UN chief offers mediation

Masood Haider Published July 14, 2016

UNITED NATIONS: United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon stands ready to mediate peace talks between Pakistan and India amid heightening tensions, provided the two neighbours accept his good offices, a spokesman said on Wednesday.

“Good offices is a standing offer,” UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric said at the regular noon briefing in reply to a question from a journalist who referred to ongoing clashes in India-held Kashmir and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s statement in which he also blamed the news media for inflaming the situation.

He underscored that the secretary general’s good offices worked only when both parties agreed to mediation. He said the UN chief had always encouraged direct talks between the two countries for the resolution of their outstanding issues.

Published in Dawn, July 14th, 2016

Newspaper

COMMENT: Will Afghanistan Change?

Violence-linked deaths surge 83pc

PML-N, PPP nominees file papers for four AJK Council seats

Amin a

Jul 14, 2016 06:53am

I am not sure UN is playing its part here. We have been ready for mediation by UN from day 1. Is it not obvious that we cannot work out issues among ourselves and we need a third party?

Recommend 0

Amar

Jul 14, 2016 11:01am

And we all know the final answer.. no thank you..

Recommend 0

Ash, India

Jul 14, 2016 11:19am

please stay away ...

Recommend 0

Hitesh

Jul 14, 2016 11:21am

UN should become tough against state-sponsored terrorism and propose sanctions against such countries

Recommend 0

Jahaalatmaar

Jul 14, 2016 11:29am

Why not solve the Kashmir problem according to the UN Resolutions in which Kashmiris should be given the right to self determination about the fate of Kashmir? Why Ban kimoon is ignoring them?

Recommend 0

human

Jul 14, 2016 11:37am

@Amin a - if you truly believe that truth is with you, why bring in third party to the talks?

Recommend 0

Ind

Jul 14, 2016 11:39am

welcome

Recommend 0

Mujahid HUSSAIN.

Jul 14, 2016 11:45am

India should play a big role like big brother.and resolve the issues with pakistan. both poor nations wanted peace for their development and prosperity.Ban ki moon as a mediator can play a big role if government approve it.

Recommend 0

SUYASH CHANDRA

Jul 14, 2016 12:07pm

Yes right decision

Recommend 0

Zealot

Jul 14, 2016 12:17pm

@Mujahid HUSSAIN. Its a old song now.we pakistanis must understand the struggle for pakistan first.because if we do that.we will able to sharpen our common sense

Recommend 0

Abdulla Hussain

Jul 14, 2016 12:23pm

Mr. Moon please take your offer to India first to see if they are ready for peace talk. As a peace loving country Pakistan has always desired to have a meaningful talk with India for a just settlement of the over stretched Kashmir occupation of Jammu & Kashmir.

Recommend 0

Tony Singh

Jul 14, 2016 01:08pm

@Mujahid HUSSAIN. My parents are from Peshawar, now in India. They also demand right of self determination on partition itself. Can't do it? Then why this previlige only for Kashmiris? If Kashmiris have right, so do the muslims who migrated to Pakistan and Hindus/Sikhs who migrated from Pakistan

Recommend 0

aslam shaikh1

Jul 14, 2016 01:23pm

@Abdulla Hussain Hindustan does not want to talk since it does not want UN resolution to be implemented, plain and simple.

Recommend 0

Rajesh

Jul 14, 2016 01:24pm

No Thank You

Recommend 0

Good Point

Jul 14, 2016 01:26pm

Sir, Why dont you first offer good offices for South China Sea dispute ?

Recommend 0

Raj

Jul 14, 2016 01:29pm

How many issues aolved by UN previously? Palastine - Israel? Vietnam - America? Ussr- US? Iran - Iraq? , S korea - N korea? Iraq, Syria, lybia? I cant find an answer.

Recommend 0

Zak

Jul 14, 2016 02:01pm

@Good Point because Kashmir is an older dispute approx 68 years old.

Recommend 0

A shah

Jul 14, 2016 01:58pm

@Jahaalatmaar yes agree. And as per UN agreement Pakistan must leave all of Kashmir for 5 years. Please read the Uan resolution before commenting.

Recommend 0

Raja

Jul 14, 2016 02:03pm

@Jahaalatmaar have u ever read their resolution

Recommend 0

Horseman

Jul 14, 2016 02:08pm

Let this be very clear, India will deal with its issues itself. We don't need anyone's help, but yes if anyone needs our help we'll be there for them.

