Why Pak was left isolated at the UNGA Daily O 24 Sep 17
This week witnessed a series of addresses at the UN by heads of state or their representatives. The world followed as leaders from US, Pakistan, India, Afghanistan and Bangladesh shared their concerns. In many cases, the country against whom comments were made, exercised the right to respond and sought to discredit the statement of the previous leader. Trump while openly threatening North Korea and Iran, also gave a direct hint to Pakistan when he mentioned that terror financing and supporting must stop, though Pakistan preferred to ignore his statement.
The Pak prime minister, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, spoke on expected lines, blaming India for his troubles, claiming Afghanistan supported anti-Pak terror groups and sought UN intervention on Kashmir, including resolution of the UN mandate. He also claimed to have handed a dossier on Indian human rights violations in Kashmir to the UN secretary general. His comment that Pak would not be anyone’s scapegoat, referring to Trump’s criticism of it on supporting terror groups, was a sign of mounting international pressure. India in its right to reply, called Pakistan ‘terroristan’, accused Pak of supporting terror groups and openly permitting UN designated terror group leaders, the freedom to operate and launch political parties.
To add further insult to injury was Trump refusing to meet Abbasi on a one-to-one meeting in New York, while he did meet the Afghan president. Abbasi had to be content with meeting the US vice-president Mike Pence. A meeting for a few minutes with Trump during the formal event hosted by him for all delegates may not mean much, but was the only life saving grace for an otherwise beleaguered Pak prime minister. The US has made no mention of this aside meeting.
The Bangladesh prime minister, Sheikh Hasina, criticised Pakistan for the 1971 genocide in the country, which resulted in the deaths of over three million people. She also stated that terrorism and violent extremism had become a major threat to peace, stability and development, in a direct hint to Pakistan. Pak in its right to reply, rejected her statement, claiming it had no takers. She spoke of factual history, while Pak desperately tried to dispel her words, clearly at a loss, as history bears testimony to her true words.
The Afghan President, Ashraf Ghani, stated that Trump’s strategy for Afghanistan would be successful, solely because it seeks to employ a harder line against Pakistan. He went on to add that, “The message to Pakistan to engage and become a responsible stakeholder in the region and in the fight against terrorism has never been clearer. If Pakistan does not take this opportunity, they would pay a high price.” Pakistan did not officially respond the Ghani, but kept insisting that they have themselves been victims of terrorism, a poor justification, which nobody would believe, as world pressure mounts on it.
Sushma Swaraj, Indian foreign minister, in her lucid address spoke of national and international issues, which would be of concern to the UN. She also took on Pak, accusing it of being a global supporter of terror, spending its budget on terror groups, while permitting its people to suffer due to pack of facilities. She reminded Pak about the Shimla accord and the Lahore declaration, which made the UN mandate on Kashmir redundant. Her comment that it was only Pak, which was compelled to respond to every speaker from the subcontinent, proved that its terror support policies were harming the region. Her statement was well received by the UN.
Pak responded in its characteristic style, taking off from where their Prime Minister left, accusing India of being the terror exporter of the region. Their spokesperson, Maleeha Lodhi, even showed a picture of a Palestine girl, claiming it to be Kashmir. Its justification included attacking the RSS and the BJP, however left none in doubt that it was done, because it was mandatory, as there were no comments on developmental issues. Sushma was right when she stated that Pak has to respond to every country of the subcontinent.
Pak’s belief that China would provide it with unstinted support in every action it takes was misplaced. The Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson, when questioned on the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) comments on requesting the UN to implement the Kashmir resolution stated that the Chinese position is clear cut. Kashmir is a left-over issue from history and can only be resolved through mutual dialogue and enhanced communication between the two countries, again supporting Indian stand of bilateral discussions.
Nations of the subcontinent have all reviled Pak for its policies, support to terror groups and making the subcontinent insecure. A further setback was when the foreign ministers of SAARC met, they refused to accept Pak hosting the SAARC summit under its chairmanship in the near future, solely because it supports terror. SAARC as an entity has almost outlived its utility. India’s support to BIMSTEC, which comprises of almost complete SAARC less Pak, and one to one agreements with most nations involving financial support and assistance in development, has isolated Pak from the subcontinent.
If even now, strategic leaders from both its military and polity, have failed to grasp the international isolation which Pak is slowly moving into, it may be late before they are able to redirect their path. Their banking on unstinted support from Russia and China may be asking for too much as China’s comments on Kashmir and the BRICS official statement proved. Chinese pressure would begin to mount as it fears undue military action by the US could place its investments in the CPEC in jeopardy.
To further add to its misery were protests, both in Geneva and New York by Baluch separatists seeking freedom from Pak repression. It brought into international glare, what Pak had been keeping under wraps all these years, brutal suppression of the Baluch people. Pak as expected protested to the Swiss authorities, however the damage has been done. Its brutality has been exposed.
Any nation, facing such hostility from its own neighbours, members of its closest regional grouping and major powers, would be an indicator of its international and regional standing. An open refusal to accept any SAARC meeting was a slap on the face, which Pak still aims to downplay. Its own deep state is pulling the nation down, into a morass, from which it may not emerge easily, while the polity looks on helplessly. A puppet regime, under the deep state can only watch helplessly as the nation faces international isolation.
For the deep state which continues in its belief of using terror groups as an instrument of state policy, the doors are slowly closing. Pressure is mounting from all directions, India, China, Russia and the US. It is time Pak introspects, plans a change in its policies and seeks to become a respected member of the international community. If it delays this decision, it could soon be heading to be deemed a terrorist state. For a nation steeped in terror activities, future decisions are difficult, but it has created this morass itself and it has no one else to blame, but its own deep state.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army