News India Times

www.newsindiatimes.com – that’s all you need to know Business India Urges UN Security Council To Distinguish Armed Aggression From Disputes, Calls For Charter Reforms -UNITED NATIONS I n a stern address to the UN Security Council, India called for greater clarity in defining international conflicts, cautioning against political maneuvering that mischaracterizes acts of armed aggression as simple disputes. Calling out global inaction, India’s Permanent Rep- resentative to the UN, P. Harish, told the UN Security Council that international peace remains out of reach not due to a lack of rules, but because member states lack the collective political will to enforce them. Harish was speaking during the UN Security Council High-Level Open Debate on “Strengthening the Mecha- nisms for Peaceful Settlement of Disputes”. The debate was a one year Follow-up to Security Council Resolution 2788 (2025) originally authored by Pakistan, which requested the Secretary-General to present concrete recommendations on strengthening Chapter VI tools for conflict prevention and peaceful settlement. Briefed by UN Secretary-General António Guterres, the discussion featured contributions from over 80 UN Member States. NEED FOR REDEFINING AGGRESSION A key focus of India’s statement was the critical distinc- tion between routine diplomatic disputes and severe violations of state sovereignty. India warned against confusing standard disputes with the illegal use of armed force, such as military aggression or unlawful occupation, which directly threaten a nation’s territorial integrity. Establishing clear definitions, India argued, is essential to determining whether conflict resolution tools under Chapter VI or enforcement actions under Chapter VII should be applied. REJECTING IDENTITY-BASED DIVISION IN DIPLOMACY Addressing the framework for conflict resolution, India urged the Security Council to pursue inclusive, open, and pragmatic problem-solving efforts. “Linking such issues to race, ethnicity, faith, religion, and other identity markers not only reflects a divisive ap- proach but is also symbolic of the absence of engagement in good faith,” Harish highlighted. ADAPTING TO MODERN REALITIES An important point raised by India was in regard to the redundancy of the age-old UN mechanisms to deal with conflicts of today’s world. Calling on the UNSC to account for evolving global realities when reviewing decades-old conflicts, India outlined fundamental operational differences between Chapters VI and VII of the UN Charter. India pointed out that Chapter VII is designed for firm, concrete action against immediate threats, breaches of peace, and acts of aggression. Chapter VI provides flexible tools to handle situation-based risks to peace. India noted that Chapter VI interventions carry no “perpetual validity” and must be subject to periodic re- view to reflect changing geopolitical realities rather than remaining frozen in time. DEMAND FOR SUNSET CLAUSES AND MANDATE ACCOUNTABILITY India called for stricter, collective reviews of UNSC mandates under the UN80 framework. Highlighting the strain on the UN’s constrained finances, India strongly criticized the practice of allowing outdated, irrelevant mandates to continue in perpetuity. India insisted that the continuation of any mandate must be guided strictly by its relevance and utility, rather than being sustained for narrow political reasons. India called for the mandatory inclusion of “sunset clauses” to ensure missions are closed when they are no longer effective. EMPOWERING TRUE REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS Finally, India addressed the role of external organiza- tions in global conflict resolution. Established regional organizations were praised by India for playing an enabling role, possessing the necessary geographic ties and domain expertise to successfully complement UN functions. At the same time, India drew a sharp distinction against “cross-regional groups”. India argued that these disconnected groupings lack the critical regional knowl- edge required to genuinely resolve complex disputes and should not be treated with the same diplomatic weight. RESPONDING TO PAKISTAN Criticizing Pakistan for using the international plat- form to advance a divisive agenda and mislead the global community, India delivered a stern critique of Pakistan for bringing up the Kashmir issue once again in a serious forum. Furthering its rebuke, India also directed a sharp critique toward the broader international community and the UN, pointing out that authoritarian practices and human rights failures in Pakistan frequently evade the meaningful global scrutiny typically applied to other sovereign nations. Reaffirming that the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir remains an integral and inalienable part of India, Harish pointed out that the sole unresolved matter regarding the region involves Pakistan’s illegal occupation and aggression toward sovereign Indian Territory. India strongly urged Pakistan to focus on resolving its escalating internal crises. Highlighting severe human rights violations in Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kash- mir (PoJK), India detailed decades of state-sponsored suppression, and severe curbs on fundamental human rights. CONCLUDING REMARKS At the end, India reaffirmed its position as a founding member of the UN, and concluded by reiterating its com- mitment to the UN Charter and international law, stating its readiness to work alongside member states to uphold global peace and security. By Archana Adalja PHOTO:UN PHOTO UNSC Open Debate July 23, 2026. Temasek Eyes India’s IPL Cricket League As Investor Race Heats Up T emasek is exploring investment opportunities in India’s booming IPL cricket league, a senior executive told Reuters, making the Singapore state investor the latest player to target one of the world’s richest sports tournaments. The Indian Premier League, once the preserve of Bollywood stars and Indian tycoons, is increasingly at- tracting sovereign wealth funds, private equity firms and billionaire investors as booming media rights and rising team revenues drive franchise values higher. “IPL is a marquee property and we remain interested in it,” Vishesh Shrivastav, managing director at Temasek India, said in an interview, declining to name any fran- chise it was evaluating. “For the right opportunity, we would jump on it,” he added, confirming the firm’s interest in IPL for the first time. Two major IPL franchise deals this year highlighted the competition’s growing appeal. United Spirits, the Indian arm of Diageo, agreed in March to sell Royal Chal- lengers Bengaluru at a $1.8 billion valuation to a consor- tium including billionaire David Blitzer’s Bolt Ventures and Blackstone. The IPL’s valuation has climbed over the years to cross $18.5 billion last year, U.S.-based investment bank Hou- lihan Lokey says. Temasek has steadily expanded its India footprint, with portfolio exposure more than quadrupling over the past decade to $42 billion. Shrivastav said Temasek would continue to focus on financial services, consumer and healthcare in India. Some of Temasek’s India investments include snacks maker Haldiram’s and Manipal Hospitals.. - Reuters ByVibhuti Sharma PHOTO:REUTERS/AMIT DAVE Cricket – Indian Premier League – IPL – Final – Royal Challengers Bengaluru v Gujarat Titans – Narendra Modi Stadium, Ahmedabad, India – May 31, 2026 Royal Challengers Bengaluru’s Virat Kohli celebrates with teammates after winning the Indian Premier League News India Times (July 25, 2026 - July 31, 2026) July 31, 2026 18 India@United Nations