Deconstructing the speech
A country cannot become a major power in the region by praising the world leaders or securing invites for meetings in the exalted places, it needs inner resilience to become one. After hearing Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s speech at United Nations General Assembly on Friday, it led me to conclude that the country has learnt no lessons from what happened to it in the summer of 2025 when its terror infrastructure and terror-training centres were demolished in high-intensity 87hour war with India.
Shehbaz Sharif had a grand opportunity to tell the world that how it would roll back its terror machinery and seek genuine friendly ties with India. He obviously missed that, and deliberately so. It is because he wanted to keep Pakistan army happy. He knows the real power in his country lies with the army, and it has become obligatory for him to praise army Chief Asim Munir. At his UNGA address, he did not forget to praise rather show his obsequiousness to the Army chief.
He had built his narrative on four things: one, India was an “aggressor” for what it did to Pakistan from May 7 to 10. Second, suspension of river-water sharing arrangement under the Indus Waters Treaty was an act of war. Third, that it was the US President who brought about cessation of the brief war. Four, still Pakistan wants to engage with India on all issues in a comprehensive dialogue on all issues, including Kashmir.
Though there is no need to point out the contradictions in his speech, yet because he has repeated the same hackneyed theories, therefore, it becomes necessary to set the record straight. For a moment even if his word is accepted that India launched an aggression against Pakistan, the question is why?
India had made it very clear on April 23rd – a day after the killing of 26 civilians in Baisaran meadow in Pahalgam - that it will avenge the terror attack, for the act of terror had hit hard at the economy of the Valley, pierced soul of India, and attempted to trigger communal riots in the country. India executed its plans in the early hours of May 7th, under Operation Sindoor, now a byword in the world dictionary as a decisive counter-terrorism action against terrorists, their backers, financiers and patrons.
Pakistan cannot say that it was not given an opportunity or time to take action against the terror machines operating on its soil, and roll back cross-border terrorism with credible evidence. On April 23rd, while announcing the suspensions of the Indus Waters Treaty, India had told Pakistan to cease its cross-border terrorism misadventures. India had already established the new norm that it would punish terrorists, their bases no matter where they existed or operated from. The examples were there – surgical strikes in September 2016, and aerial strikes in February 2019 after Pakistan sponsored attacks on Uri garrison and Pulwama respectively. So, how could it conclude that India would not retaliate after all what happened in Pahalgam .
The IWT suspension was a given when Pakistan continued with its terror campaign against India and its citizens. I cannot resist asking a question? Pakistan, ever since the IWT was suspended, has been claiming that it is an international treaty and India cannot scrap or suspend it unilaterally, and added to that, there is no provision in the treaty like that. Technically, even if it is correct, is it necessary that you shed the Indian blood and continue to cite technical gray areas?
Though the water is an issue in this whole debate and the suspension of the treaty is an “act of war”, then what is an act of terror? Where does Pakistan place acts of terror, killing and wounding people and striking at the heart of the economy and stability of the masses in Kashmir? Pakistan committed the original sin. It cannot hide it through vitriol and by playing a victim card.
By reinforcing a narrative that the US President brokered ceasefire on Many 10th and by profusely praising him, Shehbaz Sharif is sidestepping the reality that it were Pakistan army that had requested for ceasefire which India granted. This false narrative may help him and Asim Munir in misleading the public in the country, but the world is aware of the reality. Hypothetically, if that were true, then India would have put a full stop on Operation Sindoor. India did not. The operation is alive, and it is only on a pause mode. Green button can be pressed at any time.
Pakistan PM wanted a “composite, comprehensive and result-oriented dialogue with India on all issues, including Jammu and Kashmir and water resources.” It is important to seek resolution of the problems through dialogue and diplomacy. But, has Pakistan changed anything to qualify for calling for a dialogue with India.
India has made it very clear that there can be no dialogue unless the terror machinery is not halted completely. Pakistan has not done anything to do so; instead it continues to send armed infiltrators from its launch pads to the Indian side of Jammu and Kashmir. The infiltrators coming to the Indian side are part of Pakistan’s designs to keep things disturbed in Jammu and Kashmir. It may not be able to stage anything like Pahalgam or Pulwama, but the continued infiltration of terrorists from across the border is threat to national security.
It would be better to go back to drawing board and relook and re-read joint Indo-Pak statement issued in Islamabad on January 6, 2004. The key line in that statement reads: “Prime Minister Vajpayee said that in order to take forward and sustain the dialogue process, violence, hostility and terrorism must be prevented. President Musharraf reassured Prime Minister Vajpayee that he will not permit any territory under Pakistan’s control to be used to support terrorism in any manner.”
India doesn’t need assurances only, now it wants to see real and verifiable action against terrorism, because after 2004 Pakistan has launched series of terror attacks, most prominent among them being 26/11 Mumbai terror onslaught, January 2016 Pathankot airbase, Uri, Pulwama and Pahalgam and many more. Shehbaz Sharif needs to get Asim Munir to do so.
Here again, there is a question: Shehbaz Sharif wants dialogue with India and at the same time wants UN resolutions to resolve what he calls “ Kashmir dispute”, how can it in any case be bilateral? Pakistan would do a favour to itself by reading the recent history. Certain recent events have changed the whole concept; Delhi of today has no patience for any ifs and buts on Kashmir. Pakistan must understand this.
