 |
|
External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, speaking at the Raisina Dialogue, delivered a sharp critique of the selective application of global rules and norms, particularly concerning issues of sovereignty and territorial integrity. He specifically cited the situation in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), asserting that it represents the longest-standing illegal occupation of territory since World War II. He pointedly accused the international community of treating the aggressor and the victim as equals in the conflict, thereby undermining the principles of justice and international law. Jaishankar's remarks underscored India's long-held position that Pakistan's control over parts of Kashmir constitutes an illegal occupation and that the international community has failed to adequately address this issue. His address served as a forceful articulation of India's concerns regarding the perceived double standards in the application of international law and the need for a more equitable global order.
Jaishankar elaborated on his criticism by recounting the historical context of the J&K issue, highlighting that after India approached the United Nations, what began as a clear act of aggression was subsequently framed as a mere 'dispute.' This re-characterization, he argued, effectively equated the aggressor with the victim, diluting the severity of the violation and failing to hold the invading party accountable. He used strong words to illustrate this perceived injustice. The Minister's statement echoes a sentiment often expressed by Indian diplomats, emphasizing that Pakistan's actions in Kashmir are not merely a matter of bilateral dispute but rather a violation of international law and a threat to regional stability. He implicitly criticized the UN's handling of the Kashmir situation, suggesting that the organization's initial response was insufficient to address the aggression and that subsequent resolutions have not been effectively enforced. This frustration stems from the belief that the international community has not adequately acknowledged or addressed the root cause of the conflict, which India believes to be Pakistan's cross-border terrorism and its continued occupation of parts of Kashmir.
Further expanding on the themes of global order and international cooperation, Jaishankar emphasized the importance of a fair and strong United Nations. He argued that the existing international order, which emerged in the aftermath of World War II, no longer accurately reflects the current geopolitical realities and power dynamics. He suggested a need for a new international order, one that is more inclusive, representative, and responsive to the needs and concerns of all nations. Jaishankar drew a parallel between the need for a new international order and the need for a new domestic order, implying that both within nations and across the globe, there is a pressing need for reforms that promote justice, equality, and opportunity. This reflects a broader sentiment shared by many emerging powers, including India, who believe that the existing international institutions and norms are often biased in favor of developed countries and that a more multipolar world is necessary to ensure fairness and stability.
Jaishankar subtly criticized Pakistan's behavior, without explicitly naming the country. He asserted that not only large countries benefit from the absence of order in the international system, but also smaller nations that are willing to take risks, adopt extreme positions, and challenge the established norms. He explicitly stated that one does not need to be a large country to be a risky one and referenced 'smaller neighbors' who have excelled at this. The minister conveyed a clear message that irresponsible behavior by any country, regardless of its size, can undermine regional and global stability. The implication here is that Pakistan's support for cross-border terrorism and its provocative rhetoric on Kashmir pose a significant threat to regional peace and security. By using indirect language, Jaishankar sought to avoid directly naming Pakistan, perhaps to allow for potential future diplomatic engagement, but the message was undeniably clear.
He also drew a comparison between the international community's treatment of Myanmar and Pakistan, pointing out what he sees as inconsistencies in the application of international norms. He highlighted the strong condemnation that Myanmar has faced for its military rule, while suggesting that Pakistan, which also has a history of military intervention in politics, has not been subjected to the same level of scrutiny. Jaishankar argued that this inconsistency underscores the selective application of international norms, where countries are judged differently based on political considerations rather than on a consistent application of principles. He directly referenced Myanmar saying “We have military rule to our east - in Myanmar. They are a no-no. But we have them even more to the West. You know where? They seem to be okay.” This statement reinforces India's call for a more equitable and transparent international system, where all countries are held to the same standards. He also suggests it is hypocritical to selectively apply pressure based on geopolitical convenience.
