The Hazards of Going Global on India–Pakistan Issues
Relevance: International Relations | Terrorism | Bilateral Diplomacy | UNSC
Context
Operation Sindoor has reopened discussions on the ineffectiveness of both bilateral and multilateral diplomacy in managing India–Pakistan tensions, especially in the context of cross-border terrorism and the Kashmir issue.
Key Issues
- Outdated Global Frameworks
- The UN’s Cold War-era frameworks (e.g., self-determination, plebiscite) no longer align with current realities.
- India’s original 1948 UN referral on Pakistan’s aggression was treated under Article VI (pacific settlement) instead of Chapter VII (aggression), diluting India’s legal position.
- Simla Agreement vs. Global Mediation
- Simla Agreement (1972): India-Pakistan pact advocating bilateral resolution and LoC respect.
- Pakistan seeks internationalisation; India insists on bilateralism—leading to global diplomatic inertia.
- Failure to Define Terrorism at UN
- India’s Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism (CCIT) has stalled for over 30 years.
- Objections revolve around definitional grey zones (e.g., “freedom fighters” vs “terrorists”).
- Result: UN counter-terror bodies (e.g., CTC) remain symbolic, with no binding legal mandate.
- Limitations of UNSC Action
- Article 51 (self-defence) invoked by India for surgical strikes, but lacks global legal clarity for terror responses.
- UN focus on human rights and rule of law undermines the military realities of asymmetric threats.
Strategic Implications
- India-Pakistan hyphenation: Both are treated as equal parties, even when India is the victim of terror.
- Kashmir is labeled a “nuclear flashpoint” post-1998 tests, complicating India’s international messaging.
- India adheres to No First Use (NFU); Pakistan maintains ambiguity and escalation threats.
India’s Evolving Strategy
- Talks only on terrorism and PoK; rejects international mediation.
- UN has not recognized India’s doctrine that terror attacks constitute acts of war.
- Post-Operation Sindoor, international diplomacy is viewed as ineffective due to legacy baggage and narrative dominance by Pakistan.
- India must prioritise decisive, proportional military responses, not rely solely on global consensus.
Mains Questions
- Q: Why has the international community failed to address the core concerns of India regarding cross-border terrorism?
- Q: Discuss the limitations of multilateral diplomacy in resolving India–Pakistan disputes.
