Is it true that Nehru rejected a permanent seat offered to India in the UN Security Council by The US, and if so, why did Nehru do so, and if not, from whence is this rumor derived?

尼赫鲁推拒了美国提供的联合国安理会常任理事国席位，是真的吗？如果是真事，尼赫鲁为什么这样做？如果不是真事，这个谣言是从何而来？

以下是Quora网友的评论：

Dr. Balaji Viswanathan

Related

What was the rationale behind Jawaharlal Nehru rejecting UNSC seat and offering it to China?

There was never a firm offer. That was a mere tease that would have never happened - once proposed by the Soviet Union and once by the United States. The issue is far more complicated than the simplistic statements that is claimed on this. that Here is a recent paper on this based on a Phd dissertation that was done on this topic

尼赫鲁拒绝接受联合国安理会席位并拱手让给中国的理由是什么？

美国从来没有提出过正式的邀约。这只是一句玩笑话，绝对不可能实现——苏联曾经这么提过，美国也这么说过。这件事远非问题中描述的这么简单。这是最近发表的一篇基于这个话题的博士论文:

Sashi Tharoor - an expert on both Congress party and United Nations also wrote a detailed account on this: `Nehru declined offer of permanent U.N. seat'

While I’m not a big fan of Nehru, I don’t think he was stupid either. He took fairly shrewd moves here. And I don’t know of any respectable analyst who have both researched this issue and faulted Nehru for this.

国大党和联合国专家萨西·塔鲁尔也对此做过详细的描述：“尼赫鲁拒绝了联合国常任理事国的提议。”

虽然我不是尼赫鲁的忠实粉丝，我也绝不认为他会是个愚蠢的人。他这个决定十分精明。我没听说过哪个受人尊敬的分析人士研究完这个问题后还要指责尼赫鲁。

Let me attempt to summarize that paper:

There were two vague offers - one by the US in 1950 and one by the Soviet Union in 1955. The US “offer” came around the time when took China as a republic. The Soviet Union “offer” came around the time of Nehru’s landmark visit to USSR that built the Indo-USSR friendship.

Both the cases were about India getting the UNSC seat in place of China whose seat was given to a renegade ROC government. In both cases, the superpowers feared China for their own reasons.

Both the vague offers were fairly kneejerk affairs. The first by fear and second from euphoria. They were never followed through.

Nehru still wanted the UNSC seat, just not at the cost of China’s seat.

我试着总结一下那篇论文的内容吧：

当时有两个含糊其辞的提议——美国在1950年提出过一次，苏联在1955年也提出过一次。美国是在新中国成立后提出的。苏联是在尼赫鲁访问苏联这个极具意义的历史事件发生时提出的，通过那次访问印苏之间搭建了深厚的友谊。

这两次提议都是有意让印度取代中国，获得联合国安理会席位，而当时中国的席位被授予了溃逃的中华民国政府。这两个超级大国都出于各自的原因，对中国有所忌惮。

这两次提议都是下意识的做法。首先是出于恐惧，其次是出于兴奋。但都没有坚持到执行落地。

尼赫鲁还是想要联合国安理会席位的，但美苏不敢以牺牲中国的席位为代价。

Since the US and USSR didn’t simultaneously offer anything, India had no chance of getting through. Had India shook US hands in 1950, the Soviets would have vetoed and had India shook USSR hands in 1955, US would have vetoed. The bigger powers were interested in their own games and would not have let India into the club without being sure that it will side them in conflict. There was no way India could have sided both US and USSR.

因为美国和苏联没有给过任何实质性的东西，印度也就没有机会。如果印度在1950年和美国联手，苏联会进行否决，如果印度在1955年和苏联联手，美国也会进行否决。大国都只关心自己的利益，如果不确定印度会在发生冲突时站在他们一边，他们就不会让印度加入这个俱乐部。印度不可能同时站在美国和苏联一边。

While there was near zero chance for getting through even if Nehru had said yes to the initial proposal, there were plenty of risks:

Offend China and bring the eventual 1962 war a lot sooner.

Destroy India’s reputation as a nation with a principled foreign policy.

Lose independence in foreign policy and become a pawn of one of the superpowers.

所以就算尼赫鲁同意了最初的提议，印度通过的机会也几乎为零，而且风险很大：

印度会得罪中国，导致1962年战争提前爆发。

印度会失去作为一个奉行原则性外交政策的国家的名望。

印度会在外交政策上失去独立性，成为某个超级大国的棋子。

Thus, there was no upside [no chance of getting the UNSC], but plenty of downsides by merely accepting the initial proposal. In short, Nehru received vague proposals, but immediately realized that these were not real offers but traps to get India into a bigger game.

