly, already issued over 3.4 million fake domicile certificates. The basic principles about the UN resolutions on Kashmir are amply clear and unambiguous. Ironically, the complaint relating to Kashmir was initiated by India in the Security Council. The Council explicitly rejected India’s claim that Kashmir was ever a legitimate Indian territory. Instead, the resolutions established the right to self-determination as the governing principle for the settlement of the Kashmir dispute. This is the UN commitment to the people of Kashmir. The resolutions endorsed a binding agreement between India and Pakistan reached through the mediation of UNCIP, that a plebiscite would be held, under agreed and specified conditions. The Security Council has rejected the Indian contention that the people of Kashmir have exercised their right of self-determination by participating in the so-called elections which India has from time to time organized in the held Kashmir. The 0.2% turn out during the 1989 “elections” was the most recent clear repudiation of the Indian claims. It is evident that Indian has deliberately chosen to defy UN resolutions with regards to peaceful settlement of Kashmir issue. Time and again, the world community has openly expressed their serious concerns about Indian attitude which has been a source of disturbance to regional peace involving three nuclear armed states. The international community must be made aware of the difference between words and actions of a country which presents itself as world’s largest functioning democracy, an inclusive, tolerant and secular state. Time has already come that world must recognize the real face of a country involved in gross human rights violations, pursuing Hindutva policy and, thereby, set to become a fascist Nazi state. The world knows that India has waged 20 wars with its neighbours since independence and acted as a peace spoiler, fomenting terrorism and causing instability across the region, especially in Pakistan. International stakeholders and members of UNGA must be reminded of their shared responsibility to compel India to act in line with the UNSC resolutions on Kashmir issue before aspiring for a permanent UNSC seat. India must be told to stop the gory drama of blood and tears in Indian-held Jammu and Kashmir. It has to first deserve then desire! The writer is a civil servant by profession, a writer by choice and a motivational speaker by passion!