Pakistan pitches ‘responsible' image as diplomatic war with India heats up
Yet, this week, he was back in both countries, as part of a five-day, four-nation diplomatic blitzkrieg also including stops in Iran and Tajikistan, where Sharif will hold talks on Thursday and Friday. And he isn't alone: Sharif is being accompanied by Army Chief Asim Munir — recently promoted to Pakistan's only second-ever field marshal — and Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar.
Their destinations might be familiar, but the context has changed dramatically since Sharif's previous visits.
More than two weeks after a four-day standoff between Pakistan and India – during which they exchanged missile and drone strikes – diplomacy has become the new battlefront between the South Asian neighbours.
India has launched a global diplomatic campaign, sending delegations to over 30 countries, accusing Pakistan of supporting 'terrorist groups' responsible for attacks in India and Indian-administered Kashmir.
'We want to exhort the world to hold those responsible for cross-border terrorism accountable, those who have practiced this for 40 years against India, that is Pakistan. Their actions need to be called out,' said Randhir Jaiswal, spokesperson for India's Ministry of External Affairs, last week.
On April 22, gunmen killed 26 people, most of them tourists, in Pahalgam, a hill resort in Indian-administered Kashmir in the worst such attack on civilians in years. India blamed the killings on The Resistance Front (TRF), which it alleges is linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a Pakistan-based group designated as a 'terrorist' entity by the United Nations. New Delhi accused Islamabad of complicity in the attacks.
Pakistan denied the allegations, calling for a 'transparent, credible, independent' investigation.
Then, on May 7, India launched a series of missiles aimed at what it said was 'terrorist infrastructure' in parts of Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Islamabad insisted that the missiles struck civilians, mosques and schools. More than 50 people, including at least 11 security personnel were killed in the Indian missile strikes.
This was followed by drone incursions and, on May 10, both sides fired missiles at each other's military bases, as they stood on the brink of a full-fledged war before they agreed to a ceasefire that the US says it brokered.
Now, Pakistan, say officials and analysts, is looking to flip India's narrative before the world — projecting itself as an advocate of peace and stability in South Asia, and New Delhi as the aggressor looking to stoke tensions.
On Wednesday, Sharif expressed willingness to engage in dialogue with India on 'all matters,' if India reciprocates 'in all sincerity.'
Speaking at a trilateral summit in Lachin, Azerbaijan, Sharif said trade could resume if India cooperated on all issues, including 'counterterrorism.'
'I have said in all humility that we want peace in the region, and that requires talks on the table on issues which need urgent attention and amicable resolution, that is the issue of Kashmir, according to the resolutions of the United Nations and the Security Council, and as per the aspirations of the people of Kashmir,' he said.
Kashmir, a picturesque valley in the northeastern subcontinent, remains the root of conflict between the two nuclear-armed nations since their independence in 1947.
A 1948 UN resolution called for a plebiscite to determine Kashmir's future, but eight decades later, it has yet to take place.
India and Pakistan each administer parts of Kashmir, while China controls two small regions. India claims the entire territory; Pakistan claims the portion administered by India, but not the areas held by its ally China.
But there are other motivations driving Pakistan's diplomatic outreach too, say officials and experts.
India's diplomatic delegations that are currently touring the world include members from various political parties, including the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the opposition Indian National Congress (INC), projecting a unified stance.
In contrast, Pakistan's current mission is led by top state officials, including Sharif and army chief Munir, widely considered the most powerful figure in the country.
The trip also reflects strategic alignment, say analysts. Turkiye, whose drones were used by Pakistan in the recent conflict, is a key defense partner.
'Pakistan's defense cooperation with Turkey is especially deep,' said Christopher Clary, assistant professor of political science at the University at Albany.
'Evidence suggests several Turkish-origin systems were used in this recent clash, with varying levels of effectiveness, so there is much to talk about between the two,' he told Al Jazeera.
Khurram Dastgir Khan, a former federal minister for foreign affairs and defence, is part of a Pakistani delegation set to visit the US, UK and EU headquarters in Brussels next month.
He said the current trip by Sharif, Munir and Dar is at least partly about highlighting Pakistan's capacity to wage a modern war against a larger adversary. 'There is immense interest in how Pakistan fought the recent war,' Khan said.
'There are countries deeply interested in learning the details, what capabilities Pakistan used and what Indians had,' he added.
'This opens new strategic possibilities for Pakistan's defence forces to provide training to others. We are battle-tested. This makes us highly sought after, not just in the region but globally.'
Pakistan relied heavily on Chinese-supplied weaponry, including the fighter jets and the missiles that it deployed against India, and the air defence systems it used to defend itself from Indian missiles.
Though both countries claimed victory after the conflict, the battle over narratives has since raged across social media and public forums.
Pakistan claims to have downed six Indian jets, a claim neither confirmed nor denied by India, while Indian missiles penetrated deep into Pakistani territory, revealing vulnerabilities in its air defenses.
India has also suspended the six-decade-old Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a critical water-sharing agreement that is vital to Pakistan.
