New York, – At the UN Security Council, Pakistan’s representative sharply rebutted the Indian ambassador’s remarks, accusing India of hypocrisy in a heated exchange over the brief May 2025 India-Pakistan conflict.
I’m compelled to take the floor in response to the statement made by the Indian ambassador,” the envoy said. “Perhaps the esteemed Indian ambassador did not read his own words carefully. While talking about conflicts elsewhere, he said India does not believe that solutions can be found through war and conflict. Yet it was India that launched unprovoked aggression against Pakistan on the night of 7th May 2025, an act that plunged the entire region into crisis.”
The clash referenced Operation Sindoor, India’s missile strikes on alleged terrorist sites in Pakistan on May 7, in retaliation for the April 22 Pahalgam attack that killed 26 civilians in Indian-administered Kashmir. Hostilities, including airstrikes and drone battles, ended with a ceasefire on May 10, mediated by U.S. officials including President Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
“Hostilities ceased only on 10th May, following Pakistan’s position of strength after downing of seven Indian aircraft’s and the request of a ceasefire that came from India, facilitated by President Trump and other friendly countries,” the envoy continued. “President Trump has spoken countless times about it. India to this day refuses to acknowledge the very mediation that helped it escape its own misadventure.”
Trump announced the truce on Truth Social, crediting U.S. talks, though India insisted it was bilateral. Conflicting claims persist: Pakistan asserts downing seven Indian jets, while India admits losses but denies the number, and Trump referenced five.
The diplomat escalated: “It is India, not Pakistan, that repeatedly vows to undertake future strikes under the nuclear overhang. Imagining that such reckless rhetoric enhances deterrence, it does not. It only exposes the delusion of a political leadership that mistakes brinkmanship for strategy. India’s ruling party and military establishment may succeed in feeding their domestic polity with disinformation, manufacturing imaginary victories, and turning defeats into propaganda gains, but they cannot deceive the international community.”
He accused India of sponsoring terrorism: “Like all aggressors, India follows the familiar playbook, commit aggression, cry victim-hood, and cloak expansionism in the language of counter-terrorism. Let us be clear, Chair. India actively sponsors, aids, and abets terrorism in my country and beyond. Its intelligence agency has been directly collaborating with terrorist outfits to sponsor terrorist acts in Pakistan and undertake extraterritorial assassinations in other countries.”
Pakistan highlighted its sacrifices: “Pakistan has sacrificed over 90,000 lives in the global fight against terrorism and remains one of its most steadfast partners of the international community.”
On nuclear issues: “Chair, India boasts of its no-first-use doctrine, but conveniently omits the exceptions in policy statements by its own leaders that contradict this claim. If India truly seeks nuclear risk reduction, why has it avoided the bilateral dialogue on these issues since 2012?”
The envoy warned: “Chair, for decades strategic stability between any two nuclear-armed states has relied on mutual risk awareness and crisis communication. This delicate balance has prevented catastrophe even in moments of high tension. India’s emerging military doctrine seeks to dismantle this equilibrium, imagining a Utopian new normal where conventional strikes against a nuclear-armed neighbour can be treated as cost-free adventures. Wars do not follow scripts. The belief that one can initiate hostilities, control escalation, and dictate the term of peace is delusional.”
He critiqued India’s domestic record: “Chair India also lectures others about prosperity and governance, while millions of its own citizens live in abject poverty and deprivation. Perhaps it should first ensure the well-being of its own people before weaponizing economic narratives and international financial institutions to score political points against its neighbour.”
In closing: “Chair, India would do well to abandon its self-serving fiction, shed the arrogance of impunity, and return to serious result-oriented dialogue for peace, stability, and conflict prevention. Pakistan remains steadfast in its commitment to peace, stability, and responsible conduct, but equally resolute in defending its sovereignty and national security. We continue to believe that peace lies not in posturing and propaganda, but in dialogue, diplomacy and mutual respect. I thank you.”
The session underscores ongoing Kashmir tensions, with the ceasefire holding uneasily amid mutual accusations.
