The election of US President Joe Biden as Ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, on Wednesday did not expressly promise the new government’s support for India as a permanent member of the Security Council.
Three previous administrations, that of George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Donald Trump, had publicly stated that the United States supported India’s application for a permanent member of the UN Security Council.
Thomas-Greenfield, who served more than 35 years of international service prior to being nominated for the position, told lawmakers during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that this was an issue of ongoing discussion.
“Do you think India, Germany, Japan should be (permanent) members (of the UN Security Council),” asked Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon during their confirmation hearing about the position of the US Ambassador to the United Nations.
Biden named it as cabinet rank.
“I think there has been some discussion about them being members of the Security Council and there are some strong arguments for that,” she said.
“But I also know that there are others in their regions who don’t think they should be the representatives of their region. This is also an ongoing discussion,” she said in an obvious reference to the Coffee Club or United for Consensus.
The Coffee Club consists of countries such as Italy, Pakistan, Mexico and Egypt and has spoken out against the constant membership requests from India, Japan, Germany and Brazil. In his campaign policy document last year, President Biden affirmed his promise to support India as a permanent member of the UN Security Council.
“In recognition of India’s growing role on the world stage, the Obama-Biden administration officially declared US support for India’s membership in a reformed and expanded United Nations Security Council,” said the Biden campaign policy document on American Indians last August.
In response to another question, Thomas Greenfield advocated reforms in the UN Security Council. India is currently its non-permanent member for a two-year term that began in January this year.
“I think there is general consensus that reforms are needed in the Security Council. What those reforms will be and how they will be implemented has yet to be decided, but you know that the number of members we have moved from will be Has changed 11-15 years ago there was an effort to have more permanent members and these discussions are ongoing, “she said.
She answered a question from Senator Merkley.
“I wanted to ask about the Security Council itself first. At the same time, China and Russia are often hindering action in the Security Council. The Security Council is less and less representative of the geopolitical landscape, with key powers like India, Germany and Japan not included as permanent members,” he said.
“How do you deal with the Security Council question? How do you see that it may need to be reformed? How do you think it can be made more effective and functional,” Merkley asked.