No the permanent seats were set by the original charter and there is no mechanism for elevating new members.
You could see India and Britain as Mainland China and Taiwan, where the 1940s separation was followed by the previous regime continuing ruling the smaller entity and having a permanent seat in the UNSC, until the mainland is powerful enough to motivate a switch between them.
But we could angle the issue to make the British seat be for the British empire, and India is the largest remnant of that entity, especially if the UK is split in the near future. ( Sorry, forgot that this is post-1900, not chat or future history.)That would absolutely not fly. Taiwan was and is ruled by the Republic of China, which maintains its claims to the Chinese mainland in opposition to the PRC's claim. There was never any dispute that the seat belonged to the Chinese government, just which you believed was the rightful government. For the other SC members to allow that, you would need a UN that's either broken down so completely or so dominated by one member that it's more or less irrelevant.
Unlikely I'd say. Aside from the details of how it would be carried out as has already been mentioned China could well veto them simply because they don't want the competition. If they're both vying for second place in global affairs the permanent seat gives China a large advantage.Say India gets to China level of development by modern time. Could the country gain a permanent seat on the UN Security Council?
But we could angle the issue to make the British seat be for the British empire, and India is the largest remnant of that entity, especially if the UK is split in the near future. ( Sorry, forgot that this is post-1900, not chat or future history.)
False, right now the French official policy is to support a reform. So they support India (and Germany, Brazil and Japan) into getting a permanent seatIt might be possible for India to get support from China, but then at least France would probably still oppose it (maybe not too openly) since increasing the number of permanent members would inevitably dilute French influence on the Security Council.
My thoughts are there should be 3 tier of permanent members
1st tier usa russia and china
2nd tier france Germany Britain and japan
3rd tier brazil india Indonesia south Africa sweeden Nigeria Australia
Only 1 +2 +3 votes should count as a VETO
British Commonwealth should be abolished