India told the UN Security Council that membership must not be used to legitimize terrorists or serve narrow political interests [1].
The demand highlights growing tension over how the UN handles sanctions and the perceived influence of specific member states in blocking the designation of militants. India argues that the current lack of transparency undermines the global fight against terrorism.
Speaking in New York, representatives from India's Ministry of External Affairs said the Council should adopt more transparent processes for its sanctions decisions [1, 2]. The government said that the Council's credibility depends on its ability to act without being swayed by the political agendas of individual members [1, 3].
India also called for comprehensive reforms within the UNSC to ensure the body remains effective in the modern era [3]. This includes requests for the timely appointment of chairs for subsidiary bodies to avoid administrative delays that could hinder security operations [1].
The Indian delegation said that the misuse of membership to shield individuals or groups associated with terrorism creates a loophole in international law [2]. By seeking clearer guidelines and more open decision-making, India aims to prevent the Council from becoming a tool for political leverage [1, 3].
These calls for reform come as India continues to push for a permanent seat on the Council, arguing that the current structure does not reflect the geopolitical realities of the present day [3].
“Membership must not be used to legitimise terrorists”
India's push for transparency is a direct challenge to the veto power and diplomatic shielding often employed by permanent members of the UNSC. By framing the issue as a matter of counter-terrorism credibility rather than just institutional reform, New Delhi is attempting to build a broader coalition of member states that feel the sanctions process is unfairly manipulated by a few powerful nations.