Recently, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi urged Pakistanis to reject 'terrorism.' 'Live a life of peace, eat your bread or choose my bullet,' Modi said, during a speech in India's Gujarat state.
He also criticised the IWT as 'badly negotiated,' claiming it disadvantaged India.
Muhammad Shoaib, an academic and security analyst at Quaid-i-Azam University, said Modi's remarks reflected 'ultra-nationalism' and were targeted at a domestic audience.
'The Indian diplomatic teams won't likely focus on what Pakistan says. They will only implicate Pakistan for terrorism and build their case. Meanwhile, the Pakistani delegation will likely use Modi's statements and international law regarding the IWT to bolster their arguments,' he told Al Jazeera.
Khan, who is also a senior member of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PMLN), the ruling party which premier Sharif belongs to, said the upcoming diplomatic mission that he will be part of will focus on issues like India's suspension of the IWT.
'Our fundamental point is that Pakistan seeks to maintain lasting peace in South Asia, but three major hurdles are posed by Indian aggression,' he said.
The first, according to Khan, is 'Indian-sponsored terrorism' in Pakistan, in which, he claimed, more than 20 people have been killed over the past four years. India has been accused by the US and Canada of transnational assassinations. In January 2024, Pakistan also accused India of carrying out killings on its soil. India denies involvement. Pakistan also accuses India of backing separatist groups in its Balochistan province — again, an allegation that India rejects.
'The second point is India's utterly irresponsible suspension of the IWT,' Khan said.
'Pakistan has rightly said that any step by India to stop our water will be treated as an act of war. This is something that can bring all the region in conflict and I believe that if India acquires capability to divert waters in next six to ten years, and tries to do so, it will lead to a war,' Khan warned.
The third issue, Khan said, is Pakistan's concern over India's 'status as a responsible nuclear power'.
In the past, New Delhi has frequently cited the nuclear proliferation facilitated by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the father of Pakistan's nuclear programme, as evidence that Islamabad cannot be trusted with the safe management of its nuclear weapons.
But in recent days, India's internal security minister, Amit Shah — widely viewed as the country's second-most powerful leader after Modi — has confirmed that India used its homegrown BrahMos missile against Pakistan during the recent military escalation.
The BrahMos – developed with Russia – is a supersonic cruise missile capable of Mach 3 – three times the speed of sound – and a range of 300 to 500 kilometers. It can carry both conventional and nuclear warheads and be launched from land, air, or sea.
Khan, who served as defense minister from 2017 to 2018, warned of 'unimaginable consequences' from using such weapons.
'Once the missile is in the air, you cannot know what payload it carries until it hits the target. This is very, very irresponsible,' he said. 'India has already shown recklessness when it mistakenly fired a missile into our territory a few years ago.'
Khan was referring to an incident in March 2022, when India fired a BrahMos 'accidentally' in Pakistani territory, where it fell in a densely populated city of Mian Channu, roughly 500 kilometers south of capital Islamabad.
India at the time acknowledged that accidental launch was due to a 'technical malfunction' and later sacked three air force officials.
While the conflict brought both countries to the edge of war, the ceasefire declared on May 10 has held, with troops gradually returning to peacetime positions.
Shoaib, also a research fellow at George Mason University in the US, expressed cautious optimism.
'Initiating hostilities is risky. No side wants to be seen as irresponsible. For that to break, it would take a major incident,' he said.
Tughral Yamin, a former military officer and researcher in Islamabad, noted that while diplomacy offers no guarantees, the ceasefire could last.
'India has seen that Pakistan is no cakewalk. It has both conventional and nuclear deterrence,' he told Al Jazeera. 'Both sides will remain alert, and Pakistan must address weaknesses exposed in the standoff.'
Clary added that while the India-Pakistan relationship remains fragile, history suggests that intense clashes are often followed by calmer periods.
'It is reasonable for both countries and international observers to hope for the best but prepare for the worst over the next few months,' he said.
But Khan, the former minister, questioned Modi's comments, after the military crisis, where the Indian PM said that any attack on the country's soil would now be seen as worthy of a military response, and that New Delhi would effectively cease to draw any distinction between Pakistan's military and non-state armed groups.
'The new stated policy of the Indian government is to attack Pakistan even after minor incidents, without waiting for evidence. This puts the entire region on edge,' he said. 'This trigger-happy policy should concern not just Pakistan, but the entire world.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Washington Post
an hour ago
- Washington Post
Islamic State extremists exploit instability in Africa and Syria, UN experts say
UNITED NATIONS — Islamic State extremists are exploiting instability in Africa and Syria and remain a significant threat in Afghanistan, Central Asia and Europe, U.N. counterterrorism experts said Wednesday. The militant group is now using advanced technologies, including artificial intelligence, and social media, which poses a new challenge, the experts told a U.N. Security Council meeting.


Washington Post
2 hours ago
- Washington Post
Limits of Trump's diplomacy clear as Moscow balks at Ukraine plan
Just days after the White House celebrated splashy summits with the leaders of Russia and Ukraine as foreign policy victories, the Kremlin has signaled that its position has barely budged, prompting foreign policy experts to suggest that Washington's insistence it had made progress was a sign of wishful thinking.


