Current Affairs Topics Archive
International Relations Economics Polity & Governance Environment & Ecology Science & Technology Internal Security Geography Social Issues Art & Culture Modern History

Mehbooba Mufti slams Organisation of Islamic Cooperation over silence on Iran strikes

March 03, 2026 6 min read International Relations GS2 (International Relations India's Foreign Policy Internal Security)
On This Page ▼

What Happened

  • Former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti strongly criticised the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) for its failure to condemn the Pahalgam terrorist attack, which killed 26 people, while simultaneously urging both India and Pakistan to "resolve differences through peaceful means."
  • The OIC, in statements made through its New York mission, expressed "deep concern over the deteriorating security environment in South Asia" and cited India's "unfounded allegations against the Islamic Republic of Pakistan" as inflaming tensions — without acknowledging the terrorist incident.
  • India condemned the OIC's response as "absurd" and driven by Pakistani influence, noting that the OIC consistently ignores evidence of Pakistan-based terrorism while raising the Kashmir issue in international forums.
  • The Pahalgam attack, which killed 26 people at a popular tourist destination in South Kashmir, was attributed by India to groups operating from Pakistan, triggering India's Operation Sindoor — precision strikes on terrorist camps in Pakistani territory described as acts of self-defence.
  • India's Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) stated the OIC was being "misused as a platform" by Pakistan to "push anti-India propaganda" on the Kashmir issue.
  • The episode reiterates a long-standing pattern: India does not recognise the OIC's jurisdiction over Kashmir, viewing it as an internal matter, while the OIC regularly discusses Kashmir as an occupied Muslim territory.

Static Topic Bridges

Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC): Structure, Mandate, and India's Position

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is the second-largest intergovernmental organisation after the United Nations, with 57 member states representing over 1.8 billion Muslims. Founded in 1969 in Rabat, Morocco (after the arson attack on Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem), its stated purpose is to safeguard Muslim interests, promote solidarity among member states, and support the Palestinian cause. Pakistan is a founding member and one of the most active voices on Kashmir within the OIC. India is not a member (it is not an Islamic state) but has observer status at OIC summits in a limited capacity. The OIC has repeatedly passed resolutions on Jammu & Kashmir, calling for a plebiscite under UN resolutions — a position India categorically rejects.

  • OIC founded: September 1969, First Islamic Summit, Rabat (Morocco); formalised charter in 2008.
  • Membership: 57 countries (49 Muslim-majority + 8 non-Muslim-majority nations with significant Muslim populations), spanning Africa, Asia, Middle East, and Europe.
  • Headquarters: Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; Permanent Observer at UN.
  • OIC and Kashmir: Has regularly condemned Article 370's revocation (August 2019), called for reversal of demographic changes, and passed resolutions on "Occupied Jammu & Kashmir."
  • India's response to OIC Kashmir statements: Consistently rejected as "interference in India's internal affairs"; India considers J&K an integral part of the country.
  • India's OIC status: India has been invited as a 'Guest of Honour' on specific occasions (notably in 2019 when Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj attended — the first such participation), but does not hold formal membership.
  • OIC's Contact Group on Jammu & Kashmir: A dedicated OIC body that Pakistan uses as a platform to internationalise the Kashmir issue.

Connection to this news: The OIC's response — condemning India's reaction rather than the terrorist attack — reflects the organisation's structural alignment with Pakistan's framing of the Kashmir conflict, underscoring why India's diplomatic effort to expose Pakistan-sponsored terrorism in international forums consistently faces OIC-bloc resistance.

The Pahalgam attack and India's subsequent Operation Sindoor underscore the unresolved India-Pakistan confrontation over cross-border terrorism — a conflict dimension that has repeatedly challenged international norms on state sovereignty, non-state actor accountability, and the right of self-defence. India's argument invokes Article 51 of the UN Charter (self-defence against armed attacks), while framing Pakistan's support to terrorist groups as a violation of UNSC Resolution 1267 (which designated Al-Qaeda and affiliated groups as terrorist organisations) and the broader global consensus against terrorism.

