China's repeated betrayals on Masood Azhar show Pakistan's growing importance
China has once again blocked the move, this time by three permanent members of the UN Security Council — US, UK and France — to designate Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) chief Masood Azhar as an international terrorist. The US and the UK have treated India’s case on Pakistan-sponsored terrorism with ambivalence in the past.
Maintaining a political balance in relations with both countries, the view that terrorism from Pakistan derives from the unsolved Kashmir issue, the need for Pakistan’s cooperation in Afghanistan have been considerations that have provided Pakistan space over the years to continue its terrorist depredations.
Action
That these three countries jointly proposed action against the JeM chief indicates a change of mood towards Pakistan against the larger canvas of the rise of the Islamic State and a spate of terrorist attacks in major European countries by Islamist radicals. That China blocked the move indicates, in turn, its determination to shield Pakistan in the UN Security Council (UNSC) on the terrorism issue and disregard the consequences of this not only on India-China relations but also on its international reputation.
China can hardly tout its commitment to combat the menace of international terrorism collectively if it opposes tagging as a terrorist the leader of an organisation already declared one by the UNSC. Because Pakistan claims that terrorism from its soil is the handiwork of “non-state" actors which escape government control should actually make it easier for China to join the UNSC consensus on Masood Azhar.
 |
| Designating Masood Azhar as a terrorist by the UN is a tactical step that does not materially change the terrorist threat to us from Pakistan. |
But in unabashed cynicism on its part, China advocates a consensus but prevents one by unwillingness to join it. In further chicanery, it accuses India of seeking political gains from nailing down Masood Azhar as a terrorist while implying that its own counter-moves to shield Pakistan are not politically motivated.
In reality, Pakistan has become so important geo-politically for China because of the illegal China Pakistan Economic Corridor and Gwadar — the meeting point between its connectivity projects on land and sea — that it is willing to be seen in our eyes as complicit with Pakistan on promoting terror against India. Reports that China has encouraged Pakistan to put Hafiz Saeed under house arrest are “fake news” intended to present China in good light in view of its obstructionism on Masood Azhar’s case.
Why China should counsel Pakistan to place curbs on the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) chief, the mastermind of the Mumbai attacks whose incarceration and prosecution India seeks, and prevent action against the JeM chief responsible for the Pathankot attack defies common sense.
Isolation
If Russia had joined the other three UNSC permanent members to propose Masood Azhar’s inclusion in the list of international terrorists it would have isolated China more dramatically. Ironically, while the US and UK especially, and to a lesser extent France, have, despite their traditional ties with Pakistan, moved to pressure Pakistan to curb its well-known terrorist figures, Russia with no such ties and a past victim of massive geo-strategic and physical blows at Pakistan’s hands in Afghanistan has stood apart.
This is not surprising because Russia has, even in joint statements with us, agreed to references to terrorism that exclude implicit finger-pointing at Pakistan. The October 2016 summit statement, for instance, omits any reference to cross-border terrorism, the Mumbai, Pathankot or Uri attacks, or even LeT and JeM. Russia’s reticence in directly condemning Pakistan’s promotion of terrorism precedes, in fact, the marked deterioration of its relations with the US and its more willing embrace of China in self-interest.
Despite its vulnerability to Islamic terrorism and the geopolitical necessity to prevent Islamic radicalism from spreading in Central Asia from the Af-Pak region, it has treated Pakistan with consideration. Under the Obama administration, Russia and the US have had harsh stand-offs in the UNSC.
Tussle
Relations with the UK and France have been acerbic too, in particular on Ukraine and Syria. As a consequence, Russia and China — which has its own geopolitical tussles with the US — have coordinated closely in the UNSC on issues of difference with the Western powers. Russia has begun to work together with China in our region too as demonstrated by its sponsorship of the Russia-China-Pakistan dialogue on Afghanistan, the overtures to the Taliban, as well as to Pakistan that extend to the defence area as well.
In this light, Russia could hardly be expected to join the three Western countries, with which its relations are tense, to have Masood Azhar declared a terrorist and break with China’s position on the issue. Russia’s passiveness on the JeM chief’s case in the UNSC, however, does not imply that it opposes his designation under UNSC Resolution 1267 and stands in the way of a consensus.
In reality, designating Masood Azhar as a terrorist by the UN or incarcerating Hafiz Saeed in comfort are procedural or tactical steps that do not materially change the terrorist threat to us from Pakistan. Hafiz Saeed has been declared a terrorist by the UN and the US has a $10 million bounty on his head, but he has continued to have free run in Pakistan. He has been arrested and released several times and this charade continues.
JeM functions even when it has been notified as a terrorist organisation by the UN in 2001 and nominally banned by Pakistan in 2002. Unfortunately, Pakistan now benefits from muscle-flexing China’s protective shield for its terrorist affiliations.
(Courtesy of Mail Today.)