CNN
3 hours ago
- CNN
Analysis: Republicans subtly plead with Trump: Please don't cave to Putin
Republican lawmakers have been overwhelmingly complimentary of President Donald Trump meeting with Vladimir Putin and attempting to put the Russian leader in a room with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. But as the administration teases at least the theoretical possibility of a peace deal – however unlikely that might actually be – something else has crept into many of these GOP comments: A not-so-subtle fear that Putin might get too much. Numerous Republicans and Trump media allies have in recent days layered their almost perfunctory praise of Trump with notes of caution about what happens next. They've often gently nudged him to be more skeptical of and hard-edged toward Putin than he's been in public. And they've expressly worried that the process could result in a 'win' for Putin – a fear polls show many Americans share. It looks a lot like they're concerned the president who has long treated the Russian leader with kid gloves might give away the store in order to end the war. Perhaps nobody has been as explicit about that as Sen. Thom Tillis. Appearing Wednesday on 'CBS Mornings,' the North Carolina Republican said it was clear Putin is stringing Trump along and warned against 'even a modicum of a win' for the Russian president. 'Putin's provocation is the fear that a former Soviet satellite could become a thriving Western democracy. That will be the beginning of the end of his failed Communist totalitarian experience,' said Tillis, who is not running for reelection next year. 'And giving him even a modicum of a win gives life to his belief that this world should be under totalitarian rule.' Others have been more subtle but also raised big red flags about what Trump might try to give way. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has repeatedly cautioned that any 'land swaps' should only recognize parts of Ukraine as being under Russian control – not actually hand them over to be part of Russia. 'Be very careful about rewarding Putin by giving him title to Ukrainian land through force of arms,' Graham told Fox News host Maria Bartiromo on Sunday, ahead of Trump's meeting with Zelensky and European leaders. He and others have cautioned that doing so could embolden China to try and take Taiwan by force. 'As to land swaps, remember: China is watching,' Graham told Fox News' Sean Hannity on Monday. 'Don't do anything in Ukraine that would entice China to take Taiwan.' Hannity agreed that he 'would rather not reward aggression on the part of Putin.' Fellow Fox News host Mark Levin devoted a lengthy portion of his show the day after the Trump-Putin meeting to describing Russia's territorial ambitions and the failures of past efforts like the Budapest Memorandum to rein them in. He added in a social media post Tuesday after the latest Russian offensive in Ukraine: 'Genocidal maniac Putin cannot control himself.' Senate Armed Services Chairman Roger Wicker soon seized on Levin's post to essentially plead with Trump – all while, of course, praising him. 'President @realDonaldTrump, your advocate, Mark Levin, warns that Vladimir Putin is a 'genocidal maniac.' These are wise words from a good friend. Putin lies and kills,' the Mississippi Republican wrote, adding: 'Your leadership will be key to keep Ukraine, U.S., and Europe together against Putin's delays and deceptions.' Sen. Ted Cruz appeared on Fox News on Monday night and predicted Trump will land a peace deal – with a major caveat. 'What I have encouraged President Trump to do is to resolve it in a way that is a clear and discernible loss for Russia and Putin,' the Texas Republican said. 'Russia is not our friend, Putin is not our friend.' Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina has repeatedly praised Trump as seeing through Putin's lies. 'The war criminal, Putin, is misleading the world,' he said on CNN's 'The Lead' on Tuesday. 'But we've got a president who understands. … Gee whiz, what a president we have with Donald Trump.' Wilson added: 'But I agree with what Donald Trump has previously said: He has lovely talks with Putin in the morning and then there are murderous attacks by war criminal Putin in the afternoon.' The idea that Trump sees through Putin's tactics is certainly debatable. It was as if Wilson was painting a picture of the Trump he'd like to see. And perhaps the most critical House Republican has been Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, who's not seeking reelection. He said Tuesday that he supported peace negotiations. But then he suggested Trump's odd recent comments about Ukraine being able to make peace were not fortuitous. 'But saying Ukraine can have peace tomorrow if they want is a statement asking them to capitulate to Russia's invasion,' Bacon said. 'We should negotiate with moral clarity knowing Russia started this war with its ruthless invasion. We shouldn't reward barbarity.' These Republicans aren't the only ones who seem to fear Putin getting too much. Polls have suggested many Americans agree. A recent Fox News poll showed Americans said 58%-35% that Putin had the 'upper hand' on Trump ahead of their summit. Large numbers of Americans have long said Trump is too favorable to Putin. And a Gallup poll showed 7 in 10 Americans were at least 'somewhat' worried a peace deal would be too favorable to Russia. But it's telling that Republicans feel compelled to publicly express these concerns. Negotiating an actual peace deal means getting down to the nitty-gritty of what's an acceptable concession. And that's apparently a pretty scary prospect for the many Russia hawks who have quietly stood by for years as Trump and his party drifted away from Ukraine.