The 80th United Nations General Assembly was not just a diplomatic summit—it was a global media spectacle. Each year, the big question for the Pakistani delegation is what can be achieved from this global platform beyond photo-ops with dignitaries and customary addresses at a forum that increasingly seems unable to deliver meaningful solutions to many global crises.
Pakistan’s delegation, led by Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif, arrived this year amid a more upbeat environment following recent tensions with India and the lavish praise the country had received from US President Donald Trump. The delegation conveyed a message of moral clarity, strategic ambiguity, and assertive symbolism.
The Prime Minister’s speech at the UN General Assembly was emotionally charged and rhetorically bold. He condemned Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide, reaffirmed support for Kashmir, and praised Donald Trump for brokering peace with India. The optics were clearly designed to position Pakistan as a moral voice for the Muslim world. However, the praise for Trump seemed out of place and raised questions about strategic coherence.
Sharif’s speech appeared more tailored to domestic audiences than reflective of a clear foreign policy agenda. If Pakistan is aiming for a new position on the rapidly changing global diplomatic chessboard, it was not apparent from this address.
Sharif’s speech and his subsequent meeting with US President Donald Trump received moderate coverage in American media. Most reporting came from international and diaspora-focused outlets rather than mainstream US networks. This coverage emphasized the symbolism of the meeting and its context within broader diplomatic efforts to address the Gaza crisis.
Notably, there was no major commentary or analysis from leading US outlets like CNN, The New York Times, or The Washington Post, suggesting the event was not a top-tier diplomatic priority in American media narratives.
Meanwhile, an incident involving some members of the Pakistani contingent raised slogans from the gallery, violating the UN norms and earning the ire of other delegates. This breach of protocol was widely regarded as being in bad taste. Following the incident, UN security officials launched an investigation into how these individuals gained access and why slogans tied to Pakistan’s internal politics were voiced in a formal diplomatic setting.
The United Nations General Assembly maintains strict protocol, especially in the visitors’ gallery, which is accessible only through passes issued by member states’ diplomatic missions.
Adding to the controversy was the presence of Dr. Shama Junejo, a UK-based columnist and social media activist, at the 80th UNGA session as part of Pakistan’s delegation. Her seating directly behind Defence Minister Khawaja Asif during a United Nations Security Council session on artificial intelligence sparked social media commentary and raised fundamental questions: How did an individual not officially listed in the delegation’s letter of credence gain such proximity to Pakistan’s top diplomatic representatives?
Denials from officials did little to clear the air, especially as Junejo claimed she had been formally included by Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif and had contributed to drafting his UNGA speech. This episode highlighted concerns about communication and coordination within Pakistan’s diplomatic institutions.
In international forums like the UNGA, seating arrangements and delegation composition are tightly regulated, making the controversy all the more significant.
On the media front, Defence Minister Khawaja Asif was the only senior official from the Pakistani delegation to give a direct interview to a Western media outlet that received wide circulation. CNN and Al Jazeera focused on Asif’s tense and confrontational interview with Mehdi Hasan, which also became a flashpoint in Pakistani mainstream and social media discussions.
During the interview, Asif struggled to defend hybrid governance and appeared to contradict himself on key topics, including the legitimacy of upcoming 2024 elections and Imran Khan’s social media activity. The intense social media debate that followed revolved around civil-military relations and the treatment of Imran Khan.
CNN’s Becky Anderson fact-checked Asif’s claims during the interview, pointing out a lack of evidence to support some of his statements. The interview highlighted the entrenched challenges facing Pakistan’s democratic evolution, with Hasan’s pointed questions testing Asif’s narrative and Asif’s responses reflecting political complexities and deflections.
Despite these challenges, the day was salvaged by visuals from the Oval Office meeting, where Pakistan’s civil-military leaders met with the US president, secretary of state, and other high-ranking officials. Although the White House did not issue an official readout of the meeting, President Trump’s brief remarks before the meeting did not mince words in praising the Pakistani leaders.
Critics on social media were vocal, but the majority of mainstream Pakistani media framed Pakistan’s UNGA presence as a diplomatic victory, emphasizing Sharif’s strong speech and meetings with Trump and leaders of other Islamic countries. The tone was predominantly celebratory.
Pakistan’s UNGA 2025 campaign was bold but brittle. While the delegation commanded attention, it struggled to maintain coherence under close scrutiny. The optics were emotionally resonant but strategically inconsistent.
Social media added another dimension to the event, with viral moments, hashtags, and influencer narratives shaping perceptions far beyond the UN floor. Pakistani leaders and their domestic audience are gradually coming to terms with the realities of new media, where narratives are shaped beyond the traditional editorial controls of mainstream media outlets.
In today’s age of global diplomacy, optics are not just about visibility—they are also about credibility, coherence, and control.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/tns/detail/1348316-pakistans-bold-yet-brittle-moment
