Senior Congress leader and former Union Minister P. Chidambaram has raised questions about the credibility of the Tianjin Declaration, a global statement that strongly condemns terrorism in all its forms. His main concern? The fact that Pakistan, a country accused of exporting terrorism, was among those who signed and adopted the declaration.
Chidambaram shared his thoughts on social media platform X, saying, “The Tianjin Declaration strongly condemned terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. It was signed and adopted by Pakistan. That shows the worth of the Declaration.” He further emphasized, “Unless countries can distinguish between nations that export terrorism and those affected by it, such inane declarations will continue without real impact.”
This declaration was made at a multilateral forum in China, where participating nations reaffirmed their commitment to fight global terrorism. However, Chidambaram’s comments have sparked fresh debate on how effective such international statements really are, especially when countries accused of supporting or exporting terrorism are among those endorsing them.
India and Pakistan’s ongoing tensions add complexity to this issue. India has repeatedly accused Pakistan of backing cross-border terrorism, making international statements about terrorism more contentious.
Recently, India received praise from foreign and defense experts for its firm stance on terrorism at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s strong comments on India’s fight against cross-border terrorism received widespread appreciation. The SCO countries also condemned the terror attack in Pahalgam in April 2025, calling for those responsible to be brought to justice.
The Tianjin Declaration mentioned the Pahalgam attack, expressing condolences to the victims and emphasizing the need to hold terrorists accountable. This joint statement came after PM Modi urged SCO leaders to take a tough stand against terrorism and cooperate to eliminate this threat globally.
This ongoing debate highlights the importance of international unity, but also raises questions about how genuinely effective such declarations are when key signatories are linked to terrorism.
