Two delegations to present Pakistan's stance on recent Indian aggression
Listen to article
Pakistan has sent two high-level delegations abroad to present its stance on recent tensions with India, the Foreign Office said on Monday.
A senior delegation comprising three former foreign ministers, ex-diplomats, senators, and a serving minister arrived in New York to begin a diplomatic campaign across key capitals including Washington DC, London, and Brussels.
Pakistan Peoples Party Chairperson Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari, Hina Rabbani Khar, and Khurram Dastgir, along with Senators Sherry Rehman, Musadik Malik, Faisal Sabzwari, and Bushra Anjum Butt, and diplomats Jalil Abbas Jilani and Tehmina Janjua, are part of the first delegation. They are set to meet UN Secretary-General António Guterres, the President of the UN General Assembly, ambassadors from the P5 countries, and OIC members.
The delegation's US engagements begin June 3 with meetings scheduled with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, American lawmakers, think tanks, and media organisations.
A separate delegation led by Syed Tariq Fatemi will visit Moscow from June 2 to 4 for consultations with Russian officials and opinion leaders.
The Foreign Office stated the mission's aim to highlight Pakistan's peaceful and measured response to what it called 'Indian aggression' and to reaffirm the country's commitment to dialogue, international law, and regional stability.
'Pakistan countering India's false narrative at UN'
Meanwhile, Senator Sherry Rehman, a key member of Pakistan's diplomatic delegation to the United Nations, issued a strong statement today from New York, reaffirming Pakistan's commitment to exposing India's fabricated propaganda and presenting the country's principled stance on regional peace, international law, and responsible diplomacy.
'Under the leadership of Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, our delegation has launched a full-spectrum diplomatic outreach in New York,' said Senator Rehman. 'We are here not for photo-ops, but for strategic engagement with the international community at the heart of the UN system.'
Senator Rehman emphasized that Pakistan is actively presenting its diplomatic agenda, focused on peace, sustainable development, and regional stability. 'Pakistan's image as a responsible and stable middle power is being clearly articulated. We are highlighting our unwavering respect for international law and our constructive role in South Asia's peace and security,' she said.
Rejecting India's recent falsehoods, Senator Rehman warned against the dangerous normalization of using baseless terrorism allegations as a pretext for war. 'India's fabricated narrative will not be allowed to masquerade as truth. Using false allegations to justify military aggression is not only irresponsible—it's unacceptable,' she stated. 'Terrorism is a serious global issue and must be dealt with seriously, not exploited for political gain.'
Senator Rehman recalled Pakistan's heavy sacrifices in the fight against terrorism. 'We've waged one of the longest and most difficult ground battles against terrorism. Our people have paid with blood and resources. Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto was herself martyred by extremists. We do not need lectures from those who manufacture threats for electoral theatrics.'
Senator Rehman praised Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari's leadership on the international stage. 'The Prime Minister has entrusted Chairman Bilawal with the responsibility of presenting Pakistan's clear stance on Indian violations—be it water aggression, Kashmir, or breaches of international peace laws. His response during India's recent military provocations was clear, reasoned, and effective.'
Senator Rehman underscored Pakistan's commitment to dialogue and de-escalation, but not at the cost of silence. 'As a responsible nuclear state, Pakistan believes in broad, just, and peaceful engagement. But we will not remain quiet on Prime Minister Modi's reckless and dangerous policies. We will continue to warn the world of their consequences.'
