How UNSC blew its credibility in the fight against terrorism – Firstpost

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) decision to appoint Pakistan as the chair of its Taliban Sanctions Committee is a staggering betrayal of its own counter terrorism mandate effectively turning a global watchdog into an enabler of the very forces it was meant to restrain. This development has not only raised eyebrows but also serious questions about the UNSC’s commitment to fighting global terrorism. The appointment is not merely ironic, it is in fact profoundly dangerous. Pakistan, far from being a neutral stakeholder in the fight against terror, has long operated as the global incubator of jihadist terrorism. It has systemically used terrorism as an instrument of foreign policy and continues to harbour, finance, and protects internationally sanctioned terrorist organizations like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM).

By placing such a country at the helm of the committee tasked with monitoring and sanctioning the Taliban, the UNSC has signalled an erosion of its foundational principles. It has, in effect, made a mockery of its own anti-terror framework and compromised the very credibility it is supposed to uphold.

The 1988 Sanctions Committee, created under UNSC Resolution 1988, was designed with a critical mission, that is to oversee and implement measures such as asset freezes, travel bans, and arms embargoes on individuals and entities associated with the terror organizations. These sanctions aim to pressure Taliban leaders and affiliates into abandoning terrorism, severing suspected links with international terror networks like Al-Qaeda, and embracing peaceful political processes. The committee’s role is essential in maintaining the fragile global consensus against jihadist extremism.

However, the appointment of Pakistan as chair subverts this mission. It is akin to giving a fox the keys to the henhouse. Rather than being a neutral enforcer of sanctions, Pakistan has a direct and longstanding relationship with the very actors the committee is meant to restrain. The contradiction is so stark that it calls into question the sincerity of the international community’s commitment to eradicating terrorism especially at a time when Pakistan’s military Field Marshal Asim Munir has openly come across voicing support for the global designated terrorist organisations like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohamad (JeM). Both these terrorist organisations have a huge role in perpetrating terrorism not only against India but also globally. The recent Pahalgam terror attack is a testimony to the fact that Pakistan continues to brazenly brandish and perpetrate terrorism.

Pakistan’s reputation as a state sponsor of terrorism is neither speculative nor exaggerated. It is rooted in decades of documented actions, international reports, intelligence findings, and firsthand accounts from counterterrorism experts and security agencies around the world. Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency has been the primary architect behind a complex web of terrorist groups that serve the country’s strategic interests across South Asia and beyond.

In India, Pakistan has consistently supported terror groups like LeT and JeM, responsible for some of the most horrific attacks in the region. LeT’s role in the 2008 Mumbai attacks that claimed over 170 lives, including foreign nationals to the recent Pahalgam attack claiming 26 lives is a chilling testament to Pakistan’s continuous strategy of using terrorism as asymmetric warfare. JeM, likewise, carried out numerous attacks on Indian soil. From attacking the Indian Parliament in 2001 to the deadly Pulwama suicide bombing in 2019, JeM continues till date with its terror activities in Jammu and Kashmir. Both groups continue to operate openly in Pakistan, under various aliases and charitable guises, with complete state protection.

In Afghanistan, Pakistan’s influence is even more brazen. The Taliban movement itself originated in the Pakistan, where its leadership council the so-called “Quetta Shura” was long headquartered. Pakistan provided the Taliban with training, arms, financial aid, and ideological guidance, facilitating their rise during the Afghan civil war and their resurgence following the US invasion in 2001.

As the United States and its allies fought to stabilise Afghanistan, Pakistan played a duplicitous game. It positioned itself as a frontline partner in the War on Terror, receiving billions of dollars in military and economic aid, while simultaneously offering sanctuary to Taliban leaders and other insurgent groups that targeted NATO forces. The infamous discovery of Osama bin Laden in the garrison town of Abbottabad, just at a distance of a stone throw away from Pakistan’s elite military academy, laid bare this hypocrisy for the world to see. Far from being an isolated incident, this was emblematic of Pakistan’s long-standing strategy of playing both sides to maximise geopolitical leverage.

The Taliban’s formation and survival owe much to Pakistan’s unrelenting support. During the 1990s, as Afghanistan descended into civil war, Pakistan threw its full weight behind the Taliban, providing them with fighters, training camps, financial aid, and political backing. Pakistan had a clear goal and that was to establish a compliant, Sunni Islamist regime in Kabul that would serve its strategic interests and offer “strategic depth” against India.

