Just five years after the diplomatic coup by electing his judge to the ICJ, Indian diplomat Syed Akbaruddin has written a ringside account of the incident.
‘India vs UK’ is a testament to the changing dynamics of multilateral governance and international law. Just before the book’s release, Syed Akbaruddin, India’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, shared his thoughts on how India overcame odds and Britain tasted defeat for the first time.
This was the first time that a member of the G5 could not get their judge elected to the ICJ. Why did you feel you needed to tell this story?
Most of the written history sources we are taught in schools are not Indian. These are the accounts of foreign travelers, be it Megasthenes, Fahien or Hiuen Tsang. Our knowledge of the past was not written by the participants but by the visitors. I want to create a tradition where important issues and stories are told by the participants.
Such stories create such institutions, institutions that help the society in the long run. I wanted to talk about the many young foreign officials who were part of the diplomatic puzzle that came together for this victory. The Foreign Affairs Committee report on the ‘2017 Election to the International Court of Justice’ concluded that ‘the UK’s influence in the United Nations is at risk’. International relations are dynamic relative to the position of the country. The United Nations permanently sealed certain situations before 1945 or the middle of the last century.
India became an original member of the United Nations even before it became independent, as Britain had assumed that India would vote for them.
Permanent members designed this system, which ensured that they would win even if elections were held. One of these institutions was the ICJ.
Judges should be independent. Why is a country needed and how many votes can it get?
Bye-laws work in their favor because to get elected you have to win both the bodies. This adversely affects the permanent members. You need eight votes to win in SC. Five members are guaranteed five votes because of the U-scratch-my-back-I-scratch-your policy. It’s not a playground at all. So for 70 years they have been winning. This has changed now.
How were voting commitments in the General Assembly and Security Council organized or managed?
Arthashastra says, ‘When it is in our interest. all is fair’. Every means of leverage is used to gain in stature. We had political clout and made more efforts. When you make history, there will be collapse. The next time we contest for a world body, there will be doubts among the contestants whether they want to compete with India.
Did you manage to sleep on those crucial days?
Indian diplomacy does not sleep. Those were very restless days. It was a 24 hour effort. We also had to keep the feedback on Pacific Time, New York Time and Headquarters (New Delhi) in the loop. The technology platforms enabled quick decision making over a wide cross section of decision makers. The technology now available has provided privacy and quick exchange of information.
We could not have taken this issue forward 20 years ago so quickly.
(Interview has been edited for space reasons)