Pakistan’s UNSC Presidency: Diplomatic Opportunity or Political Spectacle

The United Nations Security Council’s (UNSC) presidency, occupying one of the most fleeting of public offices, rarely receives more than passing notice outside of diplomatic quarters. However, the recent assumption of this role by Pakistan has sparked discussion about whether this is a chance for real diplomacy or just a platform for theatrical performances and political posturing. Pakistan’s exercise for the current foreign policy climate, the nature of the presidency itself, and the international responses influencing this position are all necessary to comprehend the ramifications.

What does the UNSC Presidency Mean?

The presidency is ascribed authority of the president to hold the presidency for one month, and it does not confer any greater global authority than the other 14 members of the Council – five permanent (P5) and ten elected. All 15 members hold the presidency for one month and rotate the presidency in alphabetical order of the member states. In other words, at the end of each month, the next State – alphabetically – will become President.

The duties of the president are procedural: to set the agenda; to chair the meetings; to issue statements on behalf of the Council; and to help negotiate amongst the parties concerned. The presidency does not grant veto power to the State and does not allow a State to push its agenda independently.

Nonetheless, although largely a procedural role, the presidency provides a State an opportunity to gain visibility, leverage, and raise issues that are deemed important. The presidency, particularly in the last several years, has also provided an opportunity for a State to establish itself as an engaged and visible player on the global stage. In this regard, the presidency acts as a PR opportunity. Whether that opportunity leads to recognizable diplomatic outcomes depends on planning, performance, and discipline.

Pakistan’s Diplomatic Context

Pakistan’s presidency comes at a vital moment of complexity, both domestically and internationally. It is an extremely challenging time for a country that is managing such deteriorating economic, political disagreements, and security issues, all of which inhibit the country’s global agency. In terms of foreign relations, Islamabad is principally focused on its ties to India and its conduct with Afghanistan’s Taliban-led government, and, more broadly, its balancing act between the United States, China, and the Gulf states.

Pakistan has traditionally relied on multilateral forums to give its position on contentious issues, such as Kashmir, a boost. The Pakistani diplomacy has frequently used these platforms to bring attention to India’s policies in Jammu and Kashmir, which is viewed as an attempt to highlight the territorial dispute. Pakistan criticizes for raising the emotional aspect of a territorial conflict that has little or no traction, resulting in limited action in an international forum. Most relevant power actors have disengaged or taken a hopeful, wishful position, and encouraged India and Pakistan to discuss the issue bilaterally – yet, bilateral dialogue has stalled.

The Friday Times. (2025, July 2). From Symbolism to Strategy: Pakistan’s UNSC Presidency.[1]

Diplomacy: Opportunities for Substance

If Pakistan seeks to demonstrate true diplomatic capability, it has multiple opportunities during its presidency:

1. Taking a Global Approach to Security Discussions Beyond Regional Animosity

Pakistan can initiate discussions on global rather than strictly regional matters. Topics such as cyber threats, peacekeeping reform, or climate security are all substantive, cross-cutting issues that affect many of the UN member nations. If Pakistan could help put discussions on the agenda of the more global themes, it would help position Pakistan’s concerns and contributions as something more than simply a responsible international actor and would create the space needed to continue highlighting itself as not merely a country with self-serving aspirations in a territorial conflict.

2. Strengthening Peacekeeping Record

Pakistan has been one of the largest persistent contributors to UN Peacekeeping. Demonstrating that record, while advocating reforms to civilian protection, peacekeeper accountability, and funding, would relatedly speak to Pakistan’s contributions to larger international priorities.

3. Structuring a Constructive Debate on Afghanistan

Pakistan, as a neighbor of Afghanistan with long-standing historical ties, is perhaps well placed to contribute to a constructive debate about the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan, the implications of transnational terrorism, and the Taliban’s approach towards women’s rights. A sophisticated, thoughtful framework – without overtly appearing like a pro-Taliban advocate – requesting humanitarian access or help, could potentially salvage Pakistan’s position in the documents from a participant in a dispute to a mere facilitator.

4. Promoting Consensus Rather than Division

Multilateral diplomacy is based on consensus. Pakistan can start engaging “off-line” discussions, to encourage common ground where divergent positions can be negotiated amongst the powerful parties, noting the presence of Russia, China, and Western states clash, Pakistan could demonstrate diplomatic dexterity. Though more complex, this path is far more impactful than delivering public addresses primarily for domestic audiences.

Drama: The Risk of Political Theater

The alternative path, which some analysts fear Pakistan might take, involves using the presidency primarily as a platform for political signaling and media optics rather than for addressing substantive problem-solving.

1. Disproportionate Focus on Kashmir

Pakistan certainly can express its apprehensions regarding human rights or instability in the region, but making every discussion about Kashmir-related issues may frustrate some Council members who prefer an agenda without bias. While this strategy may sell newspapers in Pakistan, it does little to alter the actual dynamics of the UNSC, especially when permanent members, such as the United States, France, and the United Kingdom, remain strategically neutral, and China’s support, while regularly conveyed, cannot compel the Council to act.

2. Symbolic Gestures Over Negotiated Outcomes

Organizing high-visibility meetings or issuing strongly worded declarations without securing consensus resolutions can create the appearance of activism but leave little lasting impact. The UNSC’s effectiveness depends on negotiated compromises, not rhetorical displays.

3. Domestic Political Spillover

Pakistani leaders may attempt to leverage the presidency as proof of international legitimacy during times of internal political contestation. Such moves may play well at home but are transparent to seasoned diplomats and may undermine Pakistan’s credibility abroad.

