India told Pakistan at the UN that it would not bow to nuclear blackmail and warned against treating nuclear weapons as routine instruments of statecraft. Exercising its Right of Reply, New Delhi defended Operation Sindoor as a measured act of self-defence after the Pahalgam terror attack and reiterated its zero-tolerance stance on terrorism.
United Nations: India hits out at Pakistan at the UN, saying nuclear weapons must not be treated as "routine instruments of statecraft", asserting that New Delhi will "not bow" to nuclear blackmail.
India exercised its Right of Reply at the plenary meeting of the First Committee of the UN General Assembly Friday that deals with Disarmament and International Security issues.
Delivering India's Right of Reply, after remarks made by Pakistan raked the issue of Jammu and Kashmir, Senior Adviser (Disarmament) at the Permanent Mission of India to the Conference on Disarmament, Geneva, Anmol Sher Singh Bedi said Jammu and Kashmir is an integral and inalienable part of India.
"We call for India's illegally occupied territories to be vacated and returned," he said adding that India does not seek conflict.
"India has always stood for peace and continues to seek peace with one and with all. However, if there is no accountability for reckless actions, then peace rarely becomes a pause between crises," he said.
He underlined that India's capabilities are defensive in nature and are shaped by the country's own security environment and are not directed against any state.
"We heard concerns about escalation. These are legitimate concerns. However, these are best judged by conduct over time. Nuclear weapons must not be treated as routine instruments of statecraft," he said.
"A posture that relies on nuclear overhang to limit the consequences of subconventional activity raises the risk of escalation and not the prospect of restraint," Bedi said.
Referring to Pakistan's tactics, he said that in India's experience, crises in the region have tended to follow a "recurring pattern: first, provocation; second, denial of responsibility; and third, appeals for restraint once a response has been made.
"Where those in power are neither elected by people nor accountable to them, their decisions carry no risk and impose no cost for those who take them. That is how crisis becomes an instrument of power. That is how instability becomes useful, and that is how the cycle keeps on repeating," he said.
"The use of force by states under the garb of non-state actors does not erase the state's responsibility. India's right of self-defense remains intact," he said.
India underlined that it has drawn three clear lines.
"First, any terrorist attack against India will receive a fitting response. Second, India will not bow to nuclear blackmail. Third, India will make no distinction between those who sponsor terrorism and those who mastermind it," Bedi said.
He told the Committee that India's actions in May last year followed a "grave provocation" and the country acted in self-defence after the Pahalgam terror attack, in which 26 civilians were killed.
"These actions were measured, targeted, and designed to be non-escalatory," Bedi said.
In May last year, India had launched Operation Sindoor targeting terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir in retaliation for the dastardly April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam in Jammu and Kashmir perpetrated by The Resistance Front, a proxy of Pakistan-based terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba, in which 26 civilians, mostly tourists were killed.
He also noted that The Indus Waters Treaty, when it was signed, rested on good faith and goodwill.
"A state cannot undermine those foundations of trust and cooperation and at the same time insist that the privileges flowing from the relationship remain untouched," he said.
In the aftermath of the Pahalgam attack, India said the Indus Waters Treaty will be held in abeyance until Pakistan, a global epicentre of terror, credibly and irrevocably ends its support for cross-border and all other forms of terrorism.
On proliferation, Bedi referred to the history of the AQ Khan network, which contributed to the Security Council Resolution 1540 almost two decades back.
Named for the Pakistani nuclear physicist who is also known as the father of Pakistan's nuclear bomb, Khan led an extensive international network aimed at the proliferation of nuclear equipment and know-how, which the US State Department has described, as providing a "'one stop shopping' for countries seeking to develop nuclear weapons."
"This is relevant in the context of demands for unquestioned nuclear cooperation and transfer of advanced weapons and military capabilities. We urge all states and all responsible suppliers to exercise the highest degree of vigilance, not because of India, but for their own security," Bedi said.
