The hazards of going global on India-Pakistan issues
Operation Sindoor and subsequent events thereafter have, once again, highlighted the futility of bilateral and multilateral diplomacy in resolving differences between India and Pakistan. An entangled web of frozen ideas has enveloped the situation making it impossible to separate the different strands. The developments following the Second World War and the evolution of the Cold War have also impacted heavily on the situation. Thus, any initiative, however sincere and logical it may be, will be hampered by the existing literature formulated by the United Nations and other international bodies, not to speak of Pakistan's stubborn position that Kashmir is the core issue. It is for this reason that Pakistan finds the smokescreen of resolutions and concepts relating to Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), terrorism, self-determination, non-proliferation and peaceful settlement of disputes spread over the last 70 years or more.
For instance, in the briefing given to India's seven teams of special envoys sent out to various countries after Operation Sindoor, the very first point they were asked to assert was that J&K is an integral part of India. Most countries, particularly those which do not follow developments closely, would look up the literature and the UN maps and find that there is an inscription on UN maps depicting the India-Pakistan border, particularly in the region of J&K. The inscription says, 'Dotted line represents approximately the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir agreed upon by India and Pakistan. The final status of Jammu and Kashmir has not yet been agreed upon by the parties.' Sometimes, there is a more general disclaimer regarding boundaries on the map such as: 'the boundaries and names shown and the designations used on this map do not imply official endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.' Therefore, most countries would not make a commitment on the question of borders. At best, they would tell us that a bilateral solution, as envisaged in the Simla Agreement, would be desirable.
India's stand on terror
Equally complex is India's position on terrorism. More than 30 years ago, India introduced in the UN General Assembly, a draft for a Comprehensive Convention against Terrorism, which was dismissed as an anti-Pakistan move in which others were not interested. A one man department against terrorism in Vienna was nothing more than a research post. It did not even define terrorism because of the dictum that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. The support that India had given to fighters in Africa and Sri Lanka was pointed out as an example of the difficulty in defining terrorism. The only thing that the UN could do was to keep the definition of terrorism as vague as possible.
The shocking events of 9/11 (2001) brought terrorism, which was considered to be confined to West Asia and South Asia, centre stage in the United States and Europe and it appeared that decisive action would be taken to deal with the menace globally. But after hectic activity in the political and legal bodies of the UN to finalise binding laws, the focus shifted to U.S. military action in Afghanistan, which resulted in the ouster of the Taliban government. The war in Afghanistan was meant to root out terrorism, but after decades of conflict, the U.S. fled the country, leaving the Taliban in power.
The UN's approach
The UN Security Council has established several mechanisms to combat international terrorism, that are primarily centred around the various resolutions. Under these all member-states are obliged to take various economic and security measures to prevent the commission of terrorist acts. The Counter-Terrorism Committee of the Security Council was authorised to monitor the implementation of the overall plan. As for action against terrorists, this can be covered under Article 51 of the UN Charter, which recognises the inherent right of self defence if an armed attack occurs against a member-state. Though the application of this right in the case of terrorist attacks is complicated, it can provide a basis for a state to take action against terrorist groups that have attacked it. India's position about surgical strikes on terrorist infrastructure will be judged as to whether such action is proportionate and in accordance with international humanitarian law.
The Security Council's approach to counter-terrorism recognises that it requires a comprehensive 'whole-of-society' approach that respects human rights and the rule of law. It emphasises international cooperation, the importance of addressing the conditions conducive to terrorism, and the need to prevent and counter violent extremism. In these circumstances, it will be hard for India to get a clear endorsement of its actions against terrorism. India does bring up terrorist attacks to the Security Council, but the Counter Terrorism Committee has not taken a clear position on the right of nations to treat a terrorist attack as an act of war — the new doctrine advanced by India.
The ceasefire along the Line of Control (LoC) and India's restraint in crossing the LoC even in conflict situations are the other factors which are likely to come into play in any discussion in the Security Council or other international fora on India's strategic strikes. India's special envoys may have faced these questions in discussions even with friendly countries.
The issue of hyphenation
When India took the issue of Pakistan's invasion of Kashmir to the UN, it was a pure case of aggression which should have been considered under Chapter VII of the Charter. But as it happened , the issue was discussed under Article VI on Pacific Settlement of Disputes. Consequently, several extraneous ideas were incorporated in the agenda. leading to western countries hyphenating India and Pakistan on every issue. When Pakistan and India acquired nuclear weapons, Kashmir was considered a nuclear hot spot. India has a non-first use doctrine, while Pakistan threatens to multiply its conventional military capability.