Recommend 0

mohammad iqbal

Jul 14, 2016 02:10pm

UN is not needed here. The time is gone. Only war, that too, a nuclear one may settle the matter for ever. Kashmir is a ego factor for both Pakistan and India.

Recommend 0

s.khan

Jul 14, 2016 02:12pm

@A shah and what about India ? should it pull out too?? please elaborate here

Recommend 0

rohit kumar

Jul 14, 2016 02:26pm

@Amin a You must read Shimla agreement. Kashmir is a bilateral issue and can only be resolved through talks.

Recommend 0

Zealot

Jul 14, 2016 02:26pm

@mohammad iqbal i second you..but we can bycott india at all levels that will be enough to please our kashmiri brothers and simplest way to live in peace

Recommend 0

Traveller

Jul 14, 2016 02:28pm

@s.khan Yes. India has to pull out as well, but unlike Pakistan, can keep minimum force to defend Kashmir. But this will be done after the UN observers confirm that Pakistan pullout is complete with regulars, non-regulars and tribesmen out of Kashmir. Then the UN Observer on India and Pakistan will hold a referendum to determine the peoples will. However the problem with this resolution is that it was passed when Kashmir still had 40% Hindu population, which was driven away my the militancy. So a large part of those that should have been party to it are already dislocated. Hence the sanity of this resolution does not stand. Also as of 2010 UN has removed Kashmir from its list of disputed territories.

Recommend 0

Angry Pitbull

Jul 14, 2016 02:30pm

For What?

Recommend 0

manish

Jul 14, 2016 02:37pm

@Mujahid HUSSAIN. Who is he ??? Does he know about Simla agreement?

Recommend 0

Sri

Jul 14, 2016 02:40pm

@Zealot Pakistan should probably just try and keep itself away from isolation by the world and sanctions

Recommend 0

Karim Mombani

Jul 14, 2016 02:41pm

UN has already passed a resolution over it. But they should rather now lay down a process for execution of the resolution as well.

Recommend 0

Taimoor Khan

Jul 14, 2016 02:45pm

Mr Ban would be better advised to look into the dusted archive of the UN and see what it says about the Kashmir conflict. Rather waiting for India to give its consent, force all parties to come to negotiating table by invoking UN backed sanctioned against any party which is dragging its feat. UN didn't ask Saddam Hussain for his consent before applying crippling sanctions against Iraq did they?

Recommend 0

saagar

Jul 14, 2016 02:47pm

@Jahaalatmaar , Have you read this resolution, it is available on UN portal. It has 3 steps and Pak govt has to take the first one. 1. Remove all military from kashmir.2. India is allowed to retain Army in kashmir. 3. voting. So voting is not possible until first 2 conditions are met. Convince pak govt first

Recommend 0

Shaukat

Jul 14, 2016 02:50pm

Shimla agreement doesn't include your name as mediator Mr. Moon.

Recommend 0

bharat bhuriya

Jul 14, 2016 03:01pm

Pakistan you forgot shimla agreement?

Recommend 0

Jai

Jul 14, 2016 03:08pm

@mohammad iqbal Lets start it. We will finish it.

Recommend 0

Abdulkarim

Jul 14, 2016 03:12pm

@Hitesh Yes especially against countries whose agents have been captured and confessed to have caused insurgency in other countries.An example kalbushan of India.

Recommend 0

niks

Jul 14, 2016 03:15pm

yea india took the matter to Un at first place and you created a mess out of it , thanks but no thanks.. stay out of it.

Recommend 0

Hari(Chennai)

Jul 14, 2016 03:24pm

Key points to note are "... the secretary general’s good offices worked only when both parties agreed to mediation" and " .. the UN chief had always encouraged direct talks between the two countries for the resolution of their outstanding issues". PERIOD

Recommend 0

pak sarzameen

Jul 14, 2016 03:26pm

@Jahaalatmaar UN resolution is three part. 1. Pakistan should pull back from occupied territory. 2. India will reduce but will have soldiers to defend boundaries. 3. Plebiscite to be done with the actual Kashmirs. that is why we do not want all three point and only point 3

Recommend 0

aslam shaikh1

Jul 14, 2016 03:37pm

@Tony Singh read history before making statements since Kashmir was supposed to be part of Pakistan in 1947.

Recommend 0

MNM

Jul 14, 2016 03:40pm

@Jahaalatmaar No place for UN Resolution after Simla Agreement.

