Islamabad helps Delhi's UNSC ambitions

BRUSSELS Does the Government of Pakistan tell its UN Envoy how to vote or is he a law unto himself? That is the question Pakistanis are asking after Indias election to the UNSC as a non-permanent member. After India got elected, its jubilant UN Ambassador boasted to the international media on Tuesday that Pakistan had voted for India, its traditional rival. I know that Pakistan voted for India ..., the Indian ambassador reportedly said when asked specifically about Pakistans vote. The question is how did Ambassador Hardeep Singh Puri, a close friend of his Pakistani counterpart Hussain Haroon, know that Pakistan had voted for India since the voting is by secret ballot. Puri would not have made such a categorical statement unless he was actually shown the ballot. Did our pro-India envoy do that? Reports reaching here through diplomatic channels say that Haroon left no doubt in the mind of his friend - the two are known at the UN as inseparable twins - by quietly showing him the ballot he was casting. Such is the nature of the diplomacy at the UN that no one usually believes if a diplomat verbally talks about the way he voted since great care is taken not to hurt anybodys feelings. Haroon seems to have gone too far in attempting to push closer to India, which has refused to respond to any overtures. Last month, he invited Rajmohan Gandhi, a professor at the Chicago University, who is M.K. Gandhis grandson, to join in making an appeal for donations for flood victims in Pakistan. Subsequently, Rajmohan stayed at the Ambassadors official residence for a couple of days. No one could understand the value of involving an Indian in seeking contributions. Is all this being done with the acquiescence of the Government of Pakistan? If so, then Parliament needs to ask the Government if our India policy has altered in such a drastic manner? If Haroon is doing these things of his own volition then will the Government of Pakistan investigate the matter? Isnt Haroons conduct prejudicial to national security? But the real issue is whether the Government of Mr Gilani can seek an explanation from a person appointed by President Asif Ali Zardari? In an interview with the Press Trust of India (PTI), appearing on the Agencys website, Ambassador Puri called Pakistans vote significant. Of course it is of significance, said the Indian ambassador in response to a question of whether India viewed this positively. It proves that those who are sceptical on India-Pakistan cooperation in the UN... it proves them wrong. Tuesdays vote in the General Assembly brings together on the 15-nation council, the UNs power centre, three of the four members of the G-4 (India, Brazil and Germany), who are seeking permanent membership. The fourth member, Japan, will complete its term at the end of the year. But Japan has already laid the ground for an elevated status for the four. It is a fact that many of the countries that will be on the SC next year are also aspirants for permanent membership, the Indian ambassador pointed out. Naturally all of us will try and use the time that we have during this two-year tenure to also give our partners a sense of confidence and build trust so that they are comfortable with our membership of the Security Council on an extended basis. The most ironic part of his statement was on human rights given the situation in Occupied Kashmir. Were also a mainstream country on the issue of human rights and other issues of a thematic nature and we will utilise the next two years of our membership on the Security Council to both pursue these messages and also to work towards a more extended longer-term stay on the Council, as he glossed over Indian repression in Kashmir. The fact is that a gross violator of UN resolutions is on the Security Council and thats a bad news. But the worst part is Pakistan, or at least its UN Envoy helped put him there.