Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif used his address to the 81st United Nations General Assembly in New York to revive Islamabad’s longstanding positions on the Indus Waters Treaty and Jammu and Kashmir, while presenting Pakistan’s conduct during the May 2025 military confrontation with India as a success.
The speech came as Sharif faces significant political and economic pressure at home. Pakistan’s economy remains under strain, opposition supporters continue to protest over the detention of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, and unrest and security challenges persist in several provinces.
Against this backdrop, Sharif sought to project strength abroad and draw international attention to issues that remain central to Pakistan’s foreign-policy messaging.
Sharif referred to Pakistan’s version of the May 2025 conflict with India and portrayed Islamabad’s response as having secured the upper hand. His remarks were met with visible amusement from Indian diplomat R Srinivas, who was seen laughing while the Pakistani leader referred to Islamabad’s claimed victory.
Sharif said that Pakistan had faced external aggression from India and claimed that the confrontation had brought two nuclear-armed neighbours close to an all-out war.
He credited United States President Donald Trump with intervening at a decisive moment and claimed that Trump’s actions helped prevent a wider conflict.
“His timely intervention came at a decisive juncture when two nuclear-armed neighbours stood at the brink of an all-out war,” Sharif said. He added that it was necessary to ensure that South Asia never reached such a dangerous point again.
Sharif’s account differed from India’s stated position on how the fighting ended. New Delhi has consistently maintained that the cessation of hostilities was achieved through direct communication between the Indian and Pakistani militaries, without mediation or intervention by a third party.
According to the Indian position, it was Pakistan’s Director General of Military Operations who contacted his Indian counterpart to seek a cessation of Operation Sindoor. India has rejected repeated claims that the United States or any other foreign power brokered the ceasefire.
India launched Operation Sindoor on 7 May 2025, following the 22 April Pahalgam terror attack in which 26 civilians were killed. The operation targeted terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir. India described the action as a measured military response intended to dismantle terror networks and deter further cross-border attacks.
Operation Sindoor combined military action with diplomatic, strategic and other non-military measures. New Delhi presented it as a demonstration of India’s military capability, strategic restraint and zero-tolerance approach towards terrorism.
The operation also became a major point of dispute in the competing narratives advanced by India and Pakistan after the May confrontation. Islamabad has portrayed its response as successful, whereas India has highlighted the destruction of terror infrastructure and its ability to impose costs while controlling escalation.
Sharif also strongly criticised India’s decision to place the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance.
The treaty, signed by India and Pakistan in 1960, establishes a framework for sharing the waters of the Indus River system. It allocates the eastern rivers — the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej — primarily to India, while assigning the western rivers — the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab — primarily to Pakistan, subject to specified provisions.
Sharif described the Indus River system as the “lifeblood” of Pakistan and the wider region. He claimed that India’s unilateral decision to hold the treaty in abeyance had no legal basis and insisted that the agreement remained valid and binding.
“Water must never be weaponised. Rivers should nourish nations, not divide them,” Sharif said.
He warned that any attempt to stop, impede or divert Pakistan’s share of the waters would be treated as an act of war.
“India must make no mistake about it,” he added.
India placed the treaty in abeyance after the Pahalgam terror attack, stating that the arrangement would remain suspended until Pakistan took credible and irreversible action against cross-border terrorism.
The Indian Government has argued that continued cooperation under the treaty cannot be considered in isolation from Pakistan’s support for terrorism directed against India. New Delhi has therefore linked the future of the treaty to Pakistan’s conduct on cross-border terrorism.
Sharif’s warning marked a sharp escalation in the language used by Islamabad on water security. Pakistan has repeatedly described the Indus waters as vital to its agriculture, drinking-water supply, hydropower generation and broader economic stability.
At the same time, India has maintained that its position on the treaty is a political and strategic response to terrorism and not a declaration that it intends to deprive Pakistan of water. The two sides continue to present fundamentally different interpretations of the treaty’s legal and political consequences.
Sharif also used his UN address to internationalise the Kashmir issue, repeating Pakistan’s longstanding demand for what it described as a just and fair settlement.
He claimed that the people of Kashmir had waited for eight decades for the United Nations to fulfil what he called its commitment to a free and impartial plebiscite under UN auspices.
Sharif alleged that Kashmiris had faced illegal occupation, arbitrary detention, extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, sexual violence and collective punishment. He pledged continued Pakistani diplomatic, political and moral support for what he described as the Kashmiri people’s right to self-determination.
In other remarks associated with Pakistan’s position, Sharif referred to Kashmir as Pakistan’s “jugular vein” and said Islamabad would continue supporting the issue until its preferred political outcome was achieved.
India rejected Sharif’s references to Jammu and Kashmir at the UN General Assembly and other international forums.
New Delhi has repeatedly stated that Jammu and Kashmir is an integral and inalienable part of India. It has also maintained that Pakistan has no legitimate basis to raise the issue internationally while continuing to support cross-border terrorism.
India’s position is that the principal challenge in the region is terrorism emanating from Pakistani territory and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir. New Delhi has rejected calls for third-party involvement and has consistently insisted that issues concerning India and Pakistan must be addressed bilaterally, while terrorism cannot be treated as a subject for negotiation.
Sharif’s speech therefore combined three familiar elements of Pakistan’s international messaging: criticism of India’s position on the Indus Waters Treaty, demands for international attention to Kashmir, and an attempt to portray Pakistan’s role in the May 2025 conflict as a strategic success.
The remarks also served a domestic political purpose. With economic difficulties, opposition demonstrations and provincial security challenges placing pressure on his administration, Sharif used a major international platform to emphasise national sovereignty, water security and Pakistan’s military narrative.
India, meanwhile, continues to describe Operation Sindoor as a deliberate response to terrorism and the subsequent cessation of hostilities as the result of direct military communication. The competing accounts show that the May 2025 confrontation remains a major source of tension between the two nuclear-armed neighbours.
Sharif’s warnings over the Indus waters, his renewed Kashmir appeal and his attribution of the ceasefire to Trump are likely to reinforce the existing diplomatic divide rather than produce an immediate easing of India-Pakistan tensions.
ANI