Recommend 0

Muhammad Shrafat

Jul 14, 2016 03:43pm

Pakistan should provide military support for helpless Kashmiris.

Recommend 0

S Chandra

Jul 14, 2016 03:42pm

As UN told if both parties agreed then it will do mediation. So India will never agree for this. So point to take Kashmir issue to UN always. Now they are also fadeup with this routine baseless complaints and no one even bother and pay attention what happens in Kashmir. So best to discuss it among India and Pakistan.

Recommend 0

Javed

Jul 14, 2016 03:45pm

@Jahaalatmaar shimla aggrement say mutual talk no third party talk and shimla aggrement ruled out all previous aggrement

Recommend 0

THOUGHT PROVOKING

Jul 14, 2016 03:45pm

the Kashmir issue should need to be resolved according to the UN Resolutions in which Kashmiris should be given the right to self determination about the fate of Kashmir? Why it has been ignored since long time.??? The both countries should move forwards through peace talks and Negotiations by friendly diplomacy

Recommend 0

Harmony-1©

Jul 14, 2016 03:54pm

@Hitesh - India is already exposed here with "state-sponsored terrorism" - RAW operative's revelations and terror funding for militants in Pakistan!

Recommend 0

MNM

Jul 14, 2016 03:59pm

@THOUGHT PROVOKING No place for UN Resolution after Simla Agreement.

Recommend 0

Zuber Ahmed Khan

Jul 14, 2016 04:06pm

Peace talks should be resume without wasting time. India should ignore its claim over Kashmir. Kashmir is an international issue, and claim of India that it is integral part of India is childish. Ignoring all the previous mistakes India should give autonomy to Kashmir.

Recommend 0

Uday Kulkarni

Jul 14, 2016 04:10pm

If you read the last paragraph of this article; it is crystal clear quote " He underscored that the secretary general’s good offices worked only when both parties agreed to mediation. He ........encouraged direct talks between the two countries .....outstanding issues", unquote. Clearly the UN chief is suggesting direct talks as per 1972 shimla agreement between the two countries which is not adjudicating or resolving as per 1947 resolutions or plebiscite.

Recommend 0

Sudhir Neyalasinger

Jul 14, 2016 04:11pm

@Taimoor Khan That's where you are missing the point. India is not Iraq and she is one of the major contributors to various UN funds. With the exception of China all security council members are India's close trade and defence partners. Even China can't push India beyond a point as it has a bilateral trade of $80 billion with India.

Recommend 0

Sharmaji

Jul 14, 2016 04:19pm

Then for what Shimla Agreement was signed by both the countries.

Recommend 0

Mahen

Jul 14, 2016 04:21pm

@Harmony-1© ANY evidence?

Recommend 0

Harmony-1©

Jul 14, 2016 04:33pm

@Mahen - 1. Your RAW operative's evidence. 2. Brahamdagh Bugti of Baluchistan, who leads a designated terrorist organisation, openly admitted in BBC interview of RAW assistance and involvement. 3. Police interviews given in money laundering case in London.

Recommend 0

Timeto stopthis

Jul 14, 2016 04:44pm

@Zak As usual you want UN laws to apply to India but not to China. Your duplicity stands exposed.

Recommend 0

Timeto stopthis

Jul 14, 2016 04:53pm

A lot of illiterate people are commenting here and asking for the UN resolutions to be applied in Kashmir. The UN resolutions are outdated and have been replaced by the Shimla agreement which clearly states that Kashmir is a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan and should be resolved bilaterally without the intervention of a third party. Stop supporting terrorism and India will be happy to hold bilateral talks with you. Terrorism and talks cant go hand in hand.

Recommend 0

Zealot

Jul 14, 2016 05:13pm

Bycott india and indian world.if pakistan still think negotiations are only option then must understand it.we cant get kashmir through negotiations since independence how can now??? Sometimes self respect is important.we must learn to use to it

Recommend 0

ANT

Jul 14, 2016 06:10pm

Let him mediate and implement the courts decision in the SCS!!

Recommend 0

Muhammad

Jul 14, 2016 06:13pm

@pak sarzameen and India do not want even single point of UN resolution in fact Indians even do not want to speak about the plight of millions of Kashmiris

Recommend 0

Muhammad

Jul 14, 2016 06:14pm

@Hitesh "UN should become tough against state-sponsored terrorism and propose sanctions against such countries" Yes and also become tough against state terrorism

Recommend 0

Muhammad

Jul 14, 2016 06:15pm

@Timeto stopthis "India will be happy to hold bilateral talks with you" kindly say these words in India and they will burn you alive

Recommend 0

Ghaznavi

Jul 14, 2016 07:07pm

"He underscored that the secretary general’s good offices worked only when both parties agreed to mediation." This double standard is reserved for Muslim disputes. Where was this approach when East Timor and South Sudan were being addressed?

