India’s Harsh Accusations Fail to Overshadow Pakistan’s Call for Peace at UN Security Council

On July 22, 2025, during a high-level United Nations Security Council (UNSC) open debate chaired by Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Ishaq Dar, India launched a striking verbal attack aimed at Pakistan, overshadowing the theme of the meeting, promoting international peace and multilateralism. The Indian envoy, Ambassador Parvathaneni Harish, accused Pakistan of being a “serial borrower from the IMF” and “steeped in fanaticism,” claiming that nations supporting terrorism should “pay a serious cost.” These comments, although not naming Pakistan directly, were widely interpreted as a targeted attack, given the context of escalating tensions between the two countries.

Despite India’s confrontational posture, Pakistan responded with poise and diplomacy. Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, presiding over the session, used his address to emphasize Pakistan’s commitment to international law, peaceful conflict resolution, and the foundational principles of the United Nations. He raised two long-standing and unresolved issues, India’s violations of the Indus Waters Treaty and the dispute over Jammu and Kashmir. Ishaq Dar reiterated that Kashmir remains an internationally recognized conflict that must be resolved in accordance with United Nations Security Council resolutions and the will of the Kashmiri people. He further accused India of using water as a weapon, constructing hydroelectric projects on Pakistan’s western rivers in breach of the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty.

Ishaq Dar’s remarks were widely noted for their calm and legalistic tone. He welcomed the support of UN Secretary-General António Guterres for multilateral dialogue and peaceful resolution of disputes. Stressing Pakistan’s belief in peaceful coexistence, Ishaq Dar made clear that this commitment did not equate to silence over human rights violations. “Peace in South Asia,” he said, “cannot be achieved without justice, and justice begins with Kashmir.” He argued that India’s actions in the region, including the revocation of Article 370 and attempts to alter the Muslim-majority demographic of Jammu and Kashmir, constituted a violation of international norms and the rights of the Kashmiri people.

The contrasting styles of diplomacy on display were noted by several international observers. India’s remarks, particularly the use of terms like “fanaticism” and “habitual borrower,” drew criticism from analysts who viewed the tone as undiplomatic and counterproductive to the spirit of the debate. Many saw the statement as an extension of India’s domestic political narrative rather than a serious contribution to global peace discussions. “This type of name-calling diminishes the credibility of a country aspiring to global leadership,” said one UN-based analyst. In contrast, Pakistan’s measured language and focus on peaceful solutions received affirmations from some member states and observers, who appreciated the shift from reactive rhetoric to constructive dialogue.

India maintains that Jammu and Kashmir is an internal matter and has consistently opposed any international discussion of the dispute. However, multiple UNSC resolutions passed since 1948 affirm that Kashmir is a disputed territory and call for a plebiscite to allow its people to determine their future. Pakistan has long campaigned at global forums to raise awareness about the situation, especially after India’s unilateral constitutional changes on August 5, 2019. Since then, Pakistan has focused its diplomatic efforts on exposing the alleged human rights abuses, communication blackouts, and demographic manipulation in the region.

In addition to raising the Kashmir issue, Pakistan used the UNSC platform to spotlight India’s actions regarding the Indus Waters Treaty. Brokered by the World Bank in 1960, the treaty divides control over the six rivers of the Indus Basin between the two countries. Recent Indian projects on the Chenab and Jhelum rivers, both allocated to Pakistan, have raised alarms in Islamabad. Pakistan has approached the World Bank and international forums, arguing that these constructions violate the treaty and pose existential threats amid worsening climate change and water scarcity. “Water must not be weaponized,” Ishaq Dar emphasized, cautioning that India’s actions could escalate into a broader environmental and humanitarian crisis.

Tuesday’s debate revealed two starkly opposing approaches to diplomacy: Pakistan’s emphasis on multilateral dialogue, international law, and long-term peace contrasted sharply with India’s rhetoric, which appeared more intent on condemnation than engagement. The irony was not lost on observers, the very theme of the session was “Promoting International Peace and Security through Multilateralism,” yet one participant used it as a platform for antagonism.

Ultimately, Pakistan’s presidency of the UNSC has provided it with a rare opportunity to bring long-neglected issues to the global stage. Rather than using the moment to retaliate, Pakistan chose to remind the world of the foundational disputes that continue to threaten South Asian peace. As one observer concluded, “Pakistan did not use this opportunity to attack India, it used it to remind the world that real peace begins with justice. And justice in South Asia must begin with Kashmir.”