Daily Times

No doubt Prime Minister Imran Khan spoke like a statesman. Whether it was climate change, money laundering by corrupts in the poor countries, Islamophobia or Kashmiri peoples right to self-determination, he articulated his government’s resolve in a clear and forthright manner.

As regards the speech, PM Khan displayed a clear understanding of the climate issues and the dangers that entail with global warming. He was forthright when he told the rich countries, which are responsible for the Greenhouse Gases, to fulfill their responsibilities in containing the rising temperatures. From Pakistan’s perspective, which is largely dependent on glacier waters, melting of those glaciers with faster pace should be a source of concern, especially when forest coverage in the country is just 1.2 percent as against required coverage of 25 percent. The same applies to India as far as melting of glaciers are concerned.

Second, on money laundering he sarcastically reminded the rich countries that while they preach the poor countries of bringing good governance, they looked the other way when corrupts from the poor countries deposited ill-gotten money in the rich countries. This had created a vicious debt cycle which causes perennial poverty in the poor countries. In Pakistan’s case half of countries revenues were spent in debt servicing while the debt grew four times during the past ten years.

Third, on Islamophobia Mr. Khan together with Turkish President Erdogan and Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad have been defending Islam and countering the propaganda unleashed by the vested interest against the Muslim countries in the name of “Islamic terrorism”. Even President Trump used the term “Islamic terrorism” during his speech alongside Prime Minister Modi at Houston last week. Mr. Khan warned the western governments and societies not to push the Muslims to the wall in the name of “Islamic terrorism”. He lamented that in European countries Muslims were being marginalized. He said when Tamil Tigers were indulging in Sri Lanka no one called it as “Hindu Terrorism” but if a Muslim was involved in any terrorist act Islam is being targeted.

Fourth, on Kashmir, Prime Minister reiterated what he had been telling the world all along that Indian intransigence has not only added to the miseries of the Kashmiri people but has pushed both Pakistan and India to the dangers of a nuclear war. It was not a threat of nuclear war by Imran Khan but a warning to the entire world. He also sounded sarcastic to the UN for its inaction which had compounded the miseries of the Kashmiri people. Mr. Khan also made it clear that Hindutva ideology had created a fear psychosis in India which would ultimately push 180 million Muslims to revolt as those Muslims were also watching in desperation the plight of hapless Kashmiris. Undoubtedly, Mr. Khan emerged as a strong and determined voice for the Kashmiri people in the world which at the moment is mesmerized due to 1.3 billion Indian market.

While commentators have been focusing on Kashmir dispute of Mr. Khan’s speech, he in fact made a linkage of the four issues. From the political perspective, climate issue, especially melting of glaciers should be a matter of concern for Pakistan and India to which scant attention is being paid by the two countries. Since there is no dialogue between the two countries, this important issue of melting glaciers is not attended to seriously. In fact, melting glaciers pose an existential thereat to both the countries necessitating serious dialogue and efforts to mitigate the problem.

Islamophobia has become fashionable in the international parlance as no one challenged the issue forcefully so far. Interestingly, the countries use the term “terrorism” so liberally with vested interest despite the fact that there is no agreed definition of “terrorism” in the UN which is discussing this issue for the past three decades

Similarly, when Mr. Khan spoke about the money laundering, he alluded to the real problem faced by the poor countries entangled in debt trap at the hands of corrupt leaders or government officials. Had the problem been limited to the poor countries they could have evolved a way out, but when the matter gets stuck in the rich and powerful countries their cumbersome legal systems mostly favour the corrupts from the poor nations, especially in the name of political asylum or protection from political vendetta. Ironically, when the rich and powerful in poor countries indulge in corruption they don’t leave a clue despite living a heavenly life style. While they do not pay $ 1000 tax in their countries of origin they buy properties worth millions of dollars in London, Ottawa, Paris or New York, and the receiving states do not bother to ask the sources of those mega bucks or inform the state whose citizens have purchased a property abroad.

Similarly, Islamophobia has become fashionable in the international parlance as no one challenged the issue forcefully so far. Interestingly, the countries use the term “terrorism” so liberally with vested interest despite the fact that there is no agreed definition of “terrorism” in the UN which is discussing this issue for the past three decades. In fact, in the garb of “terrorism” legitimate movements for the right to self-determination such as Kashmir are being relegated to the background, especially after the 9/11, so that occupying states continue their occupation without being pressurized from the international community. In this regard, the legal department of the UN has maintained a meaningful silence while Kashmiri people suffer on daily basis and the right to chose their destiny is ignored with impunity.

Mr. Khan has effectively raised the plight of Kashmiris and the impending dangers if tensions continue between the two nuclear powers. Undoubtedly, Kashmir has been internationalized and a momentum generated against the Indian action of revoking Article 370. However, the real battle begins now to keep the momentum alive and take it further to a level where it forces India to negotiate the plight of Kashmiris. This is not going to be an easy task. Appointment of Ambassador Munir Akram is a right decision as he is an astute and tough negotiator, and revered as a doyen of multilateral diplomacy amongst the diplomatic community.

In an environment where India is displaying intransigence ever since it occupied Jammu and Kashmir State, pushing India to a political solution would be a tall order for any government. Nevertheless, the Kashmiris in the occupied land would fight the main battle while Pakistan should continue to offer moral, political or diplomatic support. Material support would be available to the Kashmiris from within the state or through the Indian sources, of course, at a price.

More than that, Kashmir’s case has to be fought at the intellectual level and a comprehensive strategy has to be formulated to bring out quality research work that can convince the international community, especially intellectuals, think tanks and universities about a legitimate movement for the right to self-determination. Experience shows that so far India has gone scot free on this count because it has produced reams of material based to deceit and falsehood. It is time now to expose the Indian façade and tell the real story. Second, an elaborate outreach programme will have to be launched by sending delegations to most of the capitals to sensitize their interlocutors about the issue. If necessary, Prime Minister may undertake visits to capitals to garner support for the Kashmir cause. Third, our think tanks should produce quality research papers and books on the dispute, and organize international seminars and conferences to highlight the Kashmir dispute and try to create an international consensus on a political solution of the Kashmir dispute.

The writer is a former ambassador