Jaishankar concluded by calling for a thorough audit of the world's workings over the past eight decades and emphasized the need for honesty in acknowledging the changes that have occurred in global power dynamics. He argued that the balances and shareholdings in the world have shifted, and that a different conversation and a different order are necessary to reflect these changes. He stressed that the old order was a product of its time, with its virtues often exaggerated due to the differing perspectives of the rule-makers and the rule-takers. He claimed that if you are at the receiving end of rules, you will have issues. He explained how countries are judged differently based on whether they suit an agenda. The minister's closing remarks underscored India's ambition to play a more prominent role in shaping the future of the international order and its belief that the current system is in need of fundamental reform. In essence, Jaishankar's address at the Raisina Dialogue served as a comprehensive articulation of India's foreign policy priorities and its vision for a more equitable and just world order. His remarks on J&K, the UN, and the selective application of international norms highlighted India's concerns regarding the current state of global affairs and its determination to advocate for a more balanced and representative international system. His points can be summarized as the fact that the international system unfairly judged the occupation of J&K, that global rules are selectively applied, that a fairer and stronger UN is needed, and that geopolitical shareholdings have changed and the world order needs to change with it.
Paragraph 2: Analysis of Jaishankar's statement requires consideration of India's broader strategic goals. Firstly, Jaishankar's statement aimed to put pressure on Pakistan regarding the J&K issue. This pressure comes through highlighting its stance of illegal occupation, and garner international support for its position. By characterizing Pakistan as an aggressor, India is attempting to delegitimize its claims to the region and isolate it diplomatically. Furthermore, it serves to counter Pakistan's narrative that the conflict is a result of India's internal policies in the region. Secondly, his remarks were a criticism of Western bias in geopolitical affairs. This is a recurring theme in Indian foreign policy, particularly in recent years. By highlighting the West's preoccupation with the Russia-Ukraine conflict while seemingly overlooking similar situations in the Indo-Pacific, India is asserting its independence and its right to define its own priorities. This resonates with many developing nations who feel that their concerns are often marginalized by the West. It's a strategic move to solidify India's position as a leader of the Global South. Thirdly, India aims for a more influential role in the UN and other international institutions. Jaishankar's call for a fairer and stronger UN reflects India's ambition to become a permanent member of the Security Council and to have a greater say in shaping global policies. This is a long-standing goal of Indian foreign policy and is seen as essential to its rise as a major global power. The call for an audit and new conversation seeks to reflect that international balances need to acknowledge and shift with the change in global economies. Fourthly, India is signaling a willingness to challenge the existing international order. Jaishankar's criticism of the selective application of international norms and his call for a different order suggest that India is prepared to challenge the status quo when it believes its interests are not being adequately addressed. This is not to say that India is seeking to dismantle the existing system, but rather to reform it to better reflect the realities of the 21st century. Fifthly, his comments act as a signal to both internal and external audiences. Internally, it serves to rally support for the government's policies on Kashmir and to demonstrate its commitment to defending India's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Externally, it sends a message to the international community that India is a strong and assertive nation that will not shy away from speaking its mind on important issues. This helps to consolidate India's image as a rising power on the global stage. Finally, a statement such as this is important for the Raisina Dialogue as a whole, an international platform for discussions on global issues and for showcasing India's views and perspectives on these matters to a global audience. This further contributes to India's soft power diplomacy.
Paragraph 3: Several geopolitical factors influenced Jaishankar's decision to make these statements. Increased assertiveness from China in the Indo-Pacific is a major factor, as India seeks to counter China's growing influence and assert its own regional leadership. China's close relationship with Pakistan and its support for Pakistan's position on Kashmir also contribute to India's concerns. In light of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the international focus has shifted away from other regions, including South Asia. India is seeking to ensure that the Kashmir issue does not get overshadowed and that the international community remains aware of its concerns. Strained relations with some Western countries have caused issues relating to India's approach to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. While India has condemned the violence, it has also maintained its strategic autonomy and refused to join Western sanctions against Russia. This has led to some criticism from Western countries, which India sees as hypocritical given their own historical track records and selective application of international norms. General elections being upcoming in India also played a role, since the statement served as an attempt to showcase the government's strong stance on national security issues and to rally support from nationalist voters. This is particularly important in the context of the Kashmir issue, which is a sensitive and politically charged topic in India. Finally, the evolving global landscape of global order and geopolitical dynamics influenced the comments. The rise of multipolarity, the growing influence of emerging powers, and the increasing challenges to the existing international order have prompted India to articulate its vision for a more equitable and just world. Jaishankar's statements are therefore a reflection of these broader trends and India's desire to shape the future of global governance. Conclusively, this is an Indian attempt to reframe the Kashmir narrative internationally and assert its foreign policy.
Source: Longest illegal occupation of territory since WWII in J&K: EAM Jaishankar at Raisina Dialogue