On Friday, India abstained from voting on a United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution that seeks humanitarian exemptions for sanctions, stating that terrorist groups often take “full advantage of such humanitarian carve-outs” and make a “mockery of sanction regimes.”
In an explanation of the vote, Indian Ambassador to the UN Ruchira Kamboj gave instances of several terrorist groups “in our neighborhood” that reincarnate “themselves as humanitarian organisations and civil society groups precisely to evade these sanctions,” or to raise funds and recruit fighters, referring to Pakistan-based Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), which is listed as a charity but is actually considered to be a front for the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LET) terror group.
“Under no circumstances, the “garb of humanitarian cover intended to be provided by these exemptions, should be misused by proscribed terrorist groups to expand their terror activities in the region and beyond,” she reiterated, adding that such exceptions should not aid the ‘mainstreaming’ of terror groups in the political space. “Due diligence and extreme caution in the implementation of this resolution, therefore, is an absolute must,” Kamboj asserted.
Keeping this in mind, she called for “caution and due diligence to be exercised while extending humanitarian assistance to proscribed entities under 1267, who continue to thrive with full state hospitality in territories universally acknowledged as terrorist havens by the international community.”
While understanding the humanitarian concerns behind the resolution, I agree fully with India’s reservations that prompted its abstention. We don’t have to look far across the border for evidence to substantiate @ruchirakamboj’s words. Well done, @IndiaUNNewYork @DrSJaishankar https://t.co/muwm3TsOzm
— Shashi Tharoor (@ShashiTharoor) December 10, 2022
In September, China blocked a joint effort by India and the United States (US) in the UNSC to designate LeT commander Sajid Mir as a ‘global terrorist’ under the United Nations (UN) 1267 sanctions list. In fact, in June and July, China thwarted attempts by India and the US to place LeT Deputy Chief Abdur Rahman Makki and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) deputy chief Rauf Azhar on the UNSC’s sanctions list as well.
A week later, in a veiled dig at China, India slammed countries that politicise the UNSC 1267 sanctions regime and defend “proclaimed terrorists,” warning that they do so at “their own peril” and to the detriment of their own “reputation” and “interests.”
Addressing the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), Indian External Affairs Minister (EAM) S. Jaishankar reiterated India’s commitment to a “zero tolerance” policy for cross-border terrorism and said such attacks have no justification, positing that no rhetoric can “hide blood-stained hands.”
He also said that the UNSC was sending “signals” of “impunity” by failing to sanction the “world’s most dreaded terrorists.” Jaishankar thus urged the Council to abandon the “pursuit of a narrow national agenda,” asserting, “If somebody blocks listing, particularly in cases where the merits of going ahead are very apparent, I think they do so frankly at peril to their own interests and to their own reputation.”
The next month, China blocked proposals by India and the US in the UNSC to designate two LeT leaders, Shahid Mahmood and Hafiz Talha Saeed, as global terrorists under the UNSC 167 sanctions list. It marked the fifth time this year that China has used its veto to block 1267 sanctions against terrorists from its all-weather ally Pakistan.
It has justified these decisions by saying it needs more time to evaluate the proposals and ensure their compliance with the UN rules and procedures.
Today's adoption of UNSC Resolution 2664, co-drafted by the United States, is an important step to enabling the delivery of humanitarian aid, while protecting against abuse and evasion by sanctioned persons and entities. https://t.co/1OVfhzwLhV
— Secretary Antony Blinken (@SecBlinken) December 9, 2022
China also blocked the designation of JeM chief Masood Azhar in the sanctions list back in 2018, demanding more information before introducing the measures. However, it finally gave in in 2019 after accepting evidence of his links to Al Qaeda.
While the Indian government has not commented on this week’s developments, it has previously accused China of misusing its permanent membership in the UNSC to block Pakistan-based terrorists from being sanctioned.
During the “No Money for Terror” conference in New Delhi last month, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi raised concern about state-sponsored terrorism, asserting that certain governments have adopted terror financing as their foreign policy.
Apart from PM Modi, Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, too, made a veiled dig at Pakistan during the two-day conference, saying, “Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad or Harkatul Mujahideen and their proxies thrive on assured financial support to commit barbaric acts of terror on Indian soil.”
Similarly, Indian Home Minister Amit Shah argued for the need to impose an “economic crackdown” against countries that provide a safe haven for terrorism. He proposed that India set up a Permanent Secretariat for the conference so that it remains focused on tackling such threats.
Humanitarians need to act fast to get medicine to those in need. To shelter a freezing family. To get food to a starving child.
— Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield (@USAmbUN) December 9, 2022
Today, by passing a humanitarian carveout for UN sanctions regimes, the Security Council made it even easier for them to do this lifesaving work. pic.twitter.com/0FJEPI0VLU
Pakistan, however, rejected the Indian officials’ “incorrigible and incurable” attempts to malign its commitment to counterterrorism. In a statement, the Pakistani Foreign Office rejected India’s “hollow rhetoric,” saying its recent removal from the Financial Action Task Force’s grey list shows how India’s efforts have “fallen flat.”
It went on to accuse India of undertaking a “relentless terror campaign” and “state-sponsored terrorism” in Jammu and Kashmir, wherein security forces “terrorise, torment, and torture” residents with immunity. It further claimed that India is also supporting the Pakistani Taliban.
To this end, it called on New Delhi to “reform and rectify” its own involvement in terror activities and refrain from making “false accusations” against Pakistan.
On Friday, Kamboj noted that India had “engaged constructively in the negotiations” on the UNSC resolution, which supports “the timely delivery of humanitarian assistance or to support other activities meeting basic human needs.” “The resolution is intended to ensure much needed predictability and safeguards to humanitarian agencies,” she remarked.
She also expressed regret that the resolution’s text did not include the mention of a “1267 Monitoring Team, coupled with robust reporting standards and mechanisms.” In this regard, sources told The Indian Express that the Indian side tried to negotiate a two-year review period for these measures and to allow only UN-approved organisations to provide humanitarian assistance. It is unclear whether these measures were included.
Huge achievement for #Ireland.
— Simon Coveney (@simoncoveney) December 9, 2022
Globally 250m people rely on Humanitarian Assistance in countries under UN sanctions, this will ensure assistance reaches them.
Brilliant achievement by @irishmissionun in partnership with 🇺🇸.
This is why we fought to be on the #SecurityCouncil. https://t.co/LuAx4oCacE
India, which is presiding over the UNSC presidency this month, was the only member to abstain on the vote, while the other 14 voted in favour. The resolution, introduced by the United States (US) and Ireland, sought to ensure that processing or payment of funds, other financial assets, economic resources, and provision of goods and services needed for the timely delivery of humanitarian assistance are permitted, and are not in violation of asset freezes imposed by the UNSC.
Congress Member of Parliament (MP) Shashi Tharoor lauded India’s stance at the UNSC, saying, “We don’t have to look far across the border for evidence to substantiate [Kamboj’s] words.”
In contrast, US Treasury of State Janet Yellen welcomed the “ground-breaking” resolution, saying, “The provision of legitimate humanitarian assistance to vulnerable populations reflects core American values.” Similarly, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken asserted that the resolution sends “a clear message that sanctions will not impede the delivery of critical humanitarian assistance by reputable humanitarian organisations.”
Along the same lines, US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield called it “a win for people everywhere,” noting that “sanctions are an important tool in our arsenal,” and that the resolution makes “existing UN sanctions more effective and better targeted toward bad actors.”
Irish Ambassador Fergal Mythen, too, said the resolution “has a very clear aim: to deal systematically with the unintended or unintended humanitarian consequences of UN sanctions regimes.”