India has reiterated its position that all permanent members of a reformed United Nations Security Council must have veto power for as long as the provision exists. New Delhi has opposed proposals to create a separate category of permanent members without the same privileges as the existing five permanent members.

India’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Parvathaneni Harish, outlined the country’s position during a debate on veto powers at the UN General Assembly on October 26.

India argued that granting permanent membership without veto rights would create unequal categories within the Council rather than address the existing imbalance in its decision-making structure.

India opposes unequal permanent membership

India said that any expansion of the Security Council should ensure that all permanent members enjoy equal rights and responsibilities.

In his statement, Harish said that a new category of permanent members, whether with or without veto powers, would complicate an already difficult reform process and risk reinforcing existing inequalities.

He also argued that creating long-term or permanent positions without veto rights would effectively leave the new members with second-class status, without fundamentally changing the decision-making influence of the existing permanent members.

India’s position is aligned with the Common African Position on Security Council reform, according to the statement delivered by its representative.

India calls for comprehensive UN Security Council reforms

India has called for a broader reform process that addresses the Council’s membership categories, veto powers, regional representation, size and working methods.

Harish said negotiations should begin at the earliest, with clearly defined timelines and milestones. India also called for text-based negotiations, which would allow member states to work towards a formal negotiating text.

India maintained that addressing veto powers in isolation would not be sufficient to change the Council’s existing decision-making dynamics.

The country has long called for an expansion of both permanent and non-permanent membership, arguing that the Council’s structure should reflect contemporary geopolitical realities rather than the international order established after the Second World War.

India highlights concerns over the use of veto power

India also stressed that veto power carries significant responsibility and should be exercised with restraint, particularly on matters concerning international peace and security.

Harish said the veto should not become an instrument of narrow political expediency.

According to his statement, the veto had been exercised 331 times on around 200 resolutions over the United Nations’ history. He also noted that most vetoes, or threats to use them, had come from three of the five permanent members.

India further highlighted what it described as an effective or de facto veto, in which the practice of consensus can allow a single Council member to block certain proposals, including presidential statements, press statements and decisions of sanctions committees.

The Indian representative argued that such practices can obstruct decisions without a formal veto being cast.

Which countries currently hold veto power?

The UN Security Council has 15 members, including five permanent members and 10 non-permanent members elected for two-year terms.

The five permanent members are China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States. They hold veto power under the Council’s existing voting arrangements.

Under Article 27 of the UN Charter, substantive decisions require at least nine affirmative votes, including the concurring votes of the permanent members, subject to the applicable rules on abstentions.

India’s latest statement reiterates that any future expansion of permanent membership should not create a new group of permanent members with fewer rights than the existing five.

The country has called for comprehensive negotiations to reform the Council’s composition and decision-making system.

A powerful earthquake measuring magnitude 7 struck northern Tibet on Thursday, October 22, weeks after deadly flash floods and landslides devastated parts of the mountainous region near the Nepal-China border.

The earthquake struck the Nagqu region of Tibet, according to initial reports from earthquake monitoring agencies. The tremor occurred at around 10:33 pm local time in China, with the epicentre located in a county in northern Tibet.

The earthquake was reported at a depth of around 10 kilometres by China’s Earthquake Networks Center. The United States Geological Survey also reported the magnitude 7 tremor, placing its depth at approximately 18 kilometres.

There were no immediate confirmed reports of casualties or property damage following the earthquake, according to initial information available after the tremor.

Earthquake strikes northern Tibet

The earthquake occurred in the Nagqu region, approximately 400 kilometres from Lhasa, the capital of Tibet.

The tremor was recorded on Thursday evening, with monitoring agencies reporting slightly different estimates of its depth. China’s Earthquake Networks Center placed the epicentre at a depth of 10 kilometres, while the US Geological Survey reported a depth of 18 kilometres.

Further information about the earthquake’s impact was awaited at the time of the initial reports.

Tibet earthquake follows deadly flash floods

The earthquake struck weeks after devastating flash floods and landslides affected the mountainous region along the Nepal-China border in late August.

The earlier disaster followed an ice-and-rock avalanche near the border on August 26, triggering flash floods that swept through downstream areas. Homes, roads, bridges and power infrastructure were among the structures affected, while rescue and recovery operations continued in the aftermath.

The floods caused extensive destruction and left thousands of people dead or missing across the affected region, according to reports published after the disaster.

The latest earthquake is a separate event from the earlier avalanche and flooding disaster. An assessment of its effects was not immediately available.

French President Emmanuel Macron has criticised US President Donald Trump and other foreign leaders for their remarks about the recent unrest in France, accusing them of using the situation to advance their political agendas.

Speaking to reporters in Doha on Wednesday, October 21, Macron said foreign manipulation of information following the violence and looting had led to comments he described as “unacceptable” and “stupid”.

When asked whether he was referring to Trump, Macron replied, “Among others.”

The remarks came after Trump attributed the unrest in France to immigration and urged European countries to tighten their borders. Macron rejected claims that France had been overrun by migrants and Islamists, describing them as false.

Macron rejects claims linking unrest to immigration

Trump had argued that immigration was responsible for the violence in France, dismissing other explanations related to education and social concerns. He also urged Macron to close France’s borders, warning that the country faced serious consequences if it failed to act.

In a post on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump claimed that immigration had damaged France and called on the country to regain control of its borders.

Macron pushed back against this narrative, saying that some foreign leaders were repeating misleading claims about the situation. He also highlighted the circulation of artificial intelligence-generated images that depicted events he said had never taken place in France.

The French president said claims that the country had been invaded by large numbers of migrants and Islamists were “completely false”.

Macron argued that some politicians were using France’s domestic situation to support their own political campaigns, particularly as elections approach in their respective countries.

French minister offers to counter misinformation

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said his office could provide clarification to countries concerned about the situation.

He said the aim was to help prevent the spread or amplification of false information and unsupported claims on social media.

Macron also criticised those speaking negatively about France during the unrest, saying that foreign leaders should not exploit the country’s difficulties for political purposes.

Protests driven by rising living costs

The unrest followed demonstrations over rising living costs, inflation and concerns about public services. The protests initially involved students demanding more teachers and better school conditions before expanding to include trade unions and others concerned about economic pressures.

Violence and looting subsequently affected Paris and other French cities.

The French interior ministry estimated that 550,000 people took part in the nationwide demonstrations, while the CGT trade union put attendance at 800,000. The demands reported in connection with the demonstrations centred on living costs and public services rather than immigration.

The French government has faced pressure to prevent further violence, with additional demonstrations planned in the coming days.

Macron said France had the means to maintain order and indicated that a state of emergency was not necessary at that stage.