India criticises Pakistan heading Taliban sanctions panel, flags conflict of interest at UN

India called for reforms in UN working methods, citing conflicts of interest, opaque decision-making, and outdated mandates like UNMOGIP.

PGurus Newsdesk

November 15, 2025

India urges reform in UN working methods, flags Pakistan’s role

India slams lack of transparency in UN’s anti-terror panels

India has sharply criticised Pakistan’s leadership of the UN Security Council committee overseeing sanctions against the Taliban, saying such appointments create “obvious and outright conflicts of interest”.

Speaking at the Council debate on working methods, India’s Permanent Representative P. Harish said members with “vested interests” must not be allowed to chair key panels dealing with sanctions and counter-terrorism.

While Harish did not directly name Pakistan, his remarks clearly pointed to Islamabad’s chairmanship of the 1988 Taliban sanctions committee and its position as co-chair of the Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC).

‘Obvious conflicts of interest’

The 1988 committee, responsible for enforcing sanctions including travel bans on Taliban leaders, had earlier delayed approvals for Afghan Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi’s travel waiver for a visit to India. Pakistan is currently embroiled in tensions with the Taliban-led government in Afghanistan, with frequent border clashes.

Harish argued that chairs of Security Council subsidiary bodies must be selected through a transparent, objective and time-bound process, adding that nations accused of harbouring terrorists should not lead panels tasked with addressing terrorism.

Concerns over secrecy and blocked listings

He also criticised the “veil of secrecy” around decision-making in the Council’s anti-terror committees, especially the opaque process used for rejecting terror-designation proposals.
He cited cases where listing requests against leaders of Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad were repeatedly blocked in the UN 1267 Committee, with China placing technical holds on proposals backed by India and the United States.

Harish noted that unlike delisting decisions, which require public justification, rejections of listing proposals occur without broader transparency, leaving non-Council members in the dark.

UNMOGIP mandate questioned

The envoy also touched upon the relevance of the UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP). India maintains the body has no role following the 1972 Simla Agreement, but Pakistan seeks to retain it.

Calling such bodies “a drain on the UN’s limited resources”, Harish urged for sunset clauses on operations whose mandates have become obsolete or politically motivated.

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.