Mr Chairman, we are fighting poverty, but our neighbouring country Pakistan is fighting us. The day before yesterday, speaking from this very platform, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi made various allegations against India. He also called us guilty of spreading “state-sponsored terrorism,” and accused us of human rights violations. When he was speaking, listeners were saying—”Look who’s talking!” That country, which crosses the boundaries of brutality and kills hundreds of innocent people, was standing here teaching us lessons in humanity, preaching to us about human rights.
Pakistan’s Prime Minister said that Muhammad Ali Jinnah had given Pakistan a foreign policy legacy of peace and friendship. I would like to remind him that Muhammad Ali Jinnah did not leave a legacy of peace and friendship policy—history knows this very well. But it is a truth that Prime Minister Modi did show an intention of peace and friendship. He extended a hand of friendship, overcoming all obstacles. But who discoloured that story, Mr. Abbasi, you have to answer that, not me.
He was standing here talking about old United Nations resolutions, but doesn’t he remember that under the Shimla Agreement and the Lahore Declaration, both our countries decided that we would resolve our mutual issues by sitting together, not accepting the mediation of any third party? Mr. Chairman, the truth is that Pakistan’s politicians remember everything but pretend to forget it for their convenience.
Pakistan’s Prime Minister also talked about a Comprehensive Dialogue. Let me remind him that on December 9, 2015, when I went to Islamabad for the Heart of Asia conference, under the patronage of their leader and then Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, a decision was made to start a dialogue afresh, and it was given a new name. The name was Comprehensive Bilateral Dialogue. The word “bilateral” was included thoughtfully so that there would be no doubt, no suspicion, no misgiving, and it would be certain that the talks would be only between the two countries, not with the help of any third party. But why did that process not move forward? For this too, Mr. Abbasi, you are accountable, not me.
Mr. Chairman, today from this platform, I want to ask a question to Pakistan’s politicians: have you ever sat together and thought that India and Pakistan became independent together, but today India is known around the world as an IT superpower, and Pakistan is known as a terrorist country, a country of terror? What is the reason for this? Have you ever thought about it? There is only one reason: that India, while facing the challenges of terrorism given by Pakistan, never allowed its domestic development to stop. During seventy years, governments of different parties came, but every government continued the pace of development.
Mr. Chairman, we built IITs (Indian Institute of Technology), we built IIMs (Indian Institute of Management), we built hospitals like AIIMS (All India Institute of Medical Sciences), we built world-renowned institutions in the field of space. People of Pakistan, what did you build? You built Lashkar-e-Taiba, you built Jaish-e-Mohammed, you built the Haqqani Network, you built Hizbul Mujahideen, you built terrorist hideouts, you built terrorist camps.
Mr. Chairman, we produced scholars, we produced scientists, we produced engineers, we produced doctors. People of Pakistan, what did you produce? You produced terrorists, you produced jihadis. And you know that doctors save the lives of dying people, and jihadis kill living people. And your jihadi organisations are not only killing the people of India, they are also killing the people of our neighbouring countries Afghanistan and Bangladesh; they too are in their grip.
Mr. Chairman, this is the first time in the history of the UNGA that a country asked for the right to reply in the evening and had to give explanations to three people at once, had to answer three countries at once. This single fact demonstrates Pakistan’s misdeeds. I would say, people of Pakistan, the money you are spending to help terrorists, if you spend it for the welfare of your people, for the progress of your country, then the world will be free from terrorism, and at the same time, the welfare of your people will be possible, and the development of your country will be possible.
Mr. Chairman, among the problems that the United Nations is seeking to solve today, the most prominent is terrorism. India is the oldest victim of terrorism. But I remember when we used to use the word terrorism, the big countries of the world would dismiss it by calling it a law and order issue. But today, when terrorism is spreading its feet all around, now all countries are concerned about it. But I think the time has come when we need to think introspectively in this world; we need to introspect.
All countries, in bilateral discussions, in multilateral forums, whenever we issue joint statements, we all condemn terrorism and also take a resolve of unity to fight against it. But the truth is that this has become a ritual that we perform. But actually, when the time comes to fulfil that resolve, some countries make decisions by putting their own interests first. This process has been going on for many years, and that is why the United Nations has not been able to decide on the CCIT proposed by India in 1996 until today. Consensus has been reached on all the clauses of the CCIT [Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism]; if consensus has not been reached, it is on one clause, and that is the definition of terrorism.
I would say, the definition is the root from which the distinction between good and bad terrorists emerges. If we cannot agree on the definition, how will we fight together? If my view of a terrorist and your view of a terrorist are different, how will we fight together? If differences also emerge on the listing of terrorists in the Security Council, how will we fight together? Therefore, Mr. Chairman, through you, my humble request to this assembly today is that we stop looking at terrorism from different perspectives. Let us create a common perspective and accept that terrorism is a threat to all of humanity. No reason, no matter how big, can justify violence. Therefore, if we take a resolve to fight together with unity, we should also honour it. And if we honour it, we should also implement it. And I would like that this year, by building consensus on the definition of CCIT, we must pass the CCIT this year.
This is part of ThePrint’s Great Speeches series. It features speeches and debates that shaped modern India.