Pakistan recently commenced its historic two-year term as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), effectively replacing Japan on one of the two seats for Asia-Pacific member states. Given the grave security challenges and protracted conflicts in an increasingly polarized world, can Pakistan play a meaningful role in shaping the discussion and agenda at the premier global body? Several factors merit attention.

Consider counter-terrorism. A deadly surge in terrorism and associated violence killed more than 1,600 Pakistani civilians and security officials last year, while the UNSC underscores a uniformed strategy to counter groups across regions. This provides a vital opportunity for Pakistan to underscore the gravity of cross-border terror attacks emanating from Afghanistan. After all, Islamabad has long argued that the attack capabilities of Al-Qaeda and the outlawed Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) remain largely unaddressed, providing an opening for greater information sharing on their financial support, inter-group coordination, and expanding terror operations. These contributions can help integrate Pakistan’s counter-terrorism concerns within the UNSC’s Sanctions Committee on the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. As a non-permanent member, Pakistan will acquire a seat at the Committee, signaling potential influence in shaping sanctions or terror designations against individuals and groups during its term.

To Pakistan’s advantage, there is growing appetite within the UNSC to adapt to Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State (ISIS)’s expanding terror footprint. For instance, there is focus on promoting “country assessments” that could help member states advance the work of targeted sanctions, and improve their own capacities to combat terrorism. Given Pakistan’s push to sanction Majeed Brigade – the suicide arm of the outlawed Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) – country assessments could play an important role in communicating a shared call to action. 

Key pieces are falling into place: Al-Qaeda’s operational support to the TTP remains well-established, and the latter’s engagement with Baloch militant groups has intensified since July 2022. Given the Committee’s focus on combatting terrorist groups and their expanding sphere of influence, Pakistan’s contributions could serve as a value addition to the UNSC’s evolving counterterrorism agenda.

Related News

Will Syria sign a security agreement with 'Israel' soon?

Contrasting melodies at the UN General Assembly

Interestingly, Pakistan’s involvement in the UNSC could also prove significant for UNSC reform. Islamabad can emerge better positioned to strengthen its leadership of the Uniting for Consensus (UfC) group, a Pakistan-backed grouping that has called for an increase in non-permanent member seats and a longer term at the council. Islamabad can argue that the current arrangement has brought in voices from South Asia to Latin America, but the complexity of challenges – from the Gaza war to climate and terrorism – demands greater involvement from both small and medium-sized states. 

The time is also right for Pakistan to push for a longer duration of non-permanent states to help democratize UNSC’s peace-building agenda. After all, evidence suggests that the inclusion of more non-permanent small states can increase their influence on international security matters, a long-overdue impact sought by scores of developing states. But evidence also suggests that the effectiveness of small states is constrained by their two-year term limit. This underlines the importance of Pakistan’s UNSC reform push, which puts a premium on extending time-limits and ensuring that small states remain central to a more democratized, inclusive and representative global body.

It is true that the present state of UNSC makes it difficult for states to keep their hopes up. The war on Gaza has been met with lack of decisive action, as states resort to veto and give effective peacebuilding a backseat. UNSC’s role as an anchor for collective security is also questionable when one of its core members is either part of a major conflict or aiding it. Third, prospects of increased global representation also remain bleak when core UNSC states have divergent views on how to attain it. In short, Pakistan assumes its spot at a time when UNSC’s peacemaking priorities, and desire for reform, is barely in sync with the realities of a deeply fragmented and diverse world.

Still, a two-year term can lead to some critical awareness and advocacy around Muslim rights and liberties. Pakistan, one of several non-permanent members from Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) countries, can lend more visibility to the relentless onslaught on Gaza, the scale of humanitarian suffering, and contemplate options for an urgent and effective ceasefire. Similarly, Islamabad’s proximity to Russia and the United States – two powers wielding historic influence in Syria – can help shape expectations on a Syrian-led, UN-facilitated peace process, a stated priority for Pakistan. Thus, Pakistan’s two-year term can serve as a window for Muslim countries to communicate their international peacemaking priorities. In turn, it enables Islamabad to take a more active agenda-setting role in matters spanning the Middle East and South Asia.

Ultimately, Pakistan’s historic eighth term on the Council brings substantial opportunities to shape future priorities around counter-terrorism, deepen advocacy for UNSC reforms, and become a voice for a safer and more secure Muslim world. Deep-seated divisions within the UNSC may leave little room for optimism. But that is exactly the fuel that Pakistan needs to create small but meaningful change.