不满没有否决权，印网友提议退出联合国(二) [美国媒体]

United Nations: Why doesn't India haveveto power?

联合国：为什么印度没有一票否决权？



India represents nearly 1/5 of humanity.Still, it is not allowed a fair place at the UN. How can India continue to be apart of such an unfair organization? Is this likely to change within a fewdecades, as India grows more and more stronger on the world stage? Or would itbe best for India to boycott such a biased organization altogether?

印度代表着差不多全世界五分之一的人类。然而，印度在联合国却没有一个与之相称的公正的席位。印度怎么能够还继续呆在这个如此不公正的组织里呢？随着印度在世界的舞台上越来越强大，在未来的几十年里这一状况有可能改变吗？或者对印度来说最好的方式，是不是干脆拒绝参加这个有偏见的组织？

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 回答部分：- - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

译注：作者Michelle Zhou在Quora上是比较有名的回答中国方面问题的答主：

Michelle Zhou（29岁，上海人，9岁出国，目前在洛杉矶，没有加入美国籍，在美国从小学五年级读到大学，大二休学开始人力资源和公共关系工作，比较擅长与人打交道）

Because India is one of the G4, it’s notasking for one seat, but four seats. Which is impossible.
Let’s not forget that the creation of U.N.was to prevent another world war. The veto power was given to super powers forthem to jaw-jaw instead of war-war. P5 is inefficient enough, P9 (India’sproposal) will be impossible to get anything done. India is in alliance withGermany, Japan, and Brazil - the G4. The result of this proposal is: 4 fromEurope, 3 from Asia, 2 from N+S America, and 0 from Africa. Does that soundsfair?

因为印度是四国集团成员，四国集团要求的不是一个席位，而是四个席位，而这是绝不可能的。我们不要忘了联合国的创立是为了阻止另一次世界大战的发生。给予超级大国否决权是为了让他们吵来吵去，而不要打来打去。五常现在就已经够低效了，九常（印度的提案）将会什么事也做不了。印度和德国、日本、巴西联盟—— 所谓的四国集团。这个提案的结果是：4个来自欧洲，3个来自亚洲，2个来自北美和南美，0个来自非洲。这样听起来公平吗？

UK and France are pushing for Germanybecause they understand two is already too much for EU(including UK). The US ispushing for Japan only because China against it. Russia doesn’t like to sharepower either, and the US hated it the most! Wikileaks Exposes US’Double-Game on UN Security Council Expansion.

英国和法国一直强推德国因为他们知道对于欧盟（考虑到英国脱欧影响，目前这里欧盟指的还是包括英国在内）来说2个已经够多了。美国强推日本也是因为它知道中国肯定反对。俄罗斯不想与任何人分享权力，其实美国比俄罗斯还讨厌和别人分享权力。新闻链接：维基解密揭露美国在安理会扩容上玩双面手法。



If there ever is going to be a reform, notcounting (US. China, Russia) because you cannot get rid of them. The reasonablerunning up should be: France representing EU, Nigeria representing AU, Brazilrepresenting Latin America, and then India (or Japan). But the US is pushingfor Japan, and three for Asia is not reasonable because other communities onlygets one seat!

如果安理会真想要改革，就一定要考虑到（美国，中国，俄罗斯）的利益，因为你不可能摆脱他们。最合理的运作应该是：法国代表欧盟，尼日利亚代表非盟，巴西代表拉丁美洲，然后是印度（或者日本）。但是美国强推日本，而亚洲如果有三个安理会理事国将是不合理的，因为其它共同体只有一个席位！

Edit: If India could put forward a workableproposal (AU, Brazil, India only). Stop imagining China as the enemy andimprove relationship with Pakistan. Joining P-members is totally possible.

如果印度能够提出一个切实可行的方案（只有非盟，巴西和印度加入），并且不要把中国当作假想敌，而且最好还要和巴基斯坦搞好关系。加入常任理事国就完全有可能了。


KarthikVickraman
The reason we see China as opposition isthat China has veto power in this matter. Pakistan doesn’t, and isn’t powerfulenough to oppose India on it’s own. If India had the support of all P-5, thereis nothing Pakistan could do to stop India joining. So the reason India doesn’thave a place is international politics, nothing to do with Pakistaniopposition.

我们视中国为对手是因为中国在这件事（印度入常）上有一票否决权，巴基斯坦是没有否决权的，而且单凭巴基斯坦自己是没有能力阻挡印度的。如果印度拥有所有五常国家的支持，巴基斯坦无论做什么都是是无法阻挡印度入常的。所以印度无法入常的原因是由于国际政治所致，和巴基斯坦的反对毫无关系。

KabirGupta
Heres an idea: get rid of the securitycouncil. Its the most ineffective and dysfunctional part of the UN thanks tothis concept of veto power. Lets have a truly democratic UN in which alldecisions are not made by the winners of WWII 70 years ago.

我有一个主意：让联合国取消安理会。由于一票否决权的概念存在，安理会已经变成联合国最没有效率和最功能紊乱的机构了。让我们建立一个真正民主的联合国，在这个新的联合国，所有的决定不只是由70年前那几个二战战胜国来决定。

-Michelle Zhou（答主）回复 Kabir Gupta
I have thought about that too, but as I think deeper, I think vetopower is not just for the winners of WWII, but also for the most likelyparticipants of WWIII. India doesn’t have that power because India was not andwill not be in conflict of any of the world wars, which is a good thing. Let’snot forget about the purpose why UN was created in the first place.

我也想过这个问题，但是当我想得再深入一些，我发现否决权不仅仅是为了二战战胜国而准备，而且还是为了第三次世界大战的最有可能的参战国而准备。印度没有这个权力是因为印度过去没有，将来也不会卷入任何世界大战，这其实对印度来说是一件好事。我们不要忘了起初联合国创立时的目的。

--Rahul Kapoor 回复Michelle Zhou（答主）
Regarding the point about India not being in any conflicts I justwant to point out that during WWII & WWI, India contributed the largestamount of voluntary troops to both war efforts. The historical basis to theUNSC P5 was for the Governments representing the “winning sides” at the timewhere India was represented by a Government in London & not New Delhi. Atthe time it would have not been workable as representation of both Governmentswould have meant that UK would have two seats.
Otherwise, you have made fair points.

关于印度过去没有参加两次世界大战这一点，我必须指出的是，在一战和二战期间，印度为这两场世界大战贡献了最大数量的志愿兵。联合国安理会五常的历史依据就是五常政府在联合国代表“胜利方”，然而在当时，印度是由英国的伦敦政府代表，而不是新德里（印度首都）的政府。如果让一个席位代表两个政府即意味着英国代表两个席位就好了，可是这样做在当时是不可行的。
否则，你说的这一点才公平。

--Arpan Banerjee 回复Michelle Zhou（答主）
A WWIII ? Still waiting for it ? Look around you .. the whole worldis in pieces . What is the UN Security Council doing ? Nothing . The members ofthat council only serve their own petty interests .

第三次世界大战？就一直这样等着吗？睁眼看看你周围。。。全世界都支离破碎。而联合国安理会现在在干吗？不闻不问！这个委员会的成员国们只会天天在心里想着自己的那些琐碎的利益。

--Michelle Zhou（答主）回复 Arpan Banerjee
Thinking that human beings will never kill each other ever again iswishful thinking. I don’t know what interest are you talking about other thanpreventing wars and conflict.

指望人类以后再也不自相残杀，那只是一厢情愿的想法。我不知道你说的琐碎的利益指的是什么，难道还有比阻止战争和冲突的发生更重要的利益吗？

--Arpan Banerjee 回复Michelle Zhou（答主）
Exactly my point . Their objective is to prevent conflict and wars.Have they been able to do so ? No . Since my “wishful” thinking is very closeto the UNSC goal : “Under the Charter, the Security Council has primaryresponsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security” , Ithink all the members harbor “wishful” thoughts but do not have thecourage/conviction/capacity to do so . They have lobbies and their lobbies havedifferent lobbies . Do you think they are any different from the “League ofNations” ? The UNSC constitutes the “most powerful” countries of the world ,but sadly they cannot work together . If US brings one proposal, Russia vetoesit. We have read such stories so many times. The UNSC could not help the peopleof Syria, they did not help the people of Africa ( Rwanda, Uganda, Ivory Costa,Sudan … ) , they could not help the people of North Korea starving under adespot .. They did nothing when a group of madmen (Taliban) transportedAfghanistan back to middle ages .. You have got to be kidding me if you saythat preventing all these would have been “wishful” thinking . I think UNSC isa dinosaur from the past , a leftover from history and it needs to be done away.
And please do not say “Thinking that human beings will never killeach other ever again is wishful thinking. ” .. That is the lamest denial Ihave ever heard .

这正是我要说的。安理会的目的是阻止战争和冲突的发生。但是，他们过去做到了吗？没有！而且你所指的我“一厢情愿”的想法却和联合国安理会的宗旨非常接近：“在联合国宪章之下，安理会的首要责任是维护世界和平与安全”，我认为所有的安理会成员国都应该怀有这种“一厢情愿”的想法，而不要没有勇气去这样做，没有信念去这样做，没有能力去这样做。安理会有各种各样的游说集团，游说集团后面还有不同的游说集团。联合国安理会由世界上所谓的“最强大”的国家组成，但是不幸的是，他们无法一起协作。如果美国提出一个议案，俄罗斯就否决它，反之亦然。我们已经看到太多这样的新闻了。联合国安理会无法帮助叙利亚的人民，也无法对非洲人民（卢旺达，乌干达，科特迪瓦，苏丹。。。。。。）施以援手，他们既不能把快要饿死的朝鲜人民从暴君手下拯救出来，也不能制止一个疯子集团（塔利班）把阿富汗带回了中世纪。。。。。。等等。你现在跟我说，阻止这些事情的发生是“一厢情愿”的想法，你是在和我开玩笑吗？！我认为联合国安理会是旧时代的落伍的事物，是历史的残余，应该被扫出历史舞台。
所以不要说什么 “指望人类以后再也不自相残杀，那只是一厢情愿的想法”。。。。。。
这是我见过最蹩脚的反驳！

-Sarath Kumar 回复Michelle Zhou（答主）
your telling that world countries are trying to prevent nuclear wars? then why US and RUSSIA holding 14000 war heads ? Nuclear Suppliers GroupTreaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons please go through this

你是在说全世界国家正在阻止核战争的爆发吗？那为什么美国和俄罗斯还保持14000件核武器呢？关于核不扩散问题的核供应国集团条约，请通过它。
（译注：核供应国集团成员大会于2016年6月24日在韩国首尔结束。按照印度媒体的说法，在中国的强烈反对之下，印度成为该集团会员国的努力再次落空——尽管印度等非《不扩散核武器条约》缔约国申请加入集团的相关事宜根本不在这次年会的议程上。对此中国外交部表示，申请加入核供应国集团的国家必须具备《不扩散核武器条约》缔约国资格，这一立场不针对特定国家。）

-Kabir Gupta 回复Michelle Zhou（答主）
But Michelle, you’re right in that at some point in time there willbe a World War 3. The whole point of the security council is to avert/resolvesuch conflicts. For present day comparatively minute conflicts such as theSyrian Civil War, the Council has proven to be wildly ineffective, with eitherRussia or China or the US killing any resolution with veto power even if everyother member nation agrees. So, there has to be some kind of security councilreform either way. The SC literally no longer functions to its originalcapacity.

Michelle Zhou（答主），你某些地方说得很对，比如三战未来有可能发生，安理会的重点就是防止和解决类似三战这样的冲突。但是，对于目前发生的时间比较近的冲突比如叙利亚内战问题，安理会已经被证明完全不起作用，无论是俄罗斯、中国或者美国，都通过否决权互相否决对方的提案，哪怕其他所有成员国都同意这个提案。所以，安理会必须要进行某种方式的改革，安理会已经在实质上不能像最初想的那样正常运作了。

-Anunaya Singh 回复Michelle Zhou（答主）
The whole point of the security council and the UN is to protect theinterest of a few rich nations while not giving a fuck about the rest of thenations. It is not made for peace and security,it is a cartel made to imposehegemony.

现在安理会的重点变成了保护少数富国的利益，而对其他国家的利益根本TMD地不管不顾，它哪是为了和平和安全，完全是一个为了方便施展霸权的垄断集团！

AmeyaDeswandikar
Security council seat doesnt affect Indiamuch at all. Keep working to remove poverty, grow economy, military, lead oninnovation. Control India’s oceans and trade routes. Eventually securitycouncil will be ineffective without India. Then there is no choice but to letIndia in.

我们印度不要去管什么安理会席位。只要我们继续消除贫困，提高经济水平，增强军事力量，引领创新，控制好印度洋和贸易通道。最终，安理会会发现，没有印度，他们什么事也干不成。到了那时，除了让印度加入，他们别无选择！

AdityaRaghavan
Yeah improve relationship with a countrywhich hosts and send terrorists to your borders and cities from time to time,good idea.

呵呵，和一个时不时就支持和派遣恐怖分子去你的边境和城市的国家搞好关系，真是个好主意。

VikkySingh
Well the day China will Stop using Pakistanto tackle India the relationship between India and Pakistan will automaticallyimprove. Today whole world knows that China is backing Pakistan. China don’twant a big economy with one of the biggest Man Power to be its rival in theworld market, specially if it is from the same continent.

是这样，哪一天中国不再利用巴基斯坦来膈应印度，哪一天印度和巴基斯坦的关系就会自动改善。如今，全世界都知道，中国支持巴基斯坦。中国不想在世界市场上，有一个占有世界最多人力的经济体成为自己的对手，尤其是这个经济体还和它来自同一片大陆。

RohitMehra
China is not the enemy … agreed.Territorial and other disputes between India and China are more mature(at-least in my view). China has transformed itself significantly - and Indiais aiming for the same (its obviously not easy to copy).
But Pakistan is a bad joke … which Chinalikes to support for reasons best known to China (perhaps its a strategy tokeep India on the edge … who knows? If its that, its not a bad tactic … but itis a bit out-dated and short-sighted … one expects much more from the carefuland analytical Chinese think-tank).
This stance makes most Indians a bit waryof China.
I’m not sure why China doesn’t work morewith India on economics and mutual nation building instead of relying on andspending money on Pak.
An economic corridor through India to theArabian Sea can always be easily offered to China - at-least talks for the samecan be started. No need to go through mountains and a banana republic ofdubious stability to trade. Instability (like that in Pak - which seems to beembedded, unfortunately, in that country’s DNA) is never good for business orprogress.

中国不是敌人。。。我同意。印度和中国在领土和其它方面的争端已经处理得越来越成熟了（仅仅是我个人的观点）。中国显着的改善了自己的国家 -- 印度现在也在为同样的目标努力（显然想复制中国的成功不是件容易的事情）。
但是，你说到关于巴基斯坦的建议完全是个烂笑话。。。中国喜欢支持巴基斯坦是什么原因中国自己最清楚（也许是一种战略，来让印度坐立不安。。。谁知道呢？如果是这样，也不见得就是一个坏的策略。。。但是，还是有一点过时或者短视了。。。希望中国智囊团仔细分析，多想一下）。
中国这样的立场让大部分印度人对中国有一点警惕。
我不是很清楚，为什么中国不更多地和印度在经济和国家建设上互相合作，而要依赖巴基斯坦，在巴基斯坦身上花钱。
建立一个中印经济走廊穿过印度到达阿拉伯海，我们可以很容易地为中国提供这一点 -- 至少未来可以在对话层面先开始。完全不需要翻山越岭穿过一个动荡的香蕉共和国来做生意（译注：指中巴经济走廊）。动荡（就像在巴基斯坦那样的 -- 不幸的是，这已经嵌到他们的骨子里，融入他们国家的DNA里了）对做生意或者发展不是件好事情。

（译注：香蕉共和国：指的是是一个经济体系属于单一经济（通常是经济作物如香蕉、可可、咖啡等）、拥有不民主或不稳定的政府，特别是那些拥有广泛贪污和强大外国势力介入之国家的贬称）

ArpanBhattacharya
china is an imagined enemy and pakiatanrelations can be improves. These two itema straightaway proves you donotunderstand the indian situation. Its a naive analysis. China is supportingpakistan who have made 4 instigated wars against india and their dark state hasa concept of gazw e hind. Ths makes china a enemy pakistan will never improve.You know nothing dear you are naive and live in a idealistic world.

“中国是假想敌”与“和巴基斯坦改善关系”，你对这两件事的看法显然证明了你完全不清楚印度的情况。你的分析很天真。中国支持巴基斯坦，暗中唆使巴基斯坦4次挑起与印度的战争，而黑暗的中国政府在暗中注视着这一切。这也就是为什么中国是我们的敌人，我们和巴基斯坦的关系绝不可能改善的原因。你对真相一无所知，亲爱的答主，你太天真了，还生活在自己想象的世界。

NickleshAnandan
improving relationship with pakistan? thatslike asking israel and palestine or us and russia to call truce.

和巴基斯坦搞好关系？这就像让以色列和巴勒斯坦休战。

NikhilSinghal
Can you tell me how china got veto power.

你能告诉我中国是怎么得到否决权的吗？

NikhilChowdary
Tell me Michelle Zhou, how do you seeChina's veto on Indian move to sanction Masood Azhar, a UN designatedterrorist? What's China's interest in shielding a well known terrorist? How doChinese citizens see this move? Do you agree with this move?

告诉我，Michelle Zhou（答主），你怎么看待中国否决印度将联合国认定的恐怖分子马苏德·阿兹哈尔(Masood Azhar)列入联合国安理会制裁名单的申请？庇护这样一个众所周知的恐怖分子对中国来说有什么好处？你们中国公民是怎么看待这样的举动的？你同意这样的做法吗？

（译注：马苏德·爱资哈尔是“穆罕默德军”创始人，曾被印度政府拘押在克什米尔地区一所监狱，1999年12月被释放，以交换被劫持到阿富汗坎大哈市的一架印度民航客机上的乘客。
中国近日搁置印度将武装组织“穆罕默德军”头目马苏德·阿兹哈尔(Maulana Masood Azhar)列入联合国安理会制裁名单的申请。
中国外交部发言人洪磊此前回应“搁置”一事时表示，中方一贯以事实为依据，根据联合国安理会决议及相关议事规则公正处理1267委员会列名事宜。中方就相关列名问题一直同有关各方保持着沟通。
据《印度时报》2016年4月6日报道，印度政府已经向中国高层就这一事情提出交涉。此事近期在印度持续引发激烈反应。继印度全国贸易商联合会威胁要抵制“中国制造”后，印度媒体5日称，该国安全部门正在考虑重新审查针对中国投资的“友好政策”，包括重新评估已经发放给中国投资项目的安全许可。）

RaviShah
so, 2 from tiny Europe is fine, but 3 fromAsia is impossible?

所以，2个来自面积这么小的欧洲就可以，为什么3个来自亚洲就不行呢？

GranvillePhillips
And why would France represent Europe -just interested in why?

为什么让法国代表欧盟 -- 单纯地想知道为什么？

NeerajVgpal
But P5 veto is a lobby for their allies orarm twisting the opponents. It is a insecurity council. They feel insecureamong themselves. How can they make the world secure?

但是五常的否决权，不是用来为他们各自盟友的利益游说，就是互相纠缠各自的对手。安理会完全可以叫做“不安全理事会”。五常在安理会中间都互相对对方感到不安全，那他们怎么能保证世界安全呢？

-Michelle Zhou（答主）回复 Neeraj Vgpal
You think without veto power, US, China, and Russia will stoptwisting each other?

你觉得如果一旦没有否决权，美国，中国，和俄罗斯还会继续在安理会中间纠缠吗？

--Pracheta KshirsagarOperations 回复 MichelleZhou（答主）
Michelle you are forgetting China has Veto power due to India .Panditji was offered that and due to his value system he recommended China .What Zhou En Lai did to backstab India is a recorded history in neutralarchives .

Michelle Zhou（答主），你难道忘了，正是因为印度，中国才得到了否决权。Panditji（译注：译者查了半天也没查出这个人是谁）曾经透露，基于他的价值理念他才推荐了中国。周恩来用卑鄙的手段对印度做了什么，你可以在中立的档案库中查到这段历史记录的。

SamParker
I think three for Asia is fine because theydo have the most population in the world comparatively.

我认为3个对亚洲来说是可行的，因为亚洲相比较而言有世界上最多的人口。

-Michelle Zhou（答主）回复Sam Parker
P-members needs to be as few as possible, If EU(including UK) onlyhave one, why should Asia have three? If Asia have 3, or EU have 2, why shouldAU and LA only have 1…….. etc.

常任理事国需要越少越好，如果欧盟（包括英国）只有一个理事国，那为什么亚洲要有3个呢？如果亚洲有3个，或者欧盟有2个，那为什么非盟和拉丁美洲就只能有一个呢？

--Antarik Mukherjee 回复Michelle Zhou（答主）
Well EU have a population of 700 million while Just india and CHinawill soon be touching the 3 Billion mark
i think it would be fair representation like 7 billion people 7seats
1 for each billion that confirms our seats while others may bedivided into regions based on population and then we can work it out .
Even though I wonder if India will occupy 2 seats alone by 2060 lol.

7亿人口，但是仅仅印度和中国加起来就快接近30亿人口了。
7个席位来代表70亿人口。
每一个席位对应十亿人口，这样就可以确保我们印度和你们中国的席位了，其他国家可以按区域划分席次。
通过人口划分，我们就可以解决这个问题了。
虽然我不知道印度是不是有可能到了2060年，就一个国家有2个席次了，不过想想还真有点小激动呢。

KumarA
We need to consider appeasing PeacefulPakistan to get dummy veto power?
who said we imagine China as our enemy?western media? I read Chinese has gained good number of enemies in its east.The relationship between India and China is not enmity, if you think that way,you must stop imagining so.

我们需要考虑安抚所谓的“爱好和平的巴基斯坦” 去获得虚伪的否决权吗？
谁告诉你，我们假想中国是我们的敌人了？西方媒体？我只知道中国人在它们的东边有好几个敌人。印度和中国的关系不是敌对关系，如果你真的如你所说的那样想，那你以后最好不要再这样想了。

VaibhavSahu
Too much of Geopolitics and ego is killingthe need for true Democracy. Power to make UN democratic also lies with P5, soI don’t thing true democracy can ever be achieved.

太多的地缘政治和自私自利扼杀了联合国真正的民主。五常的权力使得能否在联合国实现民主依然要取决于五常的意愿，所以我不认为在真正的民主在联合国可以得到实现。

AshleyGeorge
Michelle someone rightly pointed below incomments, instead of having an impartial view and stating facts (thats watplatforms like Quora were initially used for), U r just playing another falsepropaganda chinese machine. Common on, did U really read the facts from historywhen U say things like, “India should stop viewing China as an enemy andimprove relations with Pak”? Really?? Have U ever referred to the past to knowwhy India’s relations are sour with China and Pak? Is India the sole reason forthat?? Haahaahaa…U r really amusing then. I dont know why and how U have thisattitude of assuming China has been ever correct and others like India are notworth. Thats an ignorant attitude I would say U have and I cant say whether Uwould wish to improve that. All the best.

Michelle（答主），这个答案下面有些人的评论很正确地指出了你的问题，他们在陈述事实，而不是偏见。你只是在扮演另一个错误的中国宣传机器。当你说“不要把中国当作假想敌，而且最好还要和巴基斯坦搞好关系” 这些话的时候，你真的有好好读过历史事实吗？？你有没有查阅一下历史，去了解一下为什么印度和中国与巴基斯坦关系不好？是印度单方面的原因吗？哈哈哈。。。你真的很搞笑。我不知道你为什么和怎么会有这样的态度，想当然地认为中国一贯正确，而别人喜欢印度就是不值得的？我想说你这是一种无知的态度，而且我不敢说你是不是真心地想要改善关系，最好是这样。

JiteshDalwala
India won't support terrorist country likePakistan just to get veto.

印度不会仅仅为了得到一票否决权，就去支持像巴基斯坦这样的恐怖主义国家。

KaranPant
Michelle Zhou You are just another biasedPropaganda machine of China with no justifiable information .India doesn'tconsider china as enemy China does when China occupied Tibet then India opposedit and gave asylum to Dalai lama.we didn’t deteriorate our relationship withPakistan, Pakistan did. China support terrorism throughout the world. ChinaPakistan and North Korea are new evil axis of new world order.

Michelle Zhou（答主），你又是另一个有偏见的不辨是非的中国宣传机器。印度从来没有视中国为敌人，直到中国占领了XZ，随后印度反对，并且给予了达赖喇嘛庇护。我们没有主动去恶化和巴基斯坦的关系，而是巴基斯坦挑衅我们。中国在全世界范围内支持恐怖主义分子。中国，巴基斯坦和朝鲜是新世界秩序的新邪恶轴心。

AyushPorwal
Relations with Pakistan will never improveas since Pakistan political leaders wants total annihilation of India and Hindupeople. Pakistan does wars with its own people and suppresses minorities intheir own state. They funds Kashmir’s separatists and infiltrate militants inIndia (newest example being URI Attack). China asks India not to build any armyinfrastructure near LAC. China itself build runways and army camps within 200 mof LAC. China threatens India and you believe that India should stop imaginingchina as enemy. Whatever China is an absolute threat to India and Pakistan isno less than a headache. God bless us !

印度和巴基斯坦的关系永远都不会得到改善，因为巴基斯坦的政治领袖们想要对所有的印度人和印度教徒进行种族灭绝。巴基斯坦对内跟自己人打仗，镇压自己国家的少数MZ。他们资助克什米尔的分离主义分子，对印度进行军事渗透（最近的一个例子就是印控克什米尔一个印度陆军基地遭到袭击）。中国要求印度不要在阿鲁纳恰尔邦（即中国藏南地区）边境进行基础设施建设，但是中国自己却在距离阿鲁纳恰尔邦（即中国藏南地区）不到200米的地方建立公路和军营。中国威胁到了印度的安全，难道你还认为印度不应该视中国为敌人吗？不管怎样，中国对印度来说绝对是一个威胁，而且巴基斯坦一样让人头疼。愿神保佑我们！

（译注：新华社新德里2016年9月18日电，印度军方18日证实，印控克什米尔一个印度陆军基地当天遭到恐怖袭击，造成至少17名印度士兵死亡、30人受伤。4名袭击者也在交火中被打死。
印军方在一份声明中说，袭击发生在18日清晨，4名恐怖分子于17日夜间越过印度巴基斯坦边境并潜入位于印控克什米尔北部的印度陆军指挥中心发动袭击。印度国防部说，受伤的30名士兵已被空运至位于印控克什米尔首府斯利那加的陆军医院，其中2人伤势严重。
印度军方表示，此次袭击是26年来印度陆军在恐袭事件中伤亡最惨重的一次。自今年7月以来，印控克什米尔地区局势趋于紧张，持续的恐怖袭击已导致80多人死亡。）

Suman Sastri
Though generally Indian people does notthink of Chinese people as enemy and vice versa, Chinese government had done alot of things that can only be done by an enemy of India.

虽然大部分印度人民并不认为中国人民是他们的敌人，反之亦然，但是中国政府做的很多事情只能把自己推到印度的敌对面。

Arjav Garg
If making better relations with Pakistanwas that easy, then it would have been done already

如果和巴基斯坦搞好关系有那么容易，那么我们早就这么做了。

Robin Bhandari
I think UNSC is not doing what it shouldhave done in last 20 years, see Appello Syria, Iraq, middle east, refugeecrisis, poverty in Africa and terrorism growing worldwide, it is better forIndia to stay away from UNSC veto member, India is a student which is bright instudies and work overtime to get herself pay for fees of how she is learningthe world, and this UNSC thing will distract everything, we can still ignoreworld issues and focus on our internal issues , UNSC is something which we canget any time we want, why worry?

我认为联合国安理会在过去的20年里，没有做到它应该做到的事情。看看叙利亚阿勒颇，伊拉克，中东，难民危机，非洲的贫穷和世界范围内激增的恐怖主义，对印度来说最好和联合国安理会否决权保持距离，印度是一个，学习聪明的，努力工作交税的，正在向世界学习的学生，而安理会这种事情只会让印度分心。我们可以仍然不用理睬国际上的事务，集中精力搞好国内事务就行了，安理会只不过是一个我们随时想要就可以随时得到的东西罢了，何必去操那个心呢？

Kanisk Singh
I offer a simpler option. Kick China outand treat it just the way Pakistan treats us Indians. Then I will ask anAmerican or a Russian to tell Michelle to stop imagining USA as an enemy and toimprove rotations with India. How would that feel ?

我有一个更简单的选项。把中国踢出安理会，然后我们对待中国就像巴基斯坦对待我们印度人那样。接着，我会找一个美国人或者俄罗斯人来告诉Michelle（答主），不要把美国或者俄罗斯假想为敌人，而且要和印度搞好关系。那样的话你会怎么想？

Pranjal Krishna
Heavily biased answer with littlerationalle.

这个回答怀有严重偏见，一点道理都没有。

Himanshu Singh
Relations with China can be improved butnot with Pakistan it’s childish with really corrupt leaders.

和中国搞好关系可以，但和巴基斯坦是绝不可能的。他们的人民很幼稚，他们的领导人很腐败。

Surbhi Jain
“Stop imagining China as the enemy and improve relationship withPakistan” . Are you unaware of the fact that Pakistan is the hub of terrorists? Or you are simply ignoring the fact because terrorist hasn’t hit China yet .Remember , One day country (read China) that supports a terror nation likePakistan is going to regret it ( and in a really bad way ).

“不要把中国当作假想敌，而且最好还要和巴基斯坦搞好关系”，你不知道巴基斯坦是恐怖主义老窝这个事实吗？或者你只是简单地忽视这个事实，因为恐怖主义分子还没有袭击中国？记住，总有一天，那些支持像巴基斯坦这样的恐怖国家的国家（比如中国），今后会后悔的（并且没有好下场）。

Adhiraj Chattopadhyay
See , there are problems with your laststatement. Pakistan has already attacked India, improperly, several timesbefore.Now it chooses the covert war via terrorism. The recent surgical strikescarried out on POK by India found Pakistani soldiers among several terrorists.
Point 2: Before the Kargil war, there wereongoing talks between India and Pakistan to resolve the Kashmir issue. Amidstall that , general Musharaff's coup gave him Pakistan from Shariff and he theninitiated the Kargil war.
So, India has always been trying to resolvethings with Pakistan but no issue can be resolved one-sidedly.。
Coming to China,she has always beencovertly supporting Pakistan,vetoing several of India's moves. A recent event,she decided to veto the resolution to designate that Hafiz as a terrorist( whois a known terrorist,atleast, living in Pakistan like Laden).
But , we do not really consider China as anenemy.You are mistaken.There have been numerous talks and many of them,successfully.
You also talk like a bully. What do youthink? China does not control Asia. We don't need to butter her up.
Another thing, making philosophicalstatements is very easy, but before making them one should try and understandthe geopolitical scenario.

你最后一段说得有问题。巴基斯坦已经在过去多次不道德地袭击了印度，现在它又通过恐怖分子偷偷摸摸地发动战争。最近发生的针对印控克什米尔的外科手术式的袭击，已经发现恐怖分子中间有巴基斯坦军人。
第二点：在卡吉尔战争（译注一）之前，印度和巴基斯坦为了解决克什米尔问题双方一直在进行会谈。会谈期间，穆沙拉夫将军发动政变从谢里夫手中夺得巴基斯坦，然后发动了卡吉尔战争（译注二）。
所以，印度一直在努力解决与巴基斯坦的问题，但是，问题不可能单方面地解决。
说到中国，它一直暗中支持巴基斯坦，否决了好几次印度向安理会递交的提案。最近发生的一次是，中国否决了印度提出的要求安理会认定马苏德·爱资哈尔是恐怖分子的提案（马苏德·爱资哈尔是一个众所周知的恐怖分子，像本拉登一样住在巴基斯坦）。
但是，我们并不真正地认为中国是我们的敌人。这一点你说错了。我们和中国之间有数不清的会谈，其中很多都成功了。
你说起话来像一个恃强欺弱的人，你认为呢？中国还没有控制整个亚洲，我们不需要巴结中国。
还有就是我想说，讲一些大道理很容易，但是在说之前，你应该先努力了解一下地缘政治环境。

译注一：卡吉尔战争：1999年，印度和巴基斯坦之间因为克什米尔问题爆发卡吉尔战争（Kargil War），这已经是双方第四次为了克什米尔问题掐架。战争持续了70天，死伤1000多人。
译注二：1999年10月，以穆沙拉夫为首的军方解散了当时的谢里夫政府，成立了国家安全委员会，穆沙拉夫任首席执行官。巴基斯坦最高法院2000年5月裁定这起“军事接管”是“必要的行动”，承认穆沙拉夫政府的合法性。