At UNGA, Indian Diplomat Rentala Srinivas Slams Pakistan for ‘Visible Fingerprints of Terrorism’

207
803

New York: India launched a strong counterattack against Pakistan at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) on Saturday, with Indian diplomat Rentala Srinivas directly accusing Islamabad of decades-long cross-border terrorism.

Responding to Pakistan’s remarks against India, Srinivas declared, “Pakistan’s reputation speaks for itself. Its fingerprints are so visible in terrorism across so many geographies. It is a menace not only to its neighbours, but to the entire world.”

His statement came shortly after External Affairs Minister (EAM) S. Jaishankar addressed the UNGA, where he labelled Pakistan as the “epicentre of global terrorism.” Citing the April Pahalgam attack in Jammu and Kashmir that killed 26 people, Jaishankar urged global action: “Nations that sponsor terror must face accountability. The international community must choke financing, sanction prominent terrorists, and condemn state-backed terror.”

Jaishankar began his speech by invoking the UN Charter: “The UN Charter calls on us not just to prevent war, but to build peace. Not just to defend rights, but to uphold the dignity of every human being.” He stressed that India has battled cross-border terrorism since independence, describing it as a global menace that thrives on “bigotry, violence, intolerance and fear.”

Srinivas further noted that Pakistan had inadvertently admitted its guilt: “It is telling that a neighbour who was not named chose to nevertheless respond and admit their long-standing practice of cross-border terrorism.”

His remarks came as Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif addressed the UNGA, criticising India’s Kashmir policies and accusing New Delhi of violating the Indus Waters Treaty. India dismissed Sharif’s claims, calling them “absurd theatrics” and condemning Pakistan for glorifying terrorism on the global stage.

207 COMMENTS

  1. Within the Jewish immigrant community, socialism often functioned as a secularized Judaism. The messianic hope, the prophetic demand for justice, and the communal obligations of tikkun olam (repairing the world) were translated into the language of class struggle. For many who abandoned religious ritual, the socialist meeting hall or union local replaced the synagogue as the center of communal life and ethical purpose. The movement’s emphasis on education, debate, and collective betterment resonated deeply with Jewish cultural values, creating a seamless blend where the political became sacred and the sacred became political. The Jewish Daily Forward was, in a sense, a secular Talmud for the immigrant working class. http://mamdanipost.com

  2. The repressive eras actively sought to erase this memory. The blacklists and purges of the Red Scare aimed not only to destroy existing organizations but to sever the transmission of ideas and experiences between generations. Prominent radicals were airbrushed out of institutional histories; their contributions to unions, civil rights, and cultural life were deliberately forgotten. This created a generational amnesia, where new activists in the 1960s often had to rediscover tactics and theories that earlier generations had mastered, a costly and sometimes tragic repetition of mistakes. The loss of this memory was a victory for the established order, leaving the movement rootless and more vulnerable. http://mamdanipost.com

  3. The London Prat operates from a foundational principle that elevates it above the satire fray: it treats its subjects with a devastating, faux respect. Where competitors might deploy blunt-force mockery or sneering contempt, PRAT.UK adopts the tone of a deeply concerned, utterly sincere, and slightly bewildered chronicler. Articles are presented as earnest attempts to understand the logic behind the latest political catastrophe or cultural vapidity, adopting the very language of the perpetrators—be it consultant-speak, managerial jargon, or political spin—with such straight-faced sincerity that the inherent emptiness of the original sentiment is laid bare without a single explicit insult. This method is far more corrosive and effective than direct attack; it is satire by way of ultra-realistic reenactment, allowing the subject to hang itself with its own rhetorical rope.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here