G20 Summit: catalyst for global diplomacy or an unsettling move?
The writer is an International Relations Specialist at a transnational chamber of commerce that works for the development and capacity building of the private sector
The announcement of the G20 Summit being held in Indian illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) had raised numerous eyebrows and triggered heated debates worldwide. This contentious decision has drawn significant attention to the ongoing geopolitical tensions in the region and the complex dynamics between Pakistan, India and the international community. From Pakistan’s perspective, this article will analyse the G20 Summit in IIOJK, explore the response from the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and evaluate its implications on regional stability. Furthermore, we will examine the reactions of various countries, including China and others who opposed the summit being held in Kashmir.
Pakistan has long been advocating for international attention towards the longstanding Kashmir dispute. The choice of IIOJK as the venue for the G20 Summit has been perceived by Pakistan as an endorsement of its position on the issue. However, it also raises concerns over the potential implications for regional stability and the ongoing India-Pakistan dispute.
Firstly, hosting the G20 Summit in a disputed territory like IIOJK may inadvertently lend legitimacy to India’s control over the region. Pakistan maintains that Kashmir remains a disputed territory under United Nations resolutions, and any recognition of India’s sovereignty over the region could be seen as undermining the principle of self-determination for Kashmiris.
Secondly, the attempt to hold the summit in IIOJK can be interpreted as an implicit acceptance of the prevailing human rights situation in the region. Pakistan has consistently highlighted the alleged human rights violations committed by Indian security forces in the disputed region. By choosing to host such a high-profile event in Kashmir, the international community may inadvertently be seen as condoning these alleged abuses.
As far as international community is concerned, the decision to hold the G20 Summit in IIOJK has garnered diverse reactions from the international community. Several countries, including China, have opposed the summit being held in the disputed region, citing concerns over regional stability and the potential implications for the peace process.
China, a close ally of Pakistan, has been particularly vocal in expressing its reservations. Beijing has maintained that the Kashmir issue should be resolved through peaceful negotiations between India and Pakistan, in accordance with the principles of international law and the UN Charter. China has urged all parties to exercise restraint and avoid actions that may escalate tensions in the region.
Other countries have also expressed their concerns and reservations. Some argue that hosting the G20 Summit in a disputed territory may undermine the spirit of neutrality and impartiality that such international gatherings are meant to uphold. They emphasise the need for a conducive and peaceful environment for fruitful diplomatic engagements.
The response of the UNSC to the G20 Summit in IIOJK has been a matter of contention. While some member states argue that the venue choice falls within the purview of the host country, others emphasise the need to consider the sensitivities and implications associated with a disputed region like Kashmir.
Pakistan, in its capacity as a member of the UNSC, has been vocal in expressing its concerns regarding the potential impact on regional stability and the stalled peace process between Pakistan and India. Pakistan seeks an inclusive dialogue that takes into account the aspirations of the people of Kashmir and the UNSC’s resolutions which call for a plebiscite to determine the future of the region.
The UNSC response to the G20 Summit in the disputed territory has been divided, reflecting the differing perspectives of its member states. While some countries emphasise the host country’s prerogative in choosing the venue, others stress the importance of considering the sensitivities and implications associated with a disputed region like Kashmir. The UNSC has been deliberating on the matter and assessing its potential impact on regional peace and stability.
The reaction from the international community, including countries like China, opposing the summit being held in IIOJK, highlights the complexity of the issue and the diverse perspectives on the matter. These countries have expressed reservations about the potential consequences for regional stability and the need to uphold the principles of neutrality and impartiality in international diplomacy. The decision should not be taken lightly, as it has the potential to affect the delicate balance in the region and the ongoing India-Pakistan conflict.
However, it is crucial to balance this objective with the need for impartiality and adherence to international norms. Any perception of legitimising India’s control over Kashmir or overlooking human rights concerns could undermine the credibility of the G20 Summit and erode trust in the international community’s commitment to justice and fairness.
However, Pakistan should see it as an opportunity to draw world attention to the Kashmir dispute while expressing concerns about potential negative implications. Whilst other countries opposing the summit being held in Kashmir stress the need for regional stability and the principles of neutrality in international diplomacy.
It is essential for all stakeholders to engage in a constructive dialogue and address the concerns raised by various parties. The UNSC, in particular, must play an active role in facilitating an inclusive and comprehensive resolution to the Kashmir dispute, one that respects the aspirations of the people of Kashmir and adheres to international law and human rights principles.
Ultimately, the G20 Summit in Kashmir should serve as a catalyst for diplomatic efforts and peaceful dialogue, rather than exacerbating existing tensions. The international community, including the UN, must strive to promote an environment for constructive engagement and work towards a lasting and just resolution to the longstanding dispute.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 17th, 2023.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.