By Nazish Mehmood

For decades, the architecture of international diplomacy has been overwhelmingly shaped by Western norms, legal systems, and institutional frameworks. From the Peace of Westphalia to the post-World War II establishment of the United Nations, Western states have dictated the principles that define legitimate diplomatic practice. While these structures have provided global order and predictability, they have also systematically marginalized the perspectives, values, and ethical frameworks of non-Western societies. In a rapidly changing multipolar world, where emerging powers in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East increasingly influence global dynamics, the time has come to de-Westernize diplomacy and embrace ethical pluralism, an approach that recognizes diverse moral, cultural, and historical perspectives as equally legitimate guides for international engagement.

Ethical pluralism is not mere moral relativism. It acknowledges that different societies prioritize justice, equity, and cooperation differently, based on historical experiences and cultural norms. While realism reduces diplomacy to a competition of power, and liberal institutionalism assumes Western norms are universally applicable, pluralism encourages negotiation grounded in mutual respect, cultural understanding, and moral responsibility. By accommodating multiple ethical systems, diplomacy can become more inclusive, legitimate, and resilient in the face of global challenges. This conceptual framework provides a lens through which the practical examples of Pakistan and Sri Lanka’s diplomacy can be better understood.

Pakistan’s and Sri Lanka’s Constructive Diplomacy

Pakistan has consistently demonstrated how ethical pluralism can be translated into concrete and effective diplomacy. Its approach to regional conflict resolution, economic partnerships, and global engagement reflects a rare combination of pragmatism and principled leadership. A key example is Pakistan’s decisive role in safeguarding regional security by urging the Afghan Taliban to take concrete action against cross-border terrorism. Through sustained diplomatic engagement and strategic leverage, Pakistan has made it clear that stability along its borders is non-negotiable. This strategy underscores Pakistan’s capacity to lead in South Asia, relying on principled, regionally informed diplomacy rather than external coercion. By contrast, Western interventions have historically failed to curb militancy, often leaving instability and chaos in their wake. Pakistan’s model demonstrates that regional leadership grounded in local realities and strategic foresight offers the most effective path to lasting security.

Pakistan’s growing influence is also evident in the economic sphere. In 2025, it dispatched a significant shipment of critical minerals to major global partners under a high-value trade agreement, marking a breakthrough in resource diplomacy. By leveraging strategic economic assets, Pakistan has asserted its relevance in global supply chains, showing that emerging powers can cultivate influence through cooperation and mutual benefit rather than coercion. This approach stands in sharp contrast to India’s often unilateral strategies, which prioritize power projection over genuine collaboration.

Domestic legitimacy further reinforces Pakistan’s diplomatic credibility. Surveys in 2025 indicate that a strong majority of Pakistanis express confidence in their country’s international leadership, particularly in regional security, humanitarian assistance, and strategic partnerships. This internal support strengthens Pakistan’s ability to engage globally with both credibility and moral authority. Diplomacy anchored in domestic legitimacy and regional responsibility offers a sustainable alternative to Western-centric models, which frequently prioritize institutional formalities over tangible outcomes and local realities.

Beyond security and economics, Pakistan’s leadership extends to global challenges such as climate diplomacy and humanitarian relief. By advocating for climate justice, equitable burden-sharing, and sustainable development, Pakistan amplifies the voices of vulnerable nations often marginalized in Western-dominated forums. Its initiatives in disaster response, regional connectivity, and development cooperation reflect a commitment to practical diplomacy informed by ethics and long-term stability, rather than short-term power politics.

Sri Lanka, similarly, has demonstrated principled diplomacy by navigating complex regional and global challