VIDEO India seeks UNSC seat amid scrutiny over rights, regional record

ISLAMABAD: India has formally launched its campaign for a non-permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) for the 2028-29 term, presenting itself as a leading voice of the Global South and a committed supporter of multilateral diplomacy. The campaign, however, has also renewed debate over whether a country's domestic governance, human rights record and regional relations should influence support for leadership positions within the United Nations.

External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar unveiled India's campaign during meetings at the United Nations, arguing that the country's growing global influence, contributions to UN peacekeeping operations and expanding diplomatic engagement make it a strong candidate for another term on the 15-member Security Council.

India's campaign comes as discussions over reforming the Security Council continue, with many member states calling for broader representation while differing over how the body should be expanded and what standards should guide support for prospective members.

While New Delhi has promoted its diplomatic credentials and growing international profile, rights organizations, policy analysts, and some governments have continued to raise concerns about India's domestic human rights record and unresolved regional disputes, arguing that these issues remain relevant to its ambitions for international leadership.

Among the most persistent areas of criticism are concerns about freedom of expression, the application of anti-terror and national security legislation, restrictions on journalists and civil society, the treatment of religious and ethnic minorities, and developments in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir following the revocation of the region's special constitutional status in 2019.

Rights advocates have also highlighted internet shutdowns, preventive detentions and restrictions on independent media as issues requiring continued international attention. Indian authorities have consistently rejected allegations of widespread human rights violations, maintaining that the country's democratic institutions and independent judiciary provide constitutional safeguards while national security measures remain necessary to combat terrorism and preserve public order.

Beyond domestic issues, India's regional security environment also remains part of the broader discussion surrounding its international role.

Pakistan continues to maintain that the Jammu and Kashmir dispute remains unresolved under the UN framework and argues that countries seeking greater responsibilities within the international system should demonstrate sustained commitment to resolving disputes through dialogue and diplomacy. India, meanwhile, maintains that cross-border terrorism remains the principal obstacle to lasting peace and insists that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral part of the country.

New Delhi also continues to manage a long-running boundary dispute with China along the Line of Actual Control, where periodic military tensions have persisted despite diplomatic and military-level engagement aimed at reducing friction.

Separately, territorial disputes with Nepal over the Kalapani-Limpiyadhura-Lipulekh area remain unresolved, while discussions with Bangladesh continue on outstanding water-sharing issues, despite both countries having resolved their long-standing land boundary dispute through the 2015 Land Boundary Agreement. India also continues security cooperation with Myanmar while addressing cross-border insurgent activity along their shared frontier.

The debate surrounding India's Security Council campaign also reflects broader divisions over the future structure of the United Nations itself.

India is a member of the G4 group, alongside Brazil, Germany and Japan, which advocates expanding both permanent and non-permanent membership of the Security Council to better reflect contemporary geopolitical realities.

Opposing that approach is the Uniting for Consensus group, which argues that creating additional permanent seats would make the Council less representative and instead supports expanding only the elected, non-permanent membership. Although the debate primarily concerns institutional reform, differing views on Security Council expansion continue to shape diplomatic discussions surrounding major candidacies.

Unlike permanent membership, election to a non-permanent Security Council seat is decided by the UN General Assembly, where candidates must secure the required majority of votes from member states. Diplomatic outreach, regional endorsements and bilateral engagement remain central to every campaign.