The right kind of diplomacy

Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi’s address to the UN General Assembly identified the challenges confronting the global community. It drew attention to the threats to peace and the security dynamics that have been aggravated by the impulsive propensity of large powers to use force in resolving inter-state disputes and conflicts.

Abbasi’s speech also criticised the discriminatory approaches adopted by some countries with regard to the objectives of the UN and highlighted the reforms that were needed to make the UN and its Security Council a more effective entity to restore and maintain peace in the world. It was encouraging to note that the prime minister also mentioned the discriminatory stance taken by some countries in South Asia on the nuclear issue.

He also didn’t shy away from emphasising the role that Pakistan has played in ensuring world peace by participating in UN peacekeeping missions. By pinpointing the unresolved conflicts around the globe that needed attention of the world body and the international community, Abbasi reminded the world that Pakistan had done its part in quelling terrorism and fulfilled its international obligations in this regard. Abbasi also rejected the military solution to the conflict in Afghanistan and suggested that an alternative way forward should be devised.

The PM’s focus was on the imperative for the resolution of the Kashmir dispute and the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan which had affected Pakistan the most. On Afghanistan, he strongly opposed the recipe suggested by Trump in his new policy. Abbasi rightly pointed out that the possibility of resolving the conflict in the war-ravaged country through military means had no chance of success. Instead, he maintained that the conflict could only be resolved through dialogue that was supported and sponsored by a multinational regional forum or the revival of the Quadrilateral initiative.

Enumerating the sacrifices rendered by Pakistan in the war on terror, Abbasi categorically asserted that Pakistan would not fight the Afghan war on its soil. He strongly dismissed the notion that there were safe havens for militants on Pakistani soil and pointed out that they were actually on the Afghan territory controlled by the Taliban from where terrorist attacks were conducted in Pakistan. The PM emphasised the collaborative efforts made by Afghanistan, Pakistan and the US to combat terrorist outfits and also outlined the imperative of strict border management to prevent across-the-border movement of the terrorists.

The speech was probably the best exposition of the ground realities in Afghanistan and its fallout in the region and the strongest repudiation of America’s viewpoint on the conflict. Nevertheless, Abbasi expressed Pakistan’s unruffled and unflinching commitment to peace in Afghanistan and rightly pointed out that Pakistan had the biggest stake in peace in Afghanistan. He demonstrated that Pakistan’s credentials as an honest partner in fighting terrorism could not be doubted.

It is my considered view that Pakistan’s diplomatic offensive in the backdrop of the announcement of a new policy by Trump to garner the support of regional countries has been quite successful. The response of the regional countries strongly quashes the claims of those who never tire of asserting the failure of Pakistan’s foreign policy and its isolation in the region.

The section of his speech that focused on Kashmir and its relations with India was candid and justifiably hard-hitting. He exposed the Indian hypocrisy with regard to the non-implementation of the UN resolutions that promised a plebiscite under the UN’s auspices to settle the question of the accession of Kashmir, the military might that India had used to subdue the freedom struggle of the Kashmiris and the brazen violation of human rights in the valley, which were tantamount to war crimes and a violation of the Geneva Convention.

He demanded that an international investigation should be conducted into the Indian crimes and also urged the UN Secretary General to appoint a special envoy on Jammu and Kashmir with a mandate flowing from the UN resolutions. Abbasi also asked the international community to address the issue of state-sponsored terrorism simultaneously by focusing on addressing the root causes of terrorism. His discourse on Kashmir clearly indicated a change in the strategy and the resoluteness with which the issue would be pursued henceforth by not allowing India to get away with its oppression against the people of Kashmir, unnoticed by the world community.

The prime minister’s interaction with the world leaders on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly session has also been quite productive in promoting an understanding of Pakistan’s position among the international community. The chill in the Pak-US relations also seems to have ended with the meeting between the prime minister and the US vice-president. Both sides have expressed their resolve to remain engaged in the dialogue process, with the latter expressing America’s desire to work with Pakistan to ensure peace and security in South Asia.

Abbasi’s brief interaction with Trump during a reception that the latter hosted for the heads of states attending the UN General Assembly’s session was also quite encouraging as it brought two old and estranged allies together.

Diplomacy is about continued engagement to resolve issues between friends as well as enemies. History bears witness to this irrefutable reality that the wars and conflicts have invariably ended through persistent efforts for engagement and dialogue. The challenges faced by the global community regarding peace, security and development can be tackled through the good offices of the UN provided its charter and objectives are aligned with the evolving world environment.

The UN was formed by the triumphant world powers after World War II. While laying down its charter and objectives, they made sure that the world body and its role in promoting peace and development fitted into their worldview and gave them ascendency over other nations in managing international affairs. The veto power given to the five nuclear countries was a weapon through which they have maintained their position of ascendency and defined and managed world affairs in conformity with their strategic, political and commercial interests – often to the detriment of smaller nations. The non-resolution of the Palestine and Kashmir issues are examples of the highhandedness of the large powers and their influence on the global issues.

While reforms within the UN are essential, the ones contemplated by the large powers – that aim to expand the veto-power club, which will add more to the difficulties in resolving the conflicts around the world – will not be effective. Instead, we need changes that establish the principles of justice and sovereign equality. The solution lies in making the General Assembly a forum that finds solution to the challenges pertaining to peace, security and development through a majority vote that should be binding on all the states without any discrimination.

The veto power of the Security Council members should be abolished. It should be assigned the task of ensuring the implementation of the resolutions adopted by the UN General Assembly regarding conflicts and wars within a given timeframe. It might sound rather utopian in the given circumstances. But this is the only way to deal with and judiciously resolve the challenges faced by the world. Nevertheless, there is no harm in raising the issue of reforms as vociferously as possible.

The writer is a freelance contributor.

Email: ashpak10@gmail.com