A fresh draft proposing a 15-year freeze on veto rights in exchange for a permanent membership in the UN Security Council for India, Germany, Japan and Brazil is not a climbdown but a "carefully negotiated" offer, diplomatic sources said here.

"There is no climbdown. This draft has been reached after very careful negotiations. In any case the veto is an anachronistic mechanism and it is rarely used," sources close to the G-4 countries told IANS.

India has steadfastly argued that permanent membership without the veto power is not acceptable but the new draft appears to alter that.

"The new permanent members shall not exercise the right of veto until the question of the extension of the right of veto to new permanent members has been decided upon in the framework of the review," the draft said.

India and the three other countries - together called the G-4 - want the 191-nation UN General Assembly to adopt a framework resolution in June that would add six new permanent members and four non-permanent seats to the Security Council.

The council is currently composed of five permanent members and 10 elected non-permanent members with two-year terms. India and others are proposing the number increased from 15 to 25.

The G-4 is demanding a session of the General Assembly to vote on their proposal, which needs a two-third majority. Under a three-step procedure proposed by G-4, the assembly would vote on the draft as early as this month, then elect new permanent members in mid-July and adopt a resolution to amend the UN Charter.

A total of 130 votes, including the five permanent members - US, China, Russia, Britain and France - are needed to make the changes.

France has agreed to co-sponsor the new draft resolution.

The US, meanwhile, has cold-shouldered Germany's effort to become a permanent member. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who met visiting German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer in Washington D.C., practically reiterated what she had told India's External Affairs Minister K. Natwar Singh.

"We had an extensive discussion of this question and I think we are, first and foremost, agreed on the importance of UN reform. Now, in that context of broad reform, we also think that Security Council reform definitely needs to be examined," Rice said.

"What we are for is to look at the various ideas that are on the table, to have a sober and reflective discussion of that so that we might drive towards the broadest possible consensus on how to move forward on what would be a very fundamental change to this extremely important institution," Rice said.

"And so our plan at this point is to try, through the appropriate channels at the UN, the Presidency of the GA and so forth, to promote that dialogue on what it is that we are trying to achieve in Security Council reform as well as in the broader UN Security Council."

"The only country we have said unequivocally that we support is Japan, having to do with Japan's special role in the UN and support for the UN. But obviously, we are going to look at how to think about UN Security Council expansion within the context of these broader reforms and we've made no determination or decision beyond the one that I've just enunciated," Rice said.