FOR the most part, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif hit all the right notes when he addressed the UN General Assembly on Friday. The PM mentioned many of the key external and internal issues of relevance to this country at the august multilateral forum. These included the situation in South Asia, the Middle East quagmire, climate change, terrorism, as well as Islamophobia. Mr Sharif recalled the brief hostilities with India earlier this year and reiterated the need for dialogue in South Asia, saying that instead of `provocative` leadership, the region needed `proactive` leadership.

While detailing Pakistan`s response to Indian aggression, the PM held out an olive branch to New Delhi, saying that Pakistan was ready for a `composite, comprehensive and result-oriented dialogue` with India. It remains to be seen whether New Delhi is willing to shed its rigidity, dispel the war clouds, and sit down with Pakistan to talk peace. He further touched on Afghanistan, mentioning that Pakistan was facing `externally sponsored terrorism` from outfits based in the neighbouring country. The PM also stressed that Pakistan wanted Afghanistan to develop, and that Kabul needed to act against militants.

Importantly, Mr Sharif highlighted how Pakistan was battling the effects of climate change, a subject US President Donald Trump considers an elaborate `con job`but whose effects have, incidentally, cost Pakistan dearly, killing thousands, displacing millions and drowning homes and livelihoods. As for the Middle East, Mr Sharif put up a passionate defence of Palestine, rightly describing Israeli atrocities as a `stain on the global conscience`, while terming the Gaza genocide as amongst the `darkest chapters` in human history. Yet despite stating these inconvenient truths, it is incomprehensible why, at the UN, Mr Sharif again termed Mr Trump a `man of peace` worthy of the Nobel Peace Prize. Whatever role the American leader may have played in stopping hostilities between Pakistan and India this year, his record on Palestine like most of his predecessors`is abominable. Arguably, with one stroke of the pen Mr Trump can halt American arms and funds to Israel, which the Zionist regime needs to sustain its genocidal campaign. But he refuses to do so, instead floating fanciful ideas such as the `Gaza Riviera` scheme, which is shorthand for ethnic cleansing. These actions alone prove that Mr Trump is unworthy of the Nobel.