Concluding her remarks, Senator Rehman stated, 'Whether it's on the battlefield or the diplomatic front, Pakistan knows how to defend itself. We are here to ensure the world sees through the fog of misinformation—and to reaffirm our enduring commitment to peace and global cooperation.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
US vetoes UN call for immediate ceasefire, aid access in Gaza
US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield casts a veto vote, at UN headquarters in New York, US, February 20, 2024. PHOTO: REUTERS Listen to article The United States vetoed a UN Security Council demand on Wednesday for an "immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire" between Israel and Palestinian militants Hamas in Gaza and unhindered aid access across the enclave. "The United States has been clear we would not support any measure that fails to condemn Hamas and does not call for Hamas to disarm and leave Gaza," Acting US Ambassador to the UN Dorothy Shea told the council before the vote. "This resolution would undermine diplomatic efforts to reach a ceasefire that reflects the realities on the ground, and embolden Hamas," she said of the text that was put forward by 10 countries on the 15-member council. The remaining 14 council members voted in favor of the draft resolution. Israel has rejected calls for an unconditional or permanent ceasefire, saying Hamas cannot stay in Gaza. It has renewed its military offensive in Gaza - also seeking to free hostages held by Hamas - since ending a two-month ceasefire in March. Gaza health officials said Israeli strikes killed 45 Palestinians on Wednesday and Israel said a soldier died in fighting. A humanitarian crisis also grips the enclave of more than 2 million people: Famine looms and aid has only trickled in since Israel lifted an 11-week blockade on May 19. No aid was distributed by the U.S.-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation on Wednesday as it pressed Israel to boost civilian safety beyond the perimeter of its so-called secure distribution sites after a deadly incident. The GHF said it has asked the Israeli military to "guide foot traffic in a way that minimizes confusion or escalation risks" near military positions; develop clearer guidance for civilians; and enhance training to support civilian safety. Hospital officials have said more than 80 people were shot dead and hundreds wounded near distribution points in a three-day period from Sunday, including at least 27 killed on Tuesday. Locals said Israeli soldiers opened fire on the crowd on Tuesday that massed before dawn to seek food. The military has denied this, but acknowledged that troops fired at "suspects" who ignored warning shots and were approaching their lines. "Our top priority remains ensuring the safety and dignity of civilians receiving aid," said a GHF spokesperson. 'DELAYS AND DENIALS' The new aid distribution process - currently from just three sites - was launched last week. The UN and other aid groups say the model, which uses private US security and logistics workers, militarises aid. Ahead of the UN Security Council vote, UN aid chief Tom Fletcher again appealed for the UN and aid groups to be allowed to assist people in Gaza, stressing that they have a plan, supplies and experience. "Open the crossings – all of them. Let in lifesaving aid at scale, from all directions. Lift the restrictions on what and how much aid we can bring in. Ensure our convoys aren't held up by delays and denials," Fletcher said in a statement. The UN has long-blamed Israel and lawlessness in the enclave for hindering the delivery of aid into Gaza and its distribution throughout the war zone. Israel accuses Hamas of stealing aid, which the group denies. The newly created GHF said on Tuesday that it distributed more than seven million meals since it started operations a week ago. GHF Interim Executive Director John Acree urged humanitarians in Gaza: "Work with us and we will get your aid delivered to those who are depending on it."
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
Putin warns Trump of response to Ukrainian attacks on Russia
Russian President Vladimir Putin chairs a meeting with members of the government via video link at the Novo-Ogaryovo state residence outside Moscow, Russia June 4, 2025. PHOTO: REUTERS Listen to article Russian President Vladimir Putin told US President Donald Trump on Wednesday that he would have to respond to high-profile Ukrainian drone attacks on Russia's nuclear-capable bomber fleet and a deadly bridge bombing that Moscow blamed on Kyiv. The war in Ukraine is intensifying after nearly four months of cajoling and threats to both Moscow and Kyiv from Trump, who says he wants peace after more than three years of the deadliest conflict in Europe since World War Two. After Ukraine bombed bridges and attacked Russia's fleet of nuclear-capable bombers deep in Siberia and Russia's far north, Putin on Wednesday said he did not think Ukraine's leaders wanted peace. Shortly after Putin discussed the attacks with top ministers in Moscow, Trump said he had spoken by telephone with Putin for one hour and 15 minutes, and that they had discussed the Ukrainian attacks and Iran. "We discussed the attack on Russia's docked airplanes, by Ukraine, and also various other attacks that have been taking place by both sides. It was a good conversation, but not a conversation that will lead to immediate Peace," Trump said on social media. Russia has unleashed several massive aerial attacks on Ukraine over recent weeks. "President Putin did say, and very strongly, that he will have to respond to the recent attack on the airfields," Trump said, adding that he hoped Putin could be helpful in US negotiations with Iran over the Islamic Republic's nuclear programme. Trump said he believed Putin agreed with Washington that Iran "cannot have a nuclear weapon," and accused Tehran of "slowwalking" decisions regarding the talks. Trump has been unusually silent on the Ukrainian attacks on the Russian bombers - one of the three pillars of Russia's nuclear arsenal - though Moscow demanded that the United States and Britain restrain Ukraine. The Kremlin said Trump had told Putin that Washington was not