India and the UN

Someone I know, down in DC (not part of the US Government) said this about India and the UN Security Council:

Reportedly, India's position on UN Security Council (UNSC) positions is more than just wanting a seat for New Delhi.  It would entail a thorough reorganization of the UNSC, including adding one or more permanent seats determined by region (1-2 for Africa, apparently).

This almost certainly precludes any serious movement on the idea of adding India to the UNSC, since it would be the equivalent of reordering the workings of the US Congress in order to add the District of Columbia.

This is in addition to the reality that China has no desire to give up its place as the sole Asian P-5 member.

What is interesting is that no one has seriously broached (as far as I know) the idea of combining the French and UK P-5 seats into a single EU seat, and making India (or Nigeria, or Brazil) the next member of the P-5.

The consolidation of the French and UK permanent seats would be a major change in the order of things.  On the other hand, 1.2 billion is a lot of people.  Is their voice not worthy of being heard on a permanent basis?

But, regardless of the problems in execution, the President, the US President, did the right thing to speak out in support of a permanent seat for India.

Regards  —  Cliff