所以尼赫鲁接受入常的提议不但没有好处，反而坏处多多。简而言之，尼赫鲁收到过模棱两可的说法，但他立即意识到这种想法不切实际，反而会让印度陷入博弈的陷阱。

Vikram Yashashvi

Related

What was the rationale behind Jawaharlal Nehru rejecting UNSC seat and offering it to China?

On 27th September 1955, Jawaharlal Nehru apprised the Lok Sabha on the issue.

Nehru denied that he ever received an offer of UNSC seat, neither formal, nor informal.

Nehru clarified that vague references that had appeared in press on the issue had no foundation in fact.

尼赫鲁拒绝联合国安理会席位并拱手让给中国的理由是什么？

1955年9月27日，贾瓦哈拉尔·尼赫鲁向人民院作出了解释。

尼赫鲁否认他曾收到过联合国安理会席位的邀约，无论是正式邀约或是非正式邀约。

尼赫鲁澄清说，媒体闪烁其词的宣传并没有事实依据。

Furthermore he enlightened everyone that composition of security council has been prescribed by the UN charter, so no offer can be made to India or anyone without amending the UN charter! Thus there is no truth of an offer being made or him declining it.

The great man Nehru himself clarified this 6 decades ago, I hope people should understand that what is said and accepted on the floor of Lok Sabha is not up for debate and confusion decades later. Especially when Nehru had provided a lucid and logical response.

此外，他还告诉所有人，安理会的构成是由联合国宪章规定的，所以如果没有修改联合国宪章，任何一方都无法向印度或任何人提出邀约！所以这种说法的真实性是不存在的。

伟大的尼赫鲁在60年前就澄清了这一点，我希望人们应该明白，尼赫鲁在人民院所做的澄清不应该在几十年后引起争论和混乱。尤其是尼赫鲁已经给出了一个清晰而合乎逻辑的回应。

Phil DiNuzzo

Related

What are some reasons why India gave up UNSC seat to China?

The answer may lie in the fact that The People's Republic of China did not have a seat in 1955, that permanent seat on the UNSC was held by the Republic of China since 1945, starting in the midst of the Chinese Civil War and extending to  until 1971.

印度把安理会席位让给中国的原因是什么？

答案可能在于1955年中华人民共和国没有席位，联合国安理会的常任理事国席位自1945年（中国内战中期开始）以来一直由中华民国持有，直到1971年。

US-ROC relations were not warm in 1955, in part due to what the ROC viewed as woefully insufficient US support for retaking the mainland. It's conceivable that the US would have recommended excluding the small island nation of Taiwan from the UNSC, seeing as it had virtually no hopes of retaking the mainland and . Similarly, the Soviet Union had no love for the ROC, seeing as they had supported the PRC and had fairly warm relations with mainland China prior to the 1960 Sino-Soviet split.

1955年美国与中华民国的关系不好，部分原因在于ROC认为美国对其反攻大陆的支持严重不足。可以想象，美国可能会建议将台湾这个小岛排除在联合国安理会之外，因为台湾基本上没有反攻大陆的希望。同样，苏联也不喜欢ROC，因为苏联支持中华人民共和国，在1960年中苏分裂之前苏联和中国大陆保持着相当热络的联系。

Given this context, it would have made sense for both superpowers to support an end to the ROC's permanent seat in favor of a more legitimate world power.

Soviet-Indian relations were also warm at the time, to the chagrin of mainland China. US-Indian relations were tepid but not hostile. As a leader of the non-aligned movement and as a de ocracy with strong socialist tendencies, it didn't mesh well ideologically with the superpowers, but tended to get along well enough.

在这种背景下，两个超级大国支持废除ROC的常任理事国席位，让一个更合法的世界大国加入，是很有意义的。

令中国大陆懊恼的是，当时苏印关系也很热络。美印关系不温不火，但也并不敌对。作为不结盟运动的领导者和具有强烈社会主义倾向的皿煮国家，印度在意识形态上与超级大国虽然不那么合拍，但相处得还不错。

Having read a lot about the UN (many years ago) I can't recall learning anything about a serious attempt to get India a permanent UNSC seat in place of the ROC. But given the circumstances explained above, it's certainly conceivable, and since it never happened, it's also conceivable that this anecdote is mostly lost to the dustbins.

