Last updated:
While India said at the India-China strategic dialogue that China ‘understands and respects’ its UNSC aspirations, Beijing’s own statement made no mention of the issue.
Member of the United Nations Security Council. (Reuters)
India’s bid for a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) came to the fore again this week when China pointed out that “Understands and respects” New Delhi’s aspirations for permanent membership, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) said.
This issue arose during India-China strategic dialogue between Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri and China’s Acting Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu, who was in India for the BRICS Sherpa meeting from February 8 to 10.
Beijing’s own statement did not mention the matter, instead mentioning broad support for the United Nations and multilateral cooperation. The reference in India’s readout once again draws attention to a campaign that has been central to Indian foreign policy for several decades.
India’s long campaign for a permanent seat
India’s demand for a permanent seat is based on its argument that the Security Council does not reflect current realities. The structure of the Council was conceived after World War II, when global power was concentrated in a handful of countries.
India believes that the world has changed dramatically since then, but the composition of the Council has not. The only adjustment to the membership structure of the Council occurred in 1965, when the number of non-permanent seats increased from six to ten. However, the five permanent members remain unchanged.
India accounts for the largest share of the world’s population and ranks as the fourth largest economy, giving it considerable global importance. Despite being a nuclear-armed nation and participating in several conflicts, India has consistently contributed to international peacekeeping operations.
It is also part of the G4 grouping along with Japan, Germany and Brazil, which has long been pushing for the expansion of the Security Council in both permanent and non-permanent categories.
Why does a permanent seat matter for New Delhi?
A permanent seat provides institutional power that non-permanent membership does not. India has held a rotating seat several times, most recently in 2021–22, but these terms do not give countries the ability to consistently shape the council’s agenda or influence outcomes in the long run. Permanent membership comes with both continuity and veto power, enabling states to participate in all deliberations on peace and security and block resolutions when necessary.
India argues that its presence will strengthen the Council’s ability to address global challenges as it represents constituencies and interests that are currently under-represented. Many countries in the Global South look to India as a trustworthy voice for their interests, especially on issues such as climate justice, fair trade and reform of international institutions. Therefore, there is a case for India to have a seat effect and correct the structural imbalance in global governance.
Indian leadership calls for UN reform
The demand for reform has been raised repeatedly by Indian leaders. In an interview with French media in July 2023, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had questioned how the council could claim to represent global interests by excluding key regions and India. He asked: “How can we talk about it as the primary organ of a global body, when entire continents of Africa and Latin America are ignored? How can it claim to speak for the world when its most populous country and its largest democracy is not its permanent member?”
External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar has also described India’s permanent membership as a matter of global consensus which is gradually getting stronger. He said India’s eventual inclusion in 2024 was “inevitable”. He said, “There is a feeling across the world that this (five permanent countries) should be changed and India should get a permanent seat. I see this feeling growing every year. We will definitely achieve it. But without hard work nothing big is achieved… We have to work hard and this time we have to work even harder.”
India has also given its message of reform in the multilateral environment. At a Security Council debate on the rule of international law last month, India’s Permanent Representative Harish Parvatneni said the council’s structure reflected “the geopolitical reality of a bygone era”. He argued that global governance frameworks should evolve to suit contemporary conditions, noting that the credibility of multilateralism depends on the ability of the United Nations to adapt to changing power dynamics and global challenges.
He said: “The rule of law is at the core of the core mandate of the UN Security Council – to maintain international peace and security.” He stated that “the rule of law is barren without enforceability. The focus must shift from mystical constructs to practical solutions and outcomes that positively impact the daily lives of our citizens.”
He also stressed the need for constant review of international structures, saying: “Continuous review, updating and revitalization are necessary to avoid obsolescence.” Parvataneni warned against the selective use of legal principles, saying: “The international rule of law should not be weaponized to question state sovereignty and interfere in the internal affairs of states.”
Concluding his remarks, he said the effectiveness of the United Nations system rests on stability and impartiality: “The application of the rule of international law requires consistency, impartiality and predictability, without any double standards.”
Widespread support for India’s bid
India’s campaign has received widespread international support. Four of the five permanent members – the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Russia – have expressed their support for India’s candidacy in various statements over the past decade.
Russia reaffirmed its support for 2024, and described global electricity distribution as fundamentally different from when the UN was founded. France has advocated India’s inclusion with representation from Germany, Japan, Brazil and Africa. The United Kingdom supported India’s membership during Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s visit in 2025, while the United States has issued several expressions of support under different administrations.
Support has also come from other key partners. India’s fellow G4 members Japan and Germany consistently support its candidature. Countries across Africa, including the African Union, have welcomed India’s bid in the context of broader demands for representation from developing states.
Portugal, Kuwait, Mauritius, Bhutan, Brazil and many others have also supported India, underscoring that the spirit of reform is widespread across sectors.
China’s situation
China is the only major power that has not explicitly supported India’s bid for permanent membership. Its previous statements have been limited to acknowledging India’s desire to play a “larger role” in the UN. In 2014, during the visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping, the two sides issued a joint statement in which Beijing said it “supports India’s aspiration to play a larger role in the United Nations, including in the Security Council,” but without committing to India’s candidacy.
This time too, the Chinese Foreign Ministry’s readout made no mention of India’s bid for permanent membership.
Vinay Kaura, assistant professor at Sardar Patel University of Police, Security and Criminal Justice in India, said South China Morning Post China is determined to remain the only Asian country in the permanent category of the council and is unimpressed by Russia’s continued support for India.
“Since China is the only Asian power represented in the UN Security Council, it does not want any other Asian country to share this privilege,” he said.
China also views India as a close competitor and is unwilling to share the political space and prestige associated with permanent membership. As a result, China remains the only permanent member that has not supported India’s aspirations, making it the primary obstacle to any reform proposals requiring consensus among the existing P5.
A campaign that remains central to Indian foreign policy
India’s UNSC bid remains a key element of its foreign policy agenda. New Delhi continues to raise the issue in bilateral talks and multilateral fora. The support of most major powers strengthens India’s argument that global governance should evolve, but the lack of consensus among the P5 keeps the reform process slow and politically complex.
February 11, 2026, 17:46 IST
read more