Recommend 0

Sultan Pervez

Jul 15, 2016 07:59am

There is a need to change our approach to convince the majority in the UN that it is India who does not want to hold constructive and meaningful negotiations with its cousin and neighbour. It is Pakistan who is the thirsty party not India who is desperate to reach a just solution to the Kashmir issue. Pakistan has taken this up with the members of theUN at various level many of the times since August,1947 without success due to India not responding. I believe it is high time UN got its act together and gave India a deadline to comply with its resolutions or else face the music.

Recommend 0

Peyton Khan

Jul 15, 2016 08:37am

If any "settlement"In J&K does NOT satistfy Pakistan, the militancy will continue! Just look at China's reaction to UN law of the seas decision! China says it is rubbish and won'r recognize it!

Recommend 0

Peyton Khan

Jul 15, 2016 08:43am

@Taimoor Khan ; Mr. Ban should first mediate between the TWO Koreas and re-unification of his own divided nation. Then he can mediate between other nations!

Recommend 0

satish

Jul 15, 2016 09:01am

What is the use. He is mediating between Pakistan and India. There is no conflict between India and Pakistan as of now. Rather he will resist pakistan to resist any aggressive move in the issue. whereas pakistan is itself indulged in internal problems, it can not afford to engage with India aggresively. And what a pity with whoever UN stands that community or country destroyed completely. UN is nothing more that Group of Babus of different countries.

Recommend 0

Baaligh

Jul 15, 2016 10:09am

"He underscored that the secretary general’s good offices worked only when both parties agreed to mediation.". But both--rather all - parties agreed but still the UN sponsored talks on Yemen or Syria has not yielded any result. This shows that the UN chief holds no authoritative position and remains under pressure from vested interests as was the case when he excluded / removed the name of Saudi Arabia from the list of countries which commit war crimes. As regards Kashmir issue the UN chief would be considered to have done the job if he can try and arrange implementation of UN resolutions according to which India is required (bound) to settle the issue as per wish of Kashmiri people themselves.

Recommend 0

sameer

Jul 15, 2016 03:07pm

If Pakistan is so keen to obey what UN is saying then why not Pakistani still arrested the UN listed Hafiz saeed.

Recommend 0

Iftikhar Husain

Jul 15, 2016 04:04pm

United Nation and its member must take action to help yhese innocent people.

Recommend 0

whitesky

Jul 15, 2016 05:00pm

@Jahaalatmaar : UN resolution does not give the Kashmiris self determination if they want to remain independent and sovereign state. Plebiscite is to choose between the two. But PLEASE ALSO NOTE ---- THIS RESOLUTION IS NOT BINDING .

Recommend 0

Zak

Jul 16, 2016 12:57am

@whitesky if you want sincere peace, then make it binding without quibbling, if it is the intention.

Recommend 0

sub se pehley pakistan

Jul 16, 2016 01:28am

pak should forget kashmir, secure its water sources and focus on its own development.

Recommend 0

Siddhesh Bhanushali

Jul 16, 2016 01:29am

Ban ki moo should be very careful of not being seen as partisan. Being the chief of U.N. he has to be non partial, I hope he does not play Chinese politics in the issue....we reserve the right to decline any recommendations of the U.N.

Recommend 0

Jul 16, 2016 07:12am

@Sultan Pervez : "...I believe it is high time UN got its act together and gave India a deadline to comply with its resolutions or else face the music" When someone is that desperate they start believing in miracles...

Recommend 0

Branded Content

Putting better health in more hands: Reckitt Pakistan unveils Saaf Sehatmand Pakistan in partnership with Aga Khan Foundation

Powered by Dettol and Harpic, the flagship platform begins in schools to provide safe drinking water, rehabilitated toilets, handwashing facilities and hygiene education.

28 years of McDonald’s Pakistan: celebrating the local partners behind the Golden Arches

The milestone highlighted the structural evolution of the company's local procurement model.

Etihad Town Sialkot delivers Possession ahead of time

The project was delivered within just 1.5 years against a 3-year payment plan, while commercial possession had already been handed over to customers in January 2026.