India Condemns Pakistan at UN for Disguising Terrorism as "Freedom Struggle": Diplomatic Confrontation Explained

India has delivered a sharp rebuke to Pakistan at the United Nations for attempting to legitimize cross-border terrorism by disguising it as a "freedom struggle" and portraying terrorist organizations as "freedom fighters".

During an interactive dialogue with Ben Saul, the UN Special Rapporteur on Fundamental Freedoms while Countering Terrorism, Muhammad Jawad Ajmal, a Counsellor at Pakistan's UN Mission, argued that nations should "distinguish between terrorism and the exercise of the legitimate right of people to resist foreign occupation."

In a pointed response, Raghoo Puri, First Secretary at India's Permanent Mission to the UN, condemned Ajmal's statement as "doublespeak and hypocrisy" coming from the "epicenter" of global terrorism.

"Terrorism is among the gravest of offences that fundamentally violates the core of humanity. It represents the worst of bigotry, violence, intolerance, and fear, and terrorists are the worst of the worst in humankind," Puri declared.

He emphasized that Islamabad's "doublespeak and hypocrisy stand exposed," describing Pakistan as "a well-known epicenter of terrorism with established links to multiple terror attacks across the world targeting innocent civilians."

The Pakistani representative also attempted to misinterpret international law during the discussion. Ajmal incorrectly claimed that the "distinction (between terrorism and freedom struggle) is duly observed in International Law, International Humanitarian Law, and General Assembly resolution 46/51, which also endorses this position".

Contrary to this assertion, a 1994 General Assembly declaration explicitly states that "Criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them."

This position is further reinforced in a 2004 Security Council resolution and the 1999 International Convention Against Financing Terrorism adopted by the UN General Assembly.

The Assembly resolution 46/51 that Ajmal referenced, adopted in 1991, makes only a passing mention of liberation struggles but does not legitimize terrorism carried out under that claim. Instead, it "once again unequivocally condemns as criminal and unjustifiable all acts, methods, and practices of terrorism wherever and by whomever committed".

It also demanded that all nations "fulfil their obligations under international law to refrain from participating in terrorist acts in other states".

Negotiations for the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism proposed by India have been stalled for 19 years due to the insistence of Pakistan and a small group of countries on trying to define their preferred terrorists as "freedom fighters".

When Ajmal claimed that India's counterterrorism measures were violating the human rights of those attacking the country, Puri responded firmly: "Terrorism is the gravest threat to humanity, and its abettor and aider, like Pakistan, remains the worst violator of human rights."

Ajmal also criticized the world organization's efforts against terrorism, claiming that the "UN's counter-terrorism architecture has regrettably singled out one religion for affiliation with terrorism".

Puri dismissed this as Pakistan's "futile attempts to take cover of Islamophobia to hide its atrocities".