Ambassador Harish Parvathaneni, India’s Permanent Representative to the UN, delivered a blunt warning on Monday: any Security Council reform that creates permanent members without veto powers is a sham. Speaking at the Inter-Governmental Negotiations plenary on the veto question, he argued that such a structure would not fix the council’s flaws but simply create a new hierarchy. The existing five permanent members—China, France, Russia, the UK, and the US—would retain total control, while the new entrants would be locked out of the final decision-making process.
It’s a hard line, but one rooted in India’s long history of diplomatic frustration. Parvathaneni pointed to the 1965 expansion, which increased non-permanent seats from six to 10 but left the P5 untouched. That move shifted the balance of power, he noted, strengthening the relative influence of the original five. If we just add more members now without changing the rules of the game, we’re not reforming the council. We’re just expanding the club while keeping the old guard in charge.
The diplomat also flagged a subtler issue: the 'de facto veto.' Even where formal vetoes don’t apply, any single member can block presidential statements or sanctions committee decisions by withholding consensus. Parvathaneni called this a 'disguised' veto, noting it allows members to block proposals without explanation. He stressed that the formal veto must be used with 'great restraint' and cannot be a tool for narrow political expediency.
India’s position is clear: no veto, no permanent seat. The country has been pushing for this for decades, arguing the 1945 structure is unfit for the 21st century. New Delhi is also eyeing a non-permanent seat for the 2028-29 term, competing against Tajikistan in the Asia-Pacific group. Elections for that seat are scheduled for June next year. For now, India is demanding that text-based negotiations begin immediately with defined timelines, warning that without a comprehensive approach, the reform process will fail.