(MENAFN- Khaama Press)

Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif addressed the UN General Assembly on September 26, delivering a speech that was predictable in both content and intent. It was another attempt to recycle old narratives-invoking Kashmir, aligning with the Palestinian cause, and portraying Pakistan as a victim-while overlooking uncomfortable realities about his own country. As has been customary for Pakistani leaders since 1948, Sharif cited the UN Security Council resolutions on Kashmir. Yet, he ignored a critical fact: the very conditions required by those resolutions were undermined by Pakistan itself when its tribal militias invaded Kashmir in 1948, followed by the establishment of militant sanctuaries in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. India's consistent objection has been rooted in this reality-that Pakistan's military-intelligence nexus has fostered terrorism under the guise of supporting self-determination.

Sharif claimed that Kashmiris face oppression under Indian governance, but offered no evidence to substantiate his assertions. The abrogation of Article 370 in 2019 was painted as catastrophic by Islamabad, yet the Valley has remained largely calm since then. The tragedy in Pahalgam, where terrorists attacked civilians, was attributed by India to Pakistan-based groups. Sharif's offer for an international probe rings hollow when juxtaposed against Pakistan's own reluctance to prosecute figures such as Hafiz Saeed and Masood Azhar, both internationally designated terrorists. Equally significant is the fact that the UN's 1267 Sanctions Committee continues to list over two dozen Pakistan-based terrorists, including operatives of Al Qaeda and ISIL. Sharif did not explain what his government is doing to curb their activities or why previous investigations in Pakistan have failed to deliver justice. His silence on these issues undermines his credibility on the global stage.

Sharif himself owes answers from his tenure as Chief Minister of Punjab, when stipends were reportedly provided to some jailed extremists and privileges were extended to those accused of grave crimes. During that period, even Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi, the mastermind of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, was granted questionable concessions while incarcerated. These contradictions erode Pakistan's claim of being committed to fighting terrorism. Even within Kashmir, separatist leaders such as Syed Ali Shah Geelani have documented the brutality of Pakistani tribal raiders during the 1947–48 invasion. In his autobiography Wullar Kinare, Geelani recounts how Kashmiri women were subjected to atrocities by those militias-exposing the duplicity of Pakistan's self-styled role as a liberator. Historically, Kashmiris have resisted Pakistani incursions, whether during the 1965 war or the Kargil conflict in 1999. Today, Kashmiris are integrated across Indian institutions, pursuing careers in government, science, and innovation. Their grievances, when they exist, resemble those faced by citizens elsewhere in India: concerns over governance, not aspirations of secession.

Sharif sought to draw parallels between Kashmir and Palestine, invoking faith-based solidarity. Yet his government offered no practical roadmap for supporting Palestinians, beyond rhetorical expressions of brotherhood. Ironically, Pakistan's own history reveals contradictions: during the“Black September” of 1970, Brigadier Zia

Haq-later Pakistan's military ruler and mentor to the Sharif family-assisted Jordan in its crackdown on Palestinians. Moreover, while Sharif condemned Israeli actions, he overlooked the fact that countries like South Africa-without religious or regional ties-have taken a stronger stand against Israel. In contrast, Pakistan has often limited itself to symbolic gestures. India, on the other hand, has consistently supported a two-state solution and maintains a vibrant diplomatic relationship with Palestine. The Palestinian mission in New Delhi is among the most active worldwide, and its ambassador is widely respected across Indian society.

Beyond foreign policy, Sharif briefly touched on Pakistan's economic woes, climate challenges, and debt burden but offered little substance. Official figures already place external debt at $87.4 billion and domestic debt around $180 billion as of March 2025, yet his address downplayed the magnitude of this crisis. Instead, he chose to highlight unverified claims such as Pakistani jets downing Indian aircraft, further straining credibility. His mention of adopting cryptocurrency as a trade mechanism appeared disconnected from ground realities. Economists have repeatedly warned of the risks, while many Pakistani clerics have declared such practices“haram.” Sharif's invocation of religious references in speeches-reciting verses without context-often appears as a way to sanctify political agendas rather than present serious policy.

Pakistan's post-independence trajectory has often been shaped by opportunistic alignments. Its Cold War partnership with the United States, its role in supporting proxy wars, and its selective silence on Palestinian suffering in earlier decades reflect this pattern. The late bureaucrat and diplomat Qudratullah Shahab, in his autobiography Shahabnama, detailed how external powers, particularly Washington, influenced Pakistan's political course. Sharif's praise of Donald Trump as a“man of peace,” not for halting violence in Gaza but for brokering a ceasefire with India, was emblematic of this opportunism. Meanwhile, the United States has repeatedly vetoed resolutions calling for action against Israel at the UN. Sharif's speech avoided this reality, choosing instead to portray Pakistan as both victim and champion-a narrative that no longer convinces international audiences.

At the UN, Prime Minister Sharif once again leaned on familiar rhetoric rather than substantive policy. His claims on Kashmir lacked evidence, his stance on Palestine was undermined by historical contradictions, and his discussion of Pakistan's economic and security challenges was cursory at best. By avoiding accountability for Pakistan's own record on terrorism and governance, Sharif weakened his case before the world. True leadership demands more than rhetoric. For Pakistan to earn credibility, it must address its internal contradictions-dismantling terror networks, confronting economic mismanagement, and embracing accountability. Until then, no speech at the United Nations, however passionate, can conceal the gap between Pakistan's words and its actions.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Khaama Press.

ShareFacebook Twitter WhatsApp Email Print Telegram

MENAFN03102025000228011069ID1110148096