UN Reform — would it be an exercise ad infinitum

In a step forward for restructuring of the aging organisation, the UN has recently adopted a negotiating text or guiding dogma in order to navigate through prospective options for United Nations Security Council reforms. This decision is considered to be a quantum leap for setting Inter Governmental Negotiation (IGN) process formally on an irreversible text-based negotiations course. In other words, working group has finalised and released an official document which is a recognised text that has been adopted by the entire assembly, eliminating any confusion and ambiguity that persisted among members that which would be the negotiating text.
UNSC reform agenda is neither a new nor an incitement issue but a convoluted process because of overwhelming differences amongst members, intriguing politics, divergent interests and above all unwarranted influence of global powers to mould decisions in own favour, most of the times irrational and unbalancing. In an era of remerging cold war situation, that is also leading to multi-lateralism against monopolarity or bi-polarity, perspicacious decisions acceptable to strong, weak and impartial members seem not possible.
India has been frantically seeking a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council from the platform of the G-4, that consisted of Brazil, Germany, Japan and India. Interestingly each one of them are seeking permanent representation in the UNSC. They propose that UNSC should be expanded beyond the current fifteen members to not only dilute monopoly of five powers but also to enable emerging powers as well as smaller countries to safeguard their trade, security and other national interests. India considering itself an emerging power, both militarily and economically, has been trying and rallying support for gaining a permanent seat in the Security Council since nineties mainly overplaying its contribution of troops to UN peacekeeping missions, that stands at approximately 160,000 troops, claiming to have participated in more than 43 missions. Previously the US and other four permanent UNSC members were not very accommodating to the idea of reforming and expanding the Security Council but in the fast changing new strategic environment, particularly failure of Arab Spring, stalemate in Afghanistan in post American defeat scenario, emergence of China and Russia as freshly competing powers and above all China's new silk route strategy, have wheedled the US that has assured its support to India's permanent membership in UNSC. However, the reaction from other UNSC members as well as UN member states is not yet absolutely lucid. This ambiguity will no more last long in view of the premature jubilation expressed by India's UN ambassador Asoke Mukerji, who described UNGA working group's release of a negotiating text as historic and path-breaking. India is expected to lobby for its demands prior and during the 70th session of the UNGA, which is due to take place shortly.
Indian delight can be traced back to the assurances to Indian prime minister by the US during reciprocal visits but it is still highly uncertain whether the demands of G-4 nations will be implemented anytime soon, given the complexity of the issue and serious divergences thereof.
The dynamics of the Inter Governmental Negotiations (IGN) have generated interest in the Intermediate Approach (lA), i.e. a middle ground between the models of expansion proposed by the G-4 and the UfC. No clear model of lA exists; it broadly envisages creation of Long-Term Non-Permanent Seats, through elections, based on geographical representation. Differences on interpretation of lA are obvious. The G-4 aligns lA with their claim of permanent seat status to be reviewed after 15 years with negotiable status of veto. The UfC, on the other hand, promotes the idea of long-term non-permanent seat of 3-5 years duration. The P-5 has started showing interest in the lA, with Russian Federation as its leading advocate. L69 is a group of mostly small under represented states that has so far been supporting G-4 because L69 expects G-4 support in its demand for shortened text from the chair of IGN while "deleting positions that carry no support". In a bid to entice Africa, they amended their traditional position by demanding six new permanent seats with veto for G-4, and two African States. The Indian motivation behind this move is to isolate Pakistan and UfC on the issue of "Categories". Although, there is an agreement in principle to reform the Security Council yet there is no agreement on the modalities and the nature of this reform. So far, no reform proposal has garnered necessary support and consensus of the member states. There are widely divergent positions on various key issues, which mainly include question of categories of membership, veto power, regional representation in reformed UNSC and need to improve the working methods as well as achieving consensus among various stakeholders/member states, besides so many other differing issues.
Pakistan's all times leadership have not been wrongly viewed American lead western posture and intentions with skepticism because it was clear to them when India was provided with Bhabha research reactor and Pakistan was instead advised to develop projects of hydle electricity to overcome its energy deficit but to ensure it also does not develop this capability which could be used for military purposes. The US and its true strategic allies have also provided India with a nuclear deal which can help New Delhi make fifty additional nuclear bombs each year and on the contrary US led west is assuring us that nuclear projects for producing energy is unsafe. American west may like to support India in its quest to become a UNSC member but this process is likely to become an exercise ad infinitum for obvious reasons.