India and Pakistan and global support The Excelsior 03 Jun 2025
Article Read Time
India and Pakistan and global support The Excelsior 03 Jun 2025
Post Operation Sindoor ceasefire, the Indian government decided to inform the world of the dastardly killing of innocent tourists in Pahalgam, resulting in India launching a military operation against Pakistan’s terrorist camps. It also intended to convey New Delhi’s new normal, policy of zero tolerance to terrorism, Pakistan’s continued strategy of supporting terrorism as also defending its political decision of holding the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) in abeyance.
The government therefore nominated a total of 51 Members of Parliament (MPs), cutting across party lines, and former ambassadors, conveying national unity in purpose. These MPs were formed into seven teams, covering 33 countries, spread across all continents.
The nations selected included all 15 current members of the UNSC, five countries which would become non-permanent members in the near future, five influential nations and those who have a strong voice across the world. The selection of countries was done in a manner aimed at offsetting Pakistan’s advantage of being a non-permanent member of the UNSC till end December 2026. It could use this position to push its own anti-India narrative.
Islamabad had attempted to take advantage of its position by demanding a closed-door session of the UNSC, post Pahalgam, hoping to garner pressure on India, which failed, due to most permanent members backing India. Hence, by engaging those who are in the UNSC as also those entering the body shortly, this would be prevented. Inputs indicate that all delegations have been well received, their interactions held at appropriate levels and more importantly, they have interacted with their domestic media, thereby conveying India’s viewpoint to the local public.
Post the Pahalgam attack, over 60 countries offered condolences to the Indian government, of which eight offered complete support in India’s fight against terrorism. Some African and Asian nations, including Myanmar, Malaysia and Cambodia refrained from making any statement. Interestingly, Azerbaijan, a close ally of Pakistan also offered condolences.
Initially there were no calls for dialogue with Pakistan. Subsequently, the US and China made this suggestion. However, none commented on India’s decision to hold the IWT in abeyance.
Almost no country named or blamed Pakistan directly, despite India insisting. This implied that India’s ability to present Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism had some shortcomings over the years. It was possibly to also give this a boost that the delegation decision was undertaken and its leaders so selected.
To counter India’s global outreach, Pakistan’s PM, Shehbaz Sharief, accompanied by a high-powered delegation, including newly appointed Field Marshal Asim Munir embarked on a four-nation tour, as thanksgiving. The countries were Turkey, Iran, Azerbaijan and Tajikistan. Pakistan had support from Turkey, Azerbaijan and China during Operation Sindoor. Interestingly, India has an air force base at Farkhor in Tajikistan, which it operates alongside Tajikistan forces, an anathema to Pakistan.
In Ankara, Turkey, the two leaders discussed military cooperation and ‘fight against terrorism.’ This, while Turkey backs Hamas and Pakistan backs terrorist groups operating against India. Two terrorist backing nations discussing fighting terrorism is definitely a sign of terrorist unity. There is no global terrorist incident without some link to Pakistan.
Shehbaz officially thanked Turkey for support in its ‘so-claimed’ victory. Was the visit also aimed at discussing failure of Turkish military products as also offering regret for loss of two Turkish UAV pilots’ lives is an added possibility.
India has already begun hitting back at Turkey for supporting Pakistan militarily. A report in The Week quotes Turkish media mentioning a day after Shehbaz visited Ankara, ‘Pakistan’s resort to Turkish-made weapons and UAVs has led India to support Greece, Türkiye’s geopolitical rival in the region.’ It adds that India has planned to invest in Greece’s defence industries and ports. The visit of the Indian delegation to Greece reaffirmed the same.
Turkish media also added, ‘The Turkish tourism sector has also been affected.’ There are mass Indian destination wedding cancelations. Turkish media has termed it as ‘India’s revenge moves.’ This is in addition to India cancelling contracts with Turkish companies in airports, airlines and metro projects across the country.
Shehbaz also visited Tehran and attempted to raise India in talks. As per Iranian media, their President, Masoud Pezeshkian, only voiced Iran’s support for a durable ceasefire and dialogue to end the conflict. The same happened in Tajikistan.
Shehbaz had limited option but to offer talks with India, knowing it would be ignored. He mentioned, ‘We are ready to talk, for the sake of peace on water issues with our neighbour. We are ready to talk to promote trade and also, counter-terrorism. We wanted peace, we want peace and we will work for peace in the region.’ There has been no response from New Delhi.
In Azerbaijan, Shehbaz Sharief conveyed his gratitude to the President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, for his diplomatic support. There was no military support from Azerbaijan. Addressing the celebrations of Azerbaijan’s Independence Day, Shehbaz once again claimed victory and offered talks with India.
All this while Baku has attempted to woo the Indian tourists by increasing direct flights from different parts of India. Meanwhile, Indian travel companies have reported mass cancelations of bookings for Azerbaijan. Baku also has its grudge with India. Armenia, its sworn enemy, is amongst the largest procurer of India’s defence products, which will only increase with the success of Operation Sindoor.
Pakistan, copying India, has also nominated a delegation, comprising of ex-foreign ministers to cover US, UK and Brussels (where both NATO and EU have their headquarters). The delegation will attempt to defend their stance of not supporting terrorist groups while projecting Indian involvement in the rising freedom struggle in Baluchistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. They will face questions on Indian accusations; proof presented by India and will have a difficult time justifying their actions. There is no way they can project victory in the recent conflict.
The approach of the two nations in projecting their viewpoints to gain global support is different. While India will insist Kashmir is non-negotiable, Pakistan will demand that it must be resolved through UNSC resolutions as it remains a flashpoint for future conflicts.
What emerged from Shehbaz’s offer for bilateral talks is that the Shimla agreement remains valid and nuclear threats have no meaning. At the end, nations will listen, while the dispute between India and Pakistan will continue to linger only to worsen when the next incident takes place.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army