India’s Diplomatic Offensive on Kashmir at Raisina Dialogue
At the prestigious Raisina Dialogue in New Delhi, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar launched a stinging critique of the United Nations’ historical handling of the Kashmir issue. His remarks, delivered with characteristic candor, highlighted what he described as the UN’s failure to address Pakistan‘s aggression and the selective application of international norms. This comes amid growing calls for UN reform to better address contemporary global challenges.
.@MalikAshok: Since the #ColdWar's end, many believed the era of map-making was over. Does February 24th signal its return and a new phase of territorial shifts?#Raisina2025 #RaisinaDialogue2025@orfonline @MEAIndia pic.twitter.com/A2TTzg7Dqp
— Raisina Dialogue (@raisinadialogue) March 18, 2025The Core of the Critique: Kashmir and UN Inaction
1. The “Longest-Standing Illegal Occupation”:
Jaishankar asserted that Pakistan’s occupation of parts of Jammu and Kashmir constitutes “the longest-standing illegal occupation” of territory by another country after World War II. He emphasized that the entire state of Jammu and Kashmir, including Gilgit and Baltistan, legally acceded to India in 1947.
2. Invasion Turned “Dispute”:
He sharply criticized the UN for framing Pakistan’s invasion as a mere “dispute,” thereby equating the aggressor and the victim. Jaishankar pointed out that this approach failed to acknowledge the initial act of aggression by Pakistan and its continued occupation of Indian territory.
3. Questioning Western Powers:
Jaishankar didn’t hold back in questioning the role of Western powers, including the UK, Canada, Belgium, Australia, and the USA, in shaping the UN’s approach to Kashmir. He implied that their influence contributed to the misrepresentation of the issue and the failure to hold Pakistan accountable.
Call for a Reformed UN: Fairness and Consistency
1. “A Strong and Fair UN”:
The External Affairs Minister stressed the need for a “strong and fair” UN that applies global norms uniformly. He argued that a strong global order requires basic consistency of standards, which he believes has been lacking in the UN’s approach to Kashmir.
2. Addressing Selective Policies:
Jaishankar cited other examples of selective policies, pointing out that military coups are condemned in some regions but tolerated in others. He suggested that this inconsistency undermines the credibility of international institutions and their ability to maintain global order.
3. Changing World Order:
Jaishankar emphasized that the balances and shareholdings in the world have changed and there’s a need for a different conversation leading to a different global order.
Pakistan’s Perspective: A Contested Narrative
It’s essential to acknowledge that Pakistan presents a different narrative on the Kashmir issue, viewing it as a dispute over self-determination. Pakistan maintains that the people of Kashmir should have the right to decide their future through a plebiscite, as initially called for by the UN.
- Self-Determination vs. Territorial Integrity: Pakistan argues that the principle of self-determination should take precedence over India’s claim of territorial integrity.
- Allegations of Human Rights Abuses: Pakistan also frequently raises concerns about alleged human rights abuses in Indian-administered Kashmir.
India’s Counter-Arguments: Legality and Terrorism
India firmly rejects Pakistan’s narrative, asserting that:
- Legal Accession: Jammu and Kashmir legally acceded to India in 1947, making it an integral part of the country.
- Cross-Border Terrorism: India accuses Pakistan of supporting cross-border terrorism in Kashmir, aimed at destabilizing the region and undermining Indian sovereignty.
- Internal Matter: India maintains that the Kashmir issue is an internal matter and that any dialogue should focus on addressing terrorism and cross-border infiltration.
The Road Ahead for Kashmir and International Diplomacy
Jaishankar’s remarks at the Raisina Dialogue underscore India’s determination to challenge the historical narrative on Kashmir and push for a more equitable global order. While the path forward remains complex, it’s clear that India will continue to advocate for its position on the international stage, seeking to shape the discourse and influence the UN’s approach to the issue. The situation calls for sustained dialogue, transparency, and adherence to international laws to ensure peace and stability in the region.
FAQ
What is the core of the Kashmir dispute?
The core of the dispute revolves around competing claims of sovereignty over the region, with India asserting legal accession and Pakistan advocating for self-determination.
What is India’s main criticism of the UN’s handling of Kashmir?
India criticizes the UN for failing to condemn Pakistan’s initial invasion and for equating the aggressor and the victim.
What is Pakistan’s perspective on the Kashmir issue?
Pakistan views it as a dispute over self-determination, arguing that the people of Kashmir should have the right to decide their future through a plebiscite.
What are India’s counter-arguments to Pakistan’s claims?
India asserts legal accession, accuses Pakistan of supporting cross-border terrorism, and maintains that the issue is an internal matter.
What does Jaishankar mean by calling for a “reformed” UN?
He means the UN should apply global norms uniformly and address historical injustices, especially where rules and international laws are not being equally applied.
What role have Western powers played in the UN’s approach to Kashmir?
Jaishankar implied that Western powers contributed to the misrepresentation of the issue and the failure to hold Pakistan accountable.
How does India view the principle of self-determination in the context of Kashmir?
India rejects the applicability of self-determination, maintaining that Kashmir is an integral part of the country and that any dialogue should focus on addressing terrorism.