India has an established position that any bilateral discussion would only be on terrorism and the status of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. Therefore, diplomacy at the bilateral level or multilateral level is unlikely to be effective. Pakistan will continue to internationalise the Kashmir issue, but India should refrain from seeking international intervention or support. The reports of the special envoys will indicate, if anything, that such efforts are futile, given the history of the evolution of 'the India-Pakistan question' in the Security Council.
India has nothing to gain by raising its concerns internationally as its narrative has got entangled in several controversial concepts in the UN. India's only option is to ensure its security by appropriate military action as long as Pakistan continues its policy of inflicting a thousand cuts on India to gain Indian territory.
T.P. Sreenivasan is a former Ambassador of India, who has specialised in multilateral diplomacy. He is the only Indian diplomat who has served at the Ambassadorial level at the United Nations in New York, Vienna and Nairobi and headed the UN Division in Ministry of External Affairs
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
29 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Delhi must underline for Washington the grave dangers of Asim Munir's vision of Pakistan
In 2018, in his first term, US President Donald Trump had spelt out, in his typically blunt style, the sense that Rawalpindi and Islamabad had taken advantage of Washington: 'The United States has foolishly given Pakistan more than 33 billion dollars in aid over the last 15 years, and they have given us nothing but lies & deceit, thinking of our leaders as fools… they give safe haven to terrorists'. This week, he said: 'I love Pakistan'. It would be simplistic to view the unprecedented lunch meeting at the White House between Trump and General Asim Munir — the first time a military leader who is not head of state in Pakistan has been accorded the honour — as a major u-turn. Indeed, India-US ties have been steadily deepening over the last three decades, based on a convergence of economic and strategic interests and shared values, even as the US-Pakistan relationship has grown more volatile. That said, the current moment in international relations is one of flux and Delhi must tread carefully. The Pahalgam attack underscored the grave national security threat that Pakistan-sponsored terrorism continues to present for India. With Operation Sindoor, Delhi has made it clear to both Rawalpindi and the world that it will pierce the shield of 'proxies' and not give in to Pakistan's nuclear blackmail. India has raised the costs of terror in order to ensure that such attacks on its soil are not carried out with impunity. Communicating the new normal it has etched with Pakistan after Pahalgam to its friends abroad is Delhi's challenge. To be sure, Delhi cannot control who Trump chooses to engage, and for what reasons. Pakistan's geography — it shares a 900-km border with Iran — may make it an attractive tactical partner for the US in the current Israel-Iran war. There is speculation that Pakistan's rolling out the red carpet for the privately-owned US cryptocurrency firm, World Liberty Financial (WLF), may have helped ingratiate Munir to the White House — Donald Trump Jr has close ties with WLF. A White House spokesperson has claimed that Munir has proposed Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize for his self-proclaimed role — firmly denied by India — in the post Op Sindoor cessation of hostilities. For India, though, the question is less why the Munir-Trump meeting, and more about how to ensure that the red lines it has laid down are respected, including by the US. Just a fortnight before terrorists killed 26 people in Pahalgam after confirming their religion, Munir had reiterated some of the nastiest tropes of the two-nation theory. He called Kashmir Pakistan's 'jugular vein', and reduced the complex and layered identities of the Subcontinent's people to their religion. It is now for Delhi — diplomatically, through the appropriate channels — to remind Washington that Pakistan's Field Marshal is a fundamentalist with an army at his disposal. Delhi has done well so far in standing its ground and making it clear that it will not compromise on its national interest: Even if belatedly, it issued a clear denial of President Trump's claims about mediating the ceasefire. Now, it must underline for Washington the danger that Munir's vision of Pakistan poses for stability in the region and for global order — and why Delhi has drawn some hard red lines.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Pakistan's 'Puff Peace'! Islamabad Officially Nominates Trump For Nobel
Last Updated: Pakistan credits the US President's intervention with averting a potentially catastrophic conflict with India. New Delhi has repeatedly denied any US role in the de-escalation The government of Pakistan has officially nominated US President Donald Trump for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize, recognising his 'decisive diplomatic engagement and leadership" during the 2025 India-Pakistan crisis. Islamabad credits Trump's intervention with averting a potentially catastrophic conflict between the two nuclear-armed nations. This recommendation was released on Friday, June 20, 2025, following a period of intense cross-border hostilities between India and Pakistan in May 2025. According to Pakistan's statement, the crisis began with what it described as 'unprovoked and unlawful" Indian aggression that violated Pakistani sovereignty and led to civilian casualties. In response, Pakistan launched 'Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos", which was characterised as a measured military action to re-establish deterrence. The statement claims that as tensions escalated, it was President Trump's back-channel diplomacy and strategic foresight that facilitated a ceasefire agreement on May 10, preventing a broader war. Pakistan's government praised Trump's efforts as a watershed moment for regional peace, underscoring his role as a genuine peacemaker. The nomination follows a rare meeting between US President Donald Trump and Pakistan's army chief, General Asim Munir, at the White House on Wednesday, June 18. White House spokesperson Anna Kelly confirmed that the President hosted Munir following the latter's advocacy for Trump's Nobel nomination, crediting him with averting a nuclear confrontation. During this meeting, Trump claimed credit for stopping the war between India and Pakistan, stating, 'They were going at it; they are both nuclear countries. I got it stopped." India has consistently denied any US role in de-escalating the tensions. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in a phone call with President Trump on Tuesday, June 17, clarified that the ceasefire was achieved through direct communication channels between the Indian and Pakistani militaries, without any external mediation. Foreign secretary Vikram Misri reiterated India's stance, emphasising that New Delhi has never accepted and will never accept third-party mediation in its relations with Pakistan. The crisis was triggered by the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir, to which India responded with retaliatory strikes on terror establishments in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir as part of 'Operation Sindoor".