  • Pahalgam attack: Occurred April 22, 2025 (in J&K); 26 killed (tourists, predominantly from other Indian states and a foreign national); India attributed the attack to Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and The Resistance Front (a LeT shadow organisation).
  • Operation Sindoor: India's precision strikes on terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan (specific locations: Muzaffarabad, Kotli, Bahawalpur) in response to the Pahalgam attack; described as "measured, non-escalatory, targeted."
  • Pakistan's position: Denied involvement; offered neutral third-party probe; condemned Operation Sindoor as "act of war."
  • UNSC Resolution 1267 (1999): Designated Al-Qaeda and Taliban as terrorist organisations; mandated sanctions (asset freezes, travel bans, arms embargoes); expanded to cover IS/Daesh by Resolution 2253 (2015).
  • LeT designation: Designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO) by the US in December 2001; designated by the UN Security Council's 1267 Committee in 2008.
  • Simla Agreement (1972): India-Pakistan bilateral framework for resolving disputes; India consistently invokes it to reject third-party mediation, including OIC involvement.

Connection to this news: Mehbooba Mufti's criticism of the OIC, while coming from a political opponent of the BJP, actually aligns with India's official position — the OIC's failure to acknowledge a specific terrorist attack while generalising about India's response reveals the organisation's selective application of its own counter-terrorism principles.

Terrorism, International Law, and State Responsibility

International law holds that states bear responsibility for the acts of non-state armed groups operating from their territory if the state provides "effective control" (Nicaragua case standard, ICJ 1986) or if the state "directs or controls" the non-state actors. A lower threshold — the 'due diligence' standard — holds that states must prevent terrorist groups from using their territory for attacks on other states. The UN General Assembly's Definition of Aggression (Resolution 3314, 1974) includes armed attacks by irregulars sent by a state on behalf of that state within the definition of aggression. India's consistent position is that Pakistan's state apparatus (especially Inter-Services Intelligence) has provided direction, training, finance, and sanctuary to groups like LeT — meeting the 'effective control' standard.

  • ICJ Nicaragua Case (1986): Court held that US support for Contras in Nicaragua did not make Nicaragua's war actions attributable to the US under 'effective control' — a strict standard requiring operational direction of specific acts.
  • ILC Articles on State Responsibility (2001): Article 8 attributes acts of non-state actors to a state if the state "directed or controlled" those acts; Articles 16-18 cover state complicity and direction.
  • UNSC Resolution 1373 (2001): Obligates all states to suppress financing of terrorism, deny safe haven, and prevent recruitment — a binding resolution under Chapter VII.
  • Pakistan's FATF status: Pakistan was on FATF's 'grey list' (jurisdictions under increased monitoring) from 2018-2022 due to inadequate actions against terrorism financing; removed in 2022 after implementing 34 action plan items.
  • India's counter-terrorism diplomacy: Consistently presents evidence at UNSC and FATF; advocates for listing of Pakistan-based individuals under UNSC 1267 sanctions.

Connection to this news: The OIC's silence on Pahalgam — and its support for Pakistan's framing — illustrates how international institutions can become arenas for geopolitical contestation rather than principled application of legal standards, reinforcing India's preference for bilateral or rules-based multilateral mechanisms over bloc-based organisations for conflict resolution.

Key Facts & Data

  • Pahalgam attack: April 22, 2025; 26 killed; attributed to Lashkar-e-Taiba/The Resistance Front
  • OIC: Founded September 1969, Rabat; 57 member states; HQ Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
  • OIC response: Condemned India's "unfounded allegations" against Pakistan; no acknowledgement of terrorist attack
  • India's position: Termed OIC statement "absurd" and "at Pakistan's behest"
  • Operation Sindoor: India's precision strikes on terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan (Muzaffarabad, Kotli, Bahawalpur)
  • UNSC Resolution 1267 (1999): Designated Al-Qaeda/Taliban; LeT added to sanctions list in 2008
  • UNSC Resolution 1373 (2001): Binding obligation on all states to suppress terrorism financing and deny safe haven
  • Pakistan's FATF grey list period: 2018-2022; removed in October 2022
  • Simla Agreement: 1972; India-Pakistan framework for bilateral resolution of disputes
  • India at OIC: Guest of Honour (not member); last participation as guest: 2019 (FM Sushma Swaraj)