Statement–Argument — Should India become a permanent member of the UN Security Council? Arguments: I) Yes; India has emerged as a peace-loving nation. II) No; India should first solve domestic problems like poverty and malnutrition. Choose the strong argument(s).

Introduction / Context:
UNSC permanent membership turns on geopolitical weight, contribution to peace, economy, population, and diplomatic consensus. “Peace-loving” alone is insufficient; “solve domestic issues first” is not a criterion in the UNSC admission logic.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Permanent seats are political/diplomatic outcomes.
• Merit narratives require multiple factors and international consent.
• Domestic poverty, while important, is not dispositive for UNSC criteria.

Concept / Approach:
Argument I is too narrow; being peace-loving, without addressing representational balance or capability, is not adequate. Argument II is off-point; UNSC membership does not hinge on eradicating poverty first.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Stronger arguments would cite representation of the Global South, contributions to UN missions, economic scale, and international backing.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Awarding strength to I/II misidentifies UNSC decision variables.

Common Pitfalls:
Using virtue claims or unrelated goals as gatekeepers.

Final Answer:
if neither I nor II is strong.