India, July 9 -- The defeat of Germany in the June 2026 United Nations Security Council (UNSC) elections for the 2027-2028 term has sent shockwaves. They lost their race to Portugal and Austria for one of the two elected (non-permanent) seats, securing merely 104 votes against Portugal's 134 and Austria's 131. This is Germany's first loss in the UNSC elections. While many reasons have been put forth for the defeat of this European heavyweight, the main reason seems to be the uncritical support ofGermany to Israel, especially killingthousands of Palestinians in Gaza, mainly women and children, without accountability. The other, and probably less talked about reason, is that, even before the Ukraine war started, in their last stint in the UNSC (2019-2020),Germany adopted an aggressive, almost irascible, approach vis-a-vis China and Russia making them more determined to stop Germany. The Ukraine and Gaza war only precipitated this anti-Germany mood. Ironically, Israel proved to be the nemesis in 2020, too, when Canada's consistently pro-Israel voting record contributed to its defeat in the 2020 UNSC elections. Though Canada changed their stand a few months before the elections to appear more pro-Palestinian, nobody bought this flip-flop. When the then Canadian foreign minister asked my assessment a few days before UNSC elections, at a time when India was standing unopposed for the sole Asian seat, I told him that Canada has some way to go to get to the magic 2/3rd majority. They finally got 108 votes and lost. Be that as it may, Germany's loss in the UNSC elections holds important lessons since India is contesting for a UNSC non-permanent seat for the term 2028-29, with elections scheduled for June 2027 - less than a year from now. It is contesting against Tajikistan. Given how the stand on West Asia determined the fortunes of Canada and Germany, it is important to get our West Asia policy right for the 2027 UNSC elections. Now, we have the additional complication of the Iran war thrown in. We have excellent bilateral relations with most Gulf countries and our pro-Israel stand has been necessitated in our national interest. But we need to assess whether our taking sides in the Iran war, which we quickly corrected after the closure of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran, will affect support to our candidature, especially since the current players in that region - Pakistan and Turkey, backed by both China and the US will not make it easy for us. However, there is also a broader question to be addressed after the German loss. India, along with Germany, Japan and Brazil, constitutes the G4 group of aspirants for permanent seats in the UNSC. Each one in the G4 has at least one country opposing them - India has Pakistan, Brazil hasMexico, Germany has Italy (and others), and Japan has Republic of Korea (and others). China and Russia are nay-sayers for Council reform itself. They are also opposed to Germany and Japan since they consider them as rivals, even adversaries, and also perpetrators of World War II. The Ukraine war and Japan's aggressive defence posture have made this worse. India is caught in the crossfire between Germany and Japan, on the one hand, and their detractors, on the other. Is the G4 becoming an albatross around India's neck? Are we losing broader support? While there is no doubt that we have the best of bilateral relations with both Germany and Japan, G4 membership may well become counterproductive. With overwhelming bilateral support received by India, whenever the Council is reformed India is almost sure to get in, irrespective of the opposition. However, UNSC permanent membership will not be opened up for only one country. It has to include other unrepresented regions like Africa and Latin America. With the paralysis of UNSC decision-making, there is realisation that Council reform is the only way to reclaim the UN's role in world affairs. The time is right, and India's stand of reformed multilateralism should translate into policy. India has almost always depended on the Global South to get electedto UN and other bodies, evenagainst Big Power opposition, as we saw in the International Court ofJustice elections in 2017, when Justice Dalveer Bhandari was elected against opposition of the five permanent members of UNSC. The P5 had favoured the British candidate. However, on UNSC reforms, the Global South is riddled with contradictions. Africa agrees to two permanent seats but cannot agree on who should occupy it. Arabs want one permanent seat and will not agree till they are promised one. Latin America cannot agree on who should represent the one seat they may get. In the meantime,the so-called "middle powers" are proliferating and becoming more assertive in world affairs. The expansion of BRICS is a testimony to this. This will create more pressure to determine who should get in, when expanded. Against this backdrop, one way is for India to secure maximum backing for itself and sit back. The other way is to work actively to expand the constituency for UNSC reform by working even more closely with the Global South and not let the initiative slip out of our hands. The L.69 is a group of more than 40 developing countries (ranging from Small Island Developing States to larger countries such as Brazil, South America, and Nigeria) that is deeply committed to the expansion of the UNSC. We can leverage our membership of L.69 to push for reforms. The UN reform's Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee has beenheld hostage for years by China, Russiaand other vested groups. It is timeL.69 group challenges them bystarting parallel informal discussions on a written draft for UNSC reformsto bring together those who believe that reform is the only way to savethe United Nations. The reform constituency is only bound to increase now....