U.S.PRESIDENTF.D.ROOSEVELTandBritish
PrimeMinisterWinstonChurchill. Rooseveltwantedto
retain the name“The UnitedNations”for thepost-war
organisation.SovietPremier JosephStalinproposed
“WorldUnion” or“InternationalSecurity Organisation”.THEHINDUARCHIVESjoritysupport, Washing-
ton and London were
prepared to show some
flexibility.Stalinobjected.
Finally, Roosevelt’s for-
mula, underwhichnoneof
theP5 could preventdis-
cussionofanyissue but
couldvetoenforcement ac-
tion, was agreed to by
Stalin.
Thisin briefis theac-
countof theDumbarton
OaksConference heldin
1944.Theauthorgivesan
equallythoroughaccount
of theSanFranciscoCon-
ference of 1945,wherethe
Charter wasfinalised.
Chapter5 is appropri-
ately titled “Beginner’s
Luck: The Early Suc-
cesses”.Thesuccessesin-
cluded thelocation of the
U.N.headquartersin New
York,the selection of a
Secretary-General, accel-
erating theemergenceof
Indonesiaas an independ-
entstate,andtheU.N.-
brokered ceasefire in
Jammu andKashmir.
Chapter 14, “Imper-
manenceof the Permanent
Five”, makes important
points.Except for a while
between 1970and1990,
the U.S.has dominated the
Security Council.AllSe-
curityCouncilresolutions
authorising the use of force
wereeithermovedby the
U.S.or hadits support,
with Russia and China
either blocking or
grudgingly supporting.
Thesetwoseldomusethe
SecurityCouncil to pro-
motetheirglobalinterests
as the Westdoes.
Chapter15, “Warsthat
EscapedSecurityCouncil
Action”,andthelastone,
“Security CouncilReform”,
roundup thisexhaustive
study.Letus lookat the
conclusions. The author
startsby askingpertinent
questions:
HowhastheSecurity
Council faredin perform-
ing its Charter
responsibilities?
Hasit fulfilledtheex-
pectations of thosewho
draftedthe Charter?
How do the current
members of the U.N.eval-
uateit?
Theauthorhas pointed
out,interalia, that:
●In the absence of
compulsory adjudication
of disputes and a ma-
chineryto enforceverdicts,
theSecurityCouncil’s ac-
tionsto maintaininterna-
tionalpeaceandsecurity
becomea reactionarypre-
servation of thestatus quo.
●Anincreasein the
permanentseatswillmake
the Councilmoreundemo-
cratic.Thedebateswillbe
longeranddecision-mak-
ing willbe slower.
●All countries are not
equal. Weighted voting
canbe introduced.
Theauthor promised
us a studyfromtheper-
spectiveof the countriesin
theSouth.Therefore,thereadermighthaveexpec-
teda mention of India’s
important rolein theSe-
curity Council on the
KoreanWar.SirBenegal
Narsing RaowasIndia’s
Permanent Representat-
ive whenIndiawason the
SecurityCouncil in 1950-- He playeda crucialrole
in shaping the Security
Council’sdecisions. Simil-
arly,V.K.Krishna Menon
helped to bringabout a
ceasefire by workingouta
formulaon repatriationof
theprisonersof war.In-
dia’sresolutiondraftedby
himwasadoptedby the
U.N.GeneralAssemblyon
December 3, 1952.
This reviewer men-
tionsthismatter because
he hascomeacrossignor-
anceof India’srolein the
KoreanWarcontexton the
partof the politicalscience
facultyin morethanone
university. Thereaderin-
terestedin knowingmore
on India’s crucial diplo-
maticrolemightlookup
the bookBetweentheBlocs:
India,theUnitedNations
andEnding the Korean
Warby RobertBarnes,one
of therarebooksdealing
withIndia’s role.One can
readit freeon the Internet.
Thebookunder review
coulddo withmoreedit-
ing.Forexample, on page
39 weread: TheUnited
Nationswasformedasa
militaryalliance during
the Second World War.
After the war, its three
main allies—the United
States, the Soviet Union
andBritainconvertedit
intoaninternational or-
ganisation forcontinued
collective defenceagainst
theenemystates,Germany
andJapan.
Thereadermightwon-
deraboutthe needto seek
collectivedefenceagainst
JapanandGermany,both
underoccupation.
Thesedaysonecomes
across concocted stories
about Nehru’shavingre-
jectedtwice theofferof a
permanent seaton the Se-
curity Council. Thereader
would have appreciateda
paragraphor twoon this,
especiallyin the context of
the rewriting of history
gathering momentum
thesedays.Theauthorhas
made rather laconicrefer-
encesto theso-calledof-
fers.
The author has con-
clusively provedthe illegit-
imacy of the P5 andhence
the title is rather in-
triguing. All told, thiswell-
researchedbook by an em-
inent practitionerof the art
of multilateral diplomacy
will be readnot onlyby stu-
dents of international rela-
tions and serving
diplomats butalsoby the
generalpublic in viewof its
lucid presentation of com-
plicated issues. $
K.P.Fabian is theauthor
ofDiplomacy: Indian
Style.