By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, December 10 -- On issues ranging from Sudan to Myanmar, India joining the UN Security Council next month may work counter to what an Indian diplomat on Friday characterized as “Western” goals.
Responding to a question from Inner City Press about Sudan, the Indian diplomat said his country is sympathetic to African countries' request that the International Criminal Court indictment of President Omar al Bashir for genocide be “suspended for six months or a year.”
Pressed, he predicted that the matter would be taken up by the Council before or in connection with the South Sudan secession referendum, scheduled for January 9.
Thursday in Council consultations, Gabon challenged what ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo said about genocide. Later, Sudan's Ambassador trashed Ocampo at the Council stakeout, with no response from the US or any other Council member.
On the fight this week in the Security Council about whether the UN should have certified challenger Ouattara as the winner of Cote d'Ivoire's election, the India diplomat echoed Russian in questioning whether getting involved in elections and constitutions is a good precedent for the Council.
Inner City Press can again report, based on interviewing later on Friday, that China shares this position regarding Ivory Coast.
Asked about Myanmar, the Indian diplomat questioned whether the situation there -- “bamboo, rice and fish” as he put it -- is a threat to international peace and security.
On the other hand he pointed out that India this year did not oppose, but rather abstained from, the country specific human rights resolution on Iran. We don't favor stoning women, he dryly pointed out.
Inner City Press asked the diplomat how India's growing economic interests in Africa will interplay with its votes on the Security Council. The diplomat replied grandly that he sees very little connection, that his country and he hopes others take “a broader view.”
But, Inner City Press pointed out using the example of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, India could vote with or against President Joseph Kabila of the DRC, where India has more and more interests. No, the diplomat disagreed, India would be voting for or against other Council member, not Joseph Kabila.
Even before joining the Security Council -- for the first time in 19 years, following what he called a depressing past loss to Japan -- India has been a major force in the UN budget process, especially on questions regarding peacekeeping.
On the topic of Security Council reform, the Indian diplomat predicted that a proposal for up or down voting will emerge in six months. He was dismissive of the so called UFC, United for Consensus, which he said has 12 members at most. He contrasted it to Africa with 54 (he singled out Morocco, Algeria and Egypt as important), Asia with 54, small island states and Least Developed Countries.
People in India will say I've lost my mind, in predicting action in six months, the diplomat said, they will know who I am. We'll see.
