India’s growing “frustration” with the prolonged process of UN Security Council reforms and the Comprehensive Convention on International Terror is clear, says incoming President-elect of the United Nations General Assembly’s 71st session Peter Thomson.
“I was made aware of the sense of frustration India has on both of those counts,” Mr. Thomson told The Hindu during a visit to Delhi where he met Prime Minister Narendra Modi and External affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj, adding, “I was able to assure Prime Minister Modi that office of the President of the General Assembly will be seized with both those matters, and hope to take action on both of them.”
When asked if China was one of the blocks to expanding the UN Security Council to include permanent seat applicants like the G-4 grouping (India, Japan, Germany and Brazil), Mr. Thomson, who had flown in from Beijing said that there is a need to “finesse a balance” between India’s stand and China’s stand on the issue.
“China is one side of the argument, and India on the other. Everybody speaks of the need for reform, but the question is what will the final package be. Like any other UN process, finding a consensus always seems impossible, until it is done,” said Mr. Thomson, the Fijian candidate who won from the Asia Pacific group that includes both India and China.
On the issue of finalizing the Comprehensive Convention of International Terrorism (CCIT) which India has pursued since 1996, Mr. Thomson was more optimistic on “doing everything to have it adopted”. India has been more hopeful this year because the Israeli Ambassador Danny Dannon was elected to the Legal committee which will study the CCIT, but many countries remain opposed to the definition of terrorism under the convention.
Discussing preparations for the upcoming UNGA session in September, Mr. Thomson said he was not concerned about Pakistan derailing the session by raising the violence in Kashmir and accusations of human rights violations. When asked by The Hindu , Mr. Thomson also disclosed that Indian officials had not raised the issue of Balochistan during his meetings.
“I did read mentions in the papers of the public statements in this regard, but concerns on Balochistan were not raised in my meetings,” he said at the end of his visit.
>Click here for full interview