Global Perceptions

Global responses to Pakistan’s presidency will largely depend upon its tone and policy decisions. Fellow non-permanent members will probably assess Islamabad’s leadership fundamentally on its capacity to hold smooth, open sessions. The P5 will watch carefully for signs of constructive engagement – or, worse, politicization.

India, as to be expected, will closely monitor Pakistan’s actions and immediately counter any attempts to internationalize bilateral disputes. Western capitals – caught up in the crises in Ukraine, the Middle East, and climate-security issues – will probably ignore any grandstanding; however, if Pakistan does announce constructive initiatives, it will receive quiet products of support.

The Express Tribune. (2025, July 2). Pakistan advances peace at the UNSC [2].

The Broader Question: Does the UNSC Presidency Carry Weight?

Critics argue that the monthly change in the presidency eats away at the long-term significance or importance. This is particularly true because the real power still resides in the P5, especially with the veto, even if a temporary member has a procedural role in decision-making. No matter how good a presidency is unable to change the structure.

But nevertheless, the month gives some countries a platform to do something meaningful, if only to construct a narrative, or to support a specific resolution, or to build relationships with other country delegations. For newly rising middle powers like Pakistan, the credibility that they build through these roles could have some significance when seeking to increase their own role in a leadership capacity of UN bodies or for discussions of things such as trade and development assistance, or security cooperation.

Diplomacy or Drama: what will Pakistan choose?

The answer is obvious: the substance over the show. There is a rare opportunity for Pakistan’s foreign policy establishment to demonstrate it has some awareness of its faults and can act as a responsible, forward-looking international actor. In this case, by demonstrating the ability to have global collective engagement, promoting consensus, and minimizing excessive attention on domestic framing, Pakistan can better project diplomatic power.

Theoretical moves may get a few moments in the headlines today, but diplomacy builds power over time. In a north-south world, where reputations matter far more than they ever have before, Pakistan can serve its national interest far better by demonstrating it is a competent and moderate country, vs pursuing a theatre that courts domestic actors.

Conclusion

Pakistan’s turn as President at the UNSC is not an event that transitions power; it is a procedural step with symbolic value. The important part is how a country focuses on using that symbolic value. This is an occasion and opportunity for Islamabad to present and promote a level of maturity in its engagement with international issues, multiple international concerns, and improving international-state reputation; or it can again reduce the event to a political performance as it has since its formation, which likely solidifies disinterest to distrust about its capacity as an international actor.

In the end, whether Pakistan’s path is therein depends on whether there is evidence of diplomacy, or more theatre will not only be evident for Pakistan’s one month in the UNSC, but it will give evidence of what kind of global actor Pakistan wants to be.

Suggestions

Contextualize Pakistan’s presidency with comparative precedent by discussing how other non-permanent members (Indonesia, South Africa, or Ireland) used their presidency to highlight global issues like climate security, peacekeeping reform, or education in emergencies. Reflect on how Pakistan could argue a nexus between its potential to move from a reactive regional voice to a decisive global player by raising the issues of cyber dangers, climate-based insecurity, or accountability of peacekeepers. Connect this transition to larger strategic gains around reputational capital, middle-power diplomacy, and future governance necessities. Utilizing different theoretical academic frameworks, such as realism or constructivism, can help highlight the difference between power politics and norm-building. Also, while discussing Pakistan’s planned approach to the UNSC, bring a different normative dimension by highlighting the tactical value of consensus behind closed doors, rather than conflict with those who seek notoriety through media-facing confrontational approaches. You should also include details of Pakistan’s contributions to peacekeeping ,specifically, and include the UN procedural rules for the constraints on holding the presidency of the UNSC, and remember India’s position on bilateralism as represented in the Simla Agreement. In closing, you should note how important reputational diplomacy is for Pakistan at this time and how this is more about a subtle, substantive, and strategically-informed agenda than performative symbols.

References

1. https://thefridaytimes.com/02-Jul-2025/from-symbolism-to-strategy
2. https://tribune.com.pk/story/2553754/pakistan-advances-peace-at-unsc
3. United Nations. (n.d.). Presidency of the Security Council. Retrieved from [https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/presidency](https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/presidency)
4. (2025). Presidency of the United Nations Security Council. Retrieved from [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency\_of\_the\_United\_Nations\_Security\_Council](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_the_United_Nations_Security_Council)
5. Modern Diplomacy. (2025, July 11). Pakistan assumes UNSC presidency: A beacon of responsibility in troubled times. Retrieved from [https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2025/07/11/pakistan-assumes-unsc-presidency-a-beacon-of-responsibility-in-troubled-times](https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2025/07/11/pakistan-assumes-unsc-presidency-a-beacon-of-responsibility-in-troubled-times)
6. (2025, January 2). Pakistan enters the UN Security Council at a key juncture in global politics. Retrieved from [https://www.dawn.com/news/1882311](https://www.dawn.com/news/1882311)
7. Associated Press. (2025, July 22). UNSC adopts resolution proposed by Pakistan promoting peaceful dispute resolution. Retrieved from [https://apnews.com/article/6c90cc1bfbc12ae4f084d0e4b68b7032] (https://apnews.com/article/6c90cc1bfbc12ae4f084d0e4b68b7032)
8. (2025, May 6). UNSC urges India, Pakistan to talk on Kashmir; Islamabad says solution overdue. Retrieved from [https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/un-security-council-urges-india-pakistan-talks-kashmir-islamabad-says-2025-05-06] (https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/un-security-council-urges-india-pakistan-talks-kashmir-islamabad-says-2025-05-06)