After the 2001 US invasion, while Taliban fighters melted into the mountains of southern Afghanistan, their leaders found refuge across the border in Pakistan. The ISI continued to facilitate their operations, organize logistics, and recruit new fighters from Pakistani madrassas. Even when the Taliban were weakened, Pakistan protected them, ensuring their eventual return to power in 2021. Terror organisations like LeT and JeM provided the Taliban with fighters at the behest of Pakistan military wing ISI. Till today both JeM and LeT operate under the complete command and structure of Pakistan’s ISI.

Today, the Taliban’s government in Kabul remains misaligned with Pakistan amidst increased tensions. The notion that Pakistan can now objectively lead a sanctions committee against the Taliban defies all logic and reason. It is a textbook case of conflict of interest, where the judge is also the enabler and the prosecutor of the accused.

Adding to this deeply troubling picture is the latest report from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the global watchdog for anti-money laundering and counter-terror financing. Despite Pakistan’s efforts to avoid being blacklisted in recent years, FATF’s findings continue to expose the country’s complicity in terror financing.

The recent report on the terror financing risks clearly outlines that banned terrorist organisations such as Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Taiba are still raising funds inside Pakistan through a network of front organisations and non-profit entities (NPOs). These so-called charitable trusts and NGOs serve as fundraising arms, operating under names like Falah-e-Insaniat Foundation (associated with LeT) and Al-Rehmat Trust (linked to JeM), similar to the Aal Rashid Trust and the Al Furqan Trust. These entities solicit donations under the guise of humanitarian relief, only to funnel the money into terror training camps, arms purchases, and operational logistics.

Even more alarming is the FATF’s emphasis on the global connectivity of these groups. Jaish and Lashkar are not isolated regional actors. They have documented ties to Al-Qaeda, sharing training infrastructure, ideological resources, and intelligence networks. This collaboration has implications far beyond South Asia. It means that funds raised in Pakistan are potentially being used to finance global jihadist operations, from East Africa to West Asia to Western Europe, as per the latest FATF report on terror financing.

FATF’s conclusion has always remained unequivocal that Pakistan has failed to dismantle the core infrastructure of these groups. While some superficial arrests and organisational bans have been carried out under international pressure, the ecosystem enabling terrorism from ideological indoctrination to financial support remains intact and thriving under the protection of the Pakistani state.

The appointment of Pakistan as the chair of the UNSC’s Taliban Sanctions Committee has thus set a deeply dangerous precedent. It undermines the very principles on which the committee was founded. Instead of holding terror sponsors accountable, the UNSC has now entrusted one with regulatory powers. This is not just an oversight, but in fact it is a systemic failure of the international security architecture.

By granting Pakistan this position, the UNSC sends a troubling message to victims of terrorism around the world that political expediency trumps justice and that the global fight against terrorism is negotiable. It also emboldens other state sponsors of terror, who may now seek similar legitimisation under the cloak of multilateralism.

Moreover, this move disincentivises genuine global cooperation on counterterrorism. Countries that have borne the brunt of terror attacks will rightfully question the credibility of a system that rewards terror enablers instead of punishing them. It risks turning the UN from a global custodian of peace into a bureaucratic farce unable to live up to its own charter.

The UNSC’s decision to appoint Pakistan, the very nation that nurtured, protected, and empowered the Taliban, as chair of the Taliban Sanctions Committee is not merely ill-advised, but it is an act of self-sabotage. It has severely diminished the credibility of one of the most critical counterterrorism mechanisms in the international system. Rather than deterring terrorism, this appointment legitimises it; rather than isolating sponsors of extremism, it empowers them; and rather than safeguarding global security, it has in turn endangered it.

In doing so, the UNSC has inadvertently become a global joke, its seriousness questioned, its impartiality compromised, and its effectiveness dismantled. With the appointment of Pakistan as a chair, the message from the UNSC to terrorists is clear: if your sponsor plays their cards right, not only will they evade sanctions, but they’ll be put in charge of enforcing them.

Raja Muneeb is an independent journalist and columnist. He tweets @rajamuneeb. The views expressed in this article are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of Firstpost.