They were commenting on Russian President Vladimir Putin's rejection of veto power to new permanent members when the Security Council is enlarged as part of the UN reforms.

They said it would be simplistic to expect the five permanent members of the Security Council -- US, Russia, China, Britain and France - to willingly agree to an expansion of their exclusive club.

Former foreign secretary Shashank felt that the recommendations of the special panel set up by the UN secretary general on reforms in the world body could well be based on consultations with the permanent members.

The panel had recommended a two-tier system of permanent members, with the original five members continuing to exercise the veto power while the new members will be without it.

"Without a veto, I do not think it will be acceptable to the country," External Affairs Minister K. Natwar Singh had told parliament Thursday.

But Putin, responding to a question at a joint press conference with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh following their annual summit here Friday, ruled that out.

"Speaking about the role of veto, we should say that we believe it would be absolutely unacceptable to erode such tools of the UN," Putin said in response to a question, stunning Indians.

"Because, otherwise, the UN organisation will lose its weight and lose its role changing into some discussion club, some new addition of the League of Nations," he said.

India had launched an intensive diplomatic campaign for a permanent seat in the Security Council and it has joined forces with three other co-claimants - Germany, Japan and Brazil.

Rather than campaigning for veto power for new permanent members, India should be arguing for the democratisation of the Security Council, Shashank said.

"The feeling among the developing countries is that the veto power should be done away with altogether and India should be campaigning for that, rather than for having veto," Shashank told IANS.

"The P-5 is an exclusive club and like all such groupings they would not like it to be an open house," said S.K. Lambah, a former ambassador to Moscow.

Lambah concurred with Shashank that New Delhi, instead of seeking veto power, should be campaigning for the democratisation of the Security Council and doing away with veto altogether.

Indian officials declined to comment directly on Putin's statement but said what India was interested was in a "more transparent and representative UN system."

Shashank noted expansion of the Security Council and UN reforms were a complex issue and India's membership is still a long way off.

Lambah said India should not take it for granted that permanent membership with or without veto is "in the pocket",

"The impression that has been created is as if we are getting it whereas it is still in the realm of an uncertain future," he said.

He noted that Russia was the first P-5 country to come out in support of permanent membership for India in the Security Council and perhaps the only country among the permanent members of the Security Council that would go out of the way to support New Delhi - but without veto power.

--Indo-Asian News Service