我读过很多关于联合国的文章(很多年前)，我不记得有什么让印度取代中华民国成为联合国安理会常任理事国的严肃提案。但考虑到上面解释的情况，这种风声是可以想象的，既然这件事从未发生过，可以想象这种小道消息最后往往会被遗忘。

As to why India would forgo a seat, I can only speculate. India was a new sovereign nation in 1955 with extensive border disputes and internal conflict. It had fought it's first war with Pakistan in 1947, followed by Operation Polo in 1948 where the Indian invaded one of its own states. Over the following years and decades India would fight many more skirmishes and wars with Pakistan and China over border disputes, as well as internal disputes. Simply put, India had bigger concerns, and the UN wouldn't be much help in it's ongoing border wars.

至于印度为什么会放弃席位，我只能猜测。1955年，印度还是一个刚刚独立的主权国家，和许多邻国都有边界争端，国内矛盾也不断。1947年，印度与巴基斯坦进行了第一场战争，随后是1948年的马球行动，印度入侵了自己的一个邦。在接下来的几年、甚至几十年里，印度与巴基斯坦和中国就边界争端以及国内冲突还会持续进行很多小规模冲突和战争。简而言之，印度隐患丛生，联合国席位对印度的边境战争也不会有太大帮助。

India was also a driving force behind the creation of the Non-Aligned Movement, which was championed by India's first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru as early as 1954. While the NAM was generally supportive of the UN, it disliked the overbearing influence the US had on the organization and considered itself to be a more representative component of the UN. I'm not sure that attitude had actually developed by 1955, but I do know Nehru himself support the UN and wished to see India as a permanent member of the UNSC, which is in complete contradiction of the Washington Post's claim.

印度也是不结盟运动创立背后的推动力量，早在1954年，印度首任总理贾瓦哈拉尔·尼赫鲁就公开支持该运动。虽然不结盟运动总体上支持联合国，但印度不喜欢美国对联合国的专横影响，并认为自己是联合国中更具代表性的成员国。这种意识到1955年是否已经形成，我不得而知，但我知道尼赫鲁本人支持联合国，希望见证印度成为联合国安理会常任理事国，这与华盛顿邮报的说法完全矛盾。

I just found this 2004 article from The Hindu which gives the original source of the Washington Post cited factoid.

我刚从《印度教徒报》上找到了一篇2004年的文章，文中列出了《华盛顿邮报》的原文。

To get just a little more speculative, I'd suggest that there was indeed controversy over which China should hold the seat by 1955, and perhaps whether or not India should instead get the seat. But it does seem like a stretch to imagine an internationalist like Nehru would turn down a chance to establish his newborn nation as a permanent power broker in the United Nations.

对于该不该在1955年给中国席位，或者印度能不能获得席位，这在当时确实存在着争议。但尼赫鲁这样的国际主义者会拒绝一个让他的新生国家成为拥有实权的联合国常任理事国的机会，似乎有点牵强。

Achal Gautam

There was never a formal offer by America. Nehru himself said on the floor of Parliament that “There has been no offer, formal or informal, of this kind. Some vague references have appeared in the press about it, which have no foundation in fact.”

美国从来没有对印度给出过正式的提议。尼赫鲁本人在议会说：“我并没有收到正式或非正式的提议。媒体上出现的一些模糊的说法并没有事实根据。”

Let us assume for a moment that America had given informal offer to India to join Security council as permanent member in place of China and Nehru rejected it. What would have been pre-condition of this offer ?

· Joining American led western Alliance. Buying American & British Arms.

· Solving the Kashmir issue. West was more favorable to Pakistan on Kashmir issue at that time.

· Minimizing contacts with Soviet Union & China.

· Stop support to freedom movement in Asia & Africa

让我们暂时假设一下，美国非正式地邀请印度取代中国成为安理会常任理事国，而尼赫鲁拒绝了。这个提议的先决条件是什么？

·印度加入美国领导的西方联盟，购买美国和英国的武器。

·解决克什米尔问题。当时西方在克什米尔问题上更偏袒巴基斯坦。

·尽量减少与苏联和中国的接触。

·停止支持亚洲和非洲的自由主义运动

Nehru also had a soft corner towards c and he hated western colonial power and he was too ideal person in international diplomacy.

尼赫鲁的态度很温和，他讨厌西方殖民势力，是在国际外交中非常理想主义的人。