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
Indian defence delegation meets French officials in Paris; Rafale marine programme formally launched
ANI Indian defence delegation meets French officials in Paris; Rafale marine programme formally launched An Indian defence delegation led by Joint Secretary and Acquisition Manager (Maritime Systems) Dinesh Kumar met with French defence officials at the Paris Air Show on Thursday. The French side was headed by Lt Gen Gael Diaz De Tuesta, Director General of Armament. According to French defence officials, the meeting between the two sides also marked the formal launch of the Rafale marine programme, which already equips the Indian Air Force. Meanwhile, Chief of Naval Staff Admiral Dinesh Kumar Tripathi on Thursday attended the 12th Key Leader Engagement, which was hosted virtually by US Navy's Pacific fleet Admiral Stephen T. Koehler. Admiral Tripathi highlighted his vision on "achieving maritime security in the Indo-Pacific through innovation and technology" in the Key Leader Engagement on Wednesday, which involved 19 nations. The Indian Navy, in a post on X, said, "Adm Dinesh K Tripathi, CNS, attended the 12th Key Leader Engagement hosted virtually by Adm Stephen T Koehler, @USPacificFleet, on Jun 25, involving 19 nations. CNS highlighted his vision on 'Achieving Maritime Security in the Indo-Pacific Through Innovation and Technology."Earlier, on June 13, Admiral Tripathi said that Operation Sindoor is on a pause, but it is an operation in progress. Speaking to ANI, Navy Chief Admiral Dinesh Kumar Tripathi said, "Operation Sindoor is under pause; it is still underway. As a naval chief, I will reserve my comments on this. It's an operation in progress." He also commented on evolving warfare technology, particularly non-contact warfare and counter-drone systems, underscoring their growing importance. On counter-drone systems, he said that non-contact warfare will stay, and this area of weapons and equipment was not catered to 10-12 years ago. "It is undeniable that non-contact warfare is going to stay. In it, drones and loitering munitions, and therefore defence against them in terms of counter-drone systems, there is a whole series of weapons and equipment that one had probably not catered for 10-12 years ago," he said on Thursday. Reinforcing the focus on indigenous defence capabilities, Admiral Dinesh Kumar Tripathi, accompanied by Chairman of Solar Industries India Limited, Satyanarayan Nuwal, reviewed the manufacturing processes of various defence products at the firm's headquarters in Nagpur. Speaking to ANI, the Navy Chief lauded the products and progress made by Solar Industries India Ltd. He added that there needs to be synergy between the public and private sectors, as the latter is new in defence production."It's really eye-opening to see what progress has been made by Solar (Solar Group) in the last 14-15 years. As far as the synergy between the public and private sectors in the defence ecosystem is concerned, it is a must because some public sector companies have been working in this field for many decades, and private companies are relatively new. So there is a need for them to talk to each other and learn from each other," Admiral Tripathi told of Solar Industries India Ltd, Satyanarayan Nuwal, said that they showed the Navy Chief their drones and Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) and also showed the Navy officials their Counter-Unmanned Aerial System, Bhargavastra. Talking to ANI, Satyanarayan Nuwal said, "Today, we mainly showed our facility with drones and Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS). We showed the composite manufacturing unit of UAS. We also showed Bhargavastra (Counter-Unmanned Aerial System) to them... This counter-drone system is a significant thing... Considering present situations, we learnt that the biggest need is for long-range missiles. We have already presented a proposal in this regard..." (ANI)
