Pakistan’s image in the international community is rather negative, over the years and even after decades this has not much improved. We have never paid much attention to our image-building, whatever done was done a clumsy way. Pakistan’s negative image was further disparaged by the very successful and never relaxing anti-Pakistan propaganda by India at all international forums and in major western capitals. Indian cultural centres in all main western cities not only promote Indian culture and draw the public in Berlin, Paris and elsewhere, etc with colourful dancing sessions, the moderators would in-between sell the Indian version of South Asian conflicts while smearing Pakistan. The Cultural Attaché in all Pakistani embassies mostly remains inactive, not in command of the local language they do not care to, or be able to correct the outright wrong notions about Pakistan in local publications. One very typical example about the Pakistani failure to carry along international opinion was Pakistan’s handling of the East Pakistan crisis in 1971. Throwing out international journalists so they could not report about the crisis ensured they became susceptible to the Indian propaganda. Keeping the truth about East Pakistan from West Pakistanis came under the same brush: East Pakistan was lost not only militarily and politically but on the propaganda side as well. Many other examples for failing to convincingly project Pakistan’s point of view in the international arena exist. Apart from the Quaid the early leaders of Pakistan were inexperienced and did not know the world well. Given their profession our military rulers have limitations with openness and truth and taking the public into confidence. A liar of the highest order Z.A. Bhutto was interested in his own promotion without caring much for Pakistan. The inside story of his performance in the UN in December 1971 is characteristic for his failure to understand how the international community works when he could not convince his public in the UN after he waved away all the advice of a seasoned diplomat like Agha Shahi. In Imran Khan Pakistan has for the first time a Prime Minister who has an entirely different background than all previous ones. Not belonging to a feudal family like the Bhuttos and Sharifs with all the restrictions that come with that. Western educated and well connected in the understanding of the western world and its rules and sentiments, he is a middle class person with no assets ‘beyond known sources of income’ which makes him able to really feel the pain of the poor. And he has charisma and is emotional that makes him resound with Pakistanis and – as we have seen – even with the representatives present at UNGA. Delivered extempore his speech clearly resounded with many of the delegates, he was able to transmit Pakistan’s stand and fears to the audience. His simple choice of words supported the intensity of what he was saying. Among the four points he mentioned climate change and the international dimension of Pakistan’s fight against corruption, there were important and understood by the audience. The point about Islamophobia and how it promotes radicalization among Muslims was daring, so far not many commentaries have been made and given the importance of the topic, it will have to be repeated at other occasions to make the point. While a successful start for our Kashmir campaign there is much to do to follow through with what has been started. It has to include an improved action of the Embassies abroad that until now have handled the Kashmir issue in a rather formal, even sterile way The main thing was the situation in Kashmir and the intense warning Imran rendered that this conflict world trigger war between two nuclear states. His comparison of the situation with 1938 and the Munich agreement among countries was noticed in Germany, ‘Der Spiegel’ said it is questionable if the UN made responsible by Imran for preventing a war will be able to come up to the task. The intense warning resounded with the public in New York. It has been commented upon in the international media, hopefully there will be a follow-up. What probably cannot be fully appreciated internationally is the intensity of emotions that the crisis in Kashmir has triggered in Pakistan not only on the governmental but at the public level. For most people in the West Kashmir has been divided between India and Pakistan for the last seventy years and the recent single-handed change of Mr. Modi in India’s Constitution does not alter this for all practical reasons. Even a knowledgeable friend of Pakistan like former US Ambassador to Pakistan Cameron Munter compared Kashmir with the plight of Muslims in Sinkiang, so there remains a lot of work to be done for Pakistani diplomats. The dedication and passion with which our PM made his point could be the way to be more successful than with citing mere principles. Has the Prime Minister’s speech made a difference? He was certainly himself successful in the UN arena vocally presenting Pakistan’s stand. While this gives us some leverage in the future to build upon, can it turn decades-old perceptions and opinions around? Certainly not. As a matter of fact, the Indian version of the Kashmir conflict that has been for years on end been harangued at all forums will not be deleted or replaced so soon. Already we are seeing Indian media, as usual very effective going berserk against Pakistan’s version of the matter. While a successful start for our Kashmir campaign there is much to do to follow through with what has been started. It has to include an improved action of the Embassies abroad that until now have handled the Kashmir issue in a rather formal, even sterile way. What we need are out-of- the box ways and means to make an impact in the matter. After the repeal of Article 370 by Uncle Modi, a number of times, I have made the suggestion of sending our retired Ambassadors back to the country that they had served in representing Pakistani to explain the Kashmir situation (and the consequences of escalation of the crisis to their former contacts in the respective countries. These contacts across the board would include media persons, businessmen, govt servants, educationists, etc. It would relatively be an inexpensive exercise bearing the cost of their air ticket, hotel and local entertainment expenses, etc. They would coordinate with this Pakistan Embassy/Consulate Generals to understand the prevailing situation and become abreast of the current hierarchy in the respective countries but would not be dependent for their activities on these Embassies, Consulate, etc. This could focus the gist of Pakistan’s message on Kashmir to the intelligentsia and thus maintain the momentum of the PM’s UN speech. Our major problem has been getting the message across, this is the best way to do so. Shah Mahmood Qureshi should not ignore this suggestion just because Ikram Sehgal made it and therefore it is beneath his dignity to adopt it. A good number of people want to go this relatively economical route of getting people of consequence in the many countries of the world to understand and appreciate the real facts on Kashmir. And there is another thought as well. Imran Khan said in his speech that Mr. Modi probably has not thought through his action in Kashmir till the end and a backlash is sure to come. Have we thought it all through? (the writer is a defence and security analyst). The writer is a defence and security analyst