informed in advance of the Ukrainian attacks. Trump's Ukraine envoy said the risk of escalation from the war in Ukraine was "going way up" after the strikes. Russia and the United States are by far the world's biggest nuclear powers: together they hold about 88% of all nuclear weapons. Each has three ways of nuclear attack - strategic bombers, land-launched intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missiles - and any attack on any part of the "triad" is considered a grave escalation. WAR OR PEACE? In some of his most hawkish remarks in recent months on the outlook for peace, Putin on Wednesday said the bridge attacks had been directed against civilians and accused Ukrainian leadership of being a "terrorist organisation" supported by powers who were becoming "terrorist accomplices." "The current Kyiv regime does not need peace at all," Putin said at a meeting with senior officials. "What is there to talk about? How can we negotiate with those who rely on terror?" Ukraine has not commented on the bridge attacks. It denies it targets civilians, as does Russia, though civilians have been killed by both sides. Kyiv has similarly accused Moscow of not seriously wanting peace, citing as evidence Russian resistance to an immediate ceasefire. Russia says certain conditions must first be met. Putin, in his public remarks, did not mention the bomber attacks, which came just before Russia and Ukraine met for direct peace talks in Istanbul where Moscow set out what the United States has called "maximalist" aims. Before Putin spoke, other Russian officials said military options were "on the table" for its response to Ukrainian attacks deep inside Russia and accused the West of being involved in them. "We urge London and Washington to react in such a way as to stop further escalation," Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov was quoted by the Interfax news agency as saying. Ryabkov oversees relations with the US and arms control. British and US officials have said they had no prior knowledge of the weekend attacks on Russian nuclear-capable long-range bombers. The White House has said Trump was not informed of Ukraine's drone attack before it unfolded.
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
America protects Israel by killing democracy
Listen to article I was once talking to an old Pakistani man who had been living in America since the 60s. We tend to believe that somehow we have more authentic knowledge of things than the older folks just because we have better sources of information at our disposal. However, I believe the opposite is true. The people before us may not have been getting their information as quickly as we do, but they sure had a better understanding of things, especially politics. This old man was telling me about George Bush, the senior one. He was saying that the main reason Bush had lost was because he got tough with Israel by trying to prevent it from building settlements inside the occupied territories. The Israeli lobbies inside the United States got into action and punished him. I laughed off the old man's argument by saying that a foreign country and a mere lobby cannot be so powerful that they'd influence an American presidential election. Boy, was I naive? I spent years after that watching every single American politician, not just the presidential candidates, never forgetting to express their support and love for the state of Israel. It is as if they are required to sing this anthem or else they'd be deemed traitors and be disqualified either from the office they are holding or from the race to win that office. Sure enough, the last sentence is not really untrue. What startled me recently have been two facts about the power of Israeli lobbies inside America: the pressure on TikTok and a song Michael Jackson once wrote but never became public. TikTok is perhaps the only mainstream platform that allows for the broadcast of videos that clearly show the brutality that Israel unleashes against innocent Palestinian children. Every other platform you have ever known suppresses any content that is even remotely critical of Israel or sympathetic toward Palestine. That's why it had to be pushed around. Michael Jackson wrote a song in 1993 called 'Palestine, Don't Cry' in which he expressed support for the cause of Palestine, showed solidarity with the Palestinian people, and highlighted the miseries of the Palestinians at the hands of Israeli society. From what I understand, Sony refused to publish the song, which was heavily pressured by the United States, which was heavily pressured by the Israel lobbies. Even George Bush had expressed his helplessness and sorrow at the extreme power AIPAC had inside America when he visited the presidential library at Texas A&M in 2005. That song by the mega superstar of the day would have created a tremendous impact in support of Palestine because Jackson was loved and almost worshipped by many Americans at the time. A superstar of his height would have done the same for Palestine, which the other MJ (Michael Jordan) did for the shoe brand Nike, which was a small and about-to-die brand. Today Palestine could have been what Nike is; supported and adored by millions of Americans. But the cunning Jewish society of Israel knew this and their even more cunning supporters in the form of lobbies in America understood the potential devastation in the form of blowing Israel's fake victimhood cover. America was allowed to use rockstars and pop stars in politics such as having them endorse candidates and hold concerts to motivate people to come out to vote during elections. However, the same could not be allowed in support of Palestine because that would create an American citizenry, which would become informed about the truth that Israel was an illegal state established over the land of Palestine and that it kills its way through expanding and grabbing more and more land every single day. A genuine democracy made up of informed citizenry would result in the death of Israel because Israel would no longer enjoy the unconditional support of the American might. Things that could have happened. History that could have been redirected. And the present that could have been beautiful.
