PYQ Vault · Paper 2 · India & the UN System
‘Uniting for Consensus’ also known as ‘Coffee Club’
How the answer moves
The flow snapshot — the routes in, the body, the counter-view and the routes out.
Flow snapshot — how the answer moves
Intro routes
1t membership of the UN Security Council. their major objections. (2017/15 marks)
Body flow
R1 locate group: mid-1990s, Italy-led “Coffee Club’, ~50 states — line: objections blend principle (no new permanent privilege) + regional rivalry R2 1945 Council frozen → G4 seeks permanent seats — UfC forms as the counter-coalition — its objections now define the reform deadlock
Counter-view
Objection 1: new permanent seats “freeze privilege” — widen small-elite- vs-membership divide — expand an existing oligarchy — Objection 2: veto untouched -— deepens democratic deficit, no cure for paralysis + UfC alternative (March 2024): enlarge only elected tier, longer/re-electable seats → rotation + accountability + geographic balance → Objection 3: Article 108 → two-thirds GA + all five ratify → reform must rest on widest consensus → underlying motive: regional rivalry (Pakistan v India, Italy v Germany) → think-tank reading
Conclusion routes
India rejects the model → Kamboj (2024): ignores Africa / Global South, “just vetoes the process” → calls for “UN 2.0” — yet UfC numbers block the two-thirds majority → reform stuck without an agreed text R1 objections coherent in principle yet selective in effect — democratic language + regional rivalry + Charter rigidity → entrenches the order it claims toreform R2 objections are real constraints, not mere obstruction → but deadlock persists → any breakthrough needs the consensus UfC’s veto-on-privilege denies
Model answer
Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.
