Parag Khanna of the Brookings Institution writes in the New York Times
A realistic proposal would continue to have the United States, Russia and China as permanent members, but would include Japan, the largest aid and reconstruction donor, and India, a crucial ally in the war on terror as well as potential contributor of troops. With Japan and India, the United States can work around Chinese intransigence and outweigh Russian opposition
While I think India can play a balanced role in the UNSC, I dont think the entry of India and Japan will change all that is wrong with the UN system today. The main reason why India should get this seat is to reflect the new realities of the 21st century. Many in the US are right to think that India will not be a yes-man; that is precisely the reason it should be on the Council. While India may differ with the US policies on specific issues, the two countries’ strategic interests are largely congruent.
As I mentioned in my previous post, there is no good reason why India should not be on the Council. In spite of what the residual Marxists say.