What is important in the UNSC decision is the symbolism of the move – a symbolism that exemplifies India’s coming of age as a global political actor, one that can use its growing global heft effectively and leverage its ties with major powers to secure outcomes in its favour.
It was without a doubt a significant diplomatic victory for India when China finally lifted its hold on a proposal to blacklist the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) chief at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). India has been doggedly pursuing this for more than a decade now and China was the last nation standing as an obstacle. As far back as October 2001, the UNSC 1267 committee had listed JeM though it did not ban Azhar. It was India that India proposed the ban after the Mumbai attacks of November 2008, but China kept on resisting the move under the pretext of lack of sufficient evidence. Even after the February Pulwama attacks earlier this year, China continued with its convoluted position in order to shield Pakistan. So when it happened on May 1, it was not only a big relief for India but also underscored India’s growing ability to mobilise global opinion in its favour.
“Big, small, all join together. Masood Azhar designated as a terrorist in UN Sanctions list. Grateful to all for their support,” India's Permanent Representative to the United Nations Syed Akbaruddin tweeted. This is Indian diplomacy at its best. Led by the Prime Minister and External Affairs Minister, Indian diplomats mounted a sustained campaign over the last few years and the result is evident. New Delhi’s diplomatic management of this has been very effective: aggressive yet focused, pragmatic not preachy, and silent as well as public.
Many factors accounted for this success. Days after China put a hold on a French proposal to list Azhar under the 1267 al-Qaeda Sanctions Committee of the Council, the US with support from the UK and France circulated a draft resolution to the UNSC in March to blacklist Azhar. Washington was aware that China would continue to oppose the move but the fact that it was willing to take on China so openly on this issue underscored that it wanted to call China out publicly. This has been shaped by India’s diplomatic outreach over the last few years in which global support has been sought to reverse Pakistan’s support to terrorist organisations. But what has given this an added sense of urgency is India’s decision to up the ante after the Pulwama attacks by taking the fight to the Pakistani territory. This has now put the onus on Pakistan to de-escalate, a reversal of the post-1998 situation where in every India-Pakistan crisis it was New Delhi which was expected to take steps for de-escalation even as every crisis was precipitated by Pakistan. After every crisis, the international community, especially the West, would persuade India to ease tensions, and in most cases India relented. The post-Pulwama South Asian strategic equilibrium has shifted as New Delhi has made it clear that it could not be expected to look the other way from Pakistani provocations.
After every crisis, the international community, especially the West, would persuade India to ease tensions, and in most cases India relented. The post-Pulwama South Asian strategic equilibrium has shifted as New Delhi has made it clear that it could not be expected to look the other way from Pakistani provocations.
The American move vis-a-vis Azhar was an unprecedented one, and was not only aimed at forcing the Chinese hand on Masood Azhar but was also a recognition of the new regional context in South Asia where a stronger global attempt to rein in Pakistan is the only viable option of maintaining regional peace. Meanwhile, New Delhi kept it channels of communication with China open with the Foreign Secretary visiting Beijing recently and tried to convince China how its position is preventing a normalisation of Sino-Indian ties. Recognising the diminishing returns of its position and its growing isolation, China saved its face by suggesting that China was lifting technical hold to the listing proposal following a careful study of the “revised materials.”
This is unlikely to fundamentally alter the state of play in Sino-Indian or Sino-Pakistan relations. Even as it changed its stance on Azhar, China made it a point to note that Pakistan had made “enormous contributions to fighting terrorism, which deserves the full recognition of the international community” and that “China will continue to firmly support Pakistan’s efforts to combat terrorist and extremist forces.” And in India many will view China’s shift as merely tactical aimed salvaging something from a very deep diplomatic hole it had dug for itself.
There will be those who will argue that the UNSC decision will hardly change the realities on the ground. Much like Hafiz Saeed, Azhar will continue to operate with few constraints in the Pakistani territory despite the tag of a terror-designate. Pakistani military-intelligence complex has little incentive in curtailing Azhar’s ability to operate or plan terror strikes against India. But that India already knows. What is important in the UNSC decision is the symbolism of the move – a symbolism that exemplifies India’s coming of age as a global political actor, one that can use its growing global heft effectively and leverage its ties with major powers to secure outcomes in its favour. In global politics symbolism of moves and countermoves has a long lasting impact. And in this case India’s crafty diplomatic management has managed to ensure that “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Professor Harsh V. Pant is Vice President – Studies and Foreign Policy at Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi. He is a Professor of International Relations ...
Read More +
PREV
