UN faltered by turning K-invasion into dispute, Jaishankar seeks audit

External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar today called for a “strong and fair” United Nations and sought an audit of its functioning of eight decades, saying the global body had faltered in turning the 1947 invasion of Kashmir by Pakistan into a dispute.

Speaking at the Raisina Dialogue here, Jaishankar raised concerns over historical injustices in dealing with certain issues, highlighting the West’s selective application of global rules.

“After World War II, the longest-standing illegal presence and occupation of a territory by another country pertains to India—in Kashmir. We went to the UN. What was an invasion was made into a dispute. The attacker and the victim were put on par,” he said.

Highlighting the selective application of global rules on issues pertaining to sovereignty and territorial integrity, Jaishankar named the UK, Canada, Belgium, Australia and the US for “having done it at the UN”. He made the remarks at a session themed ‘Thrones and Thorns: Defending the Integrity of Nations’, which focused on the working of the UN.

The minister said global norms and rules must be applied uniformly. “We need a strong and a fair UN. We need an international order. A strong global order must have some basic consistency of standards,” he said.

Jaishankar also called for a review of the existing world order. “I think it’s important to audit the working of the world body for the last eight decades and be honest about it and to understand today that the global balances and shareholdings have changed,” he said.

The minister said the existing order—the creation of the UN after World War II—was a “byproduct of its times”. “If you were at the receiving end of some of the rules, it is important to audit the working of the UN for the last eight decades. Be honest and understand that the ‘shareholdings’ of the world have changed…. We need a different order. The global order must have some basic consistency,” he said.

Jaishankar cited how some countries could misuse the system. Without naming Pakistan, he said, “We have seen in our neighbourhood. You need not be a big country to be a risky country. We have some smaller neighbours who have done a ‘good job’ (of being risky)”.

He then mentioned how the global order to countries was applied differently. Citing the example of Afghanistan, he said, “The same Taliban that was an outlier earlier was welcomed in Doha and Oslo as apparently people at that time were okay with it. Today again, we are going back saying ‘Taliban is doing all these not so good things’. Now, if they were doing all of that... what was discussed in Oslo and Doha?” (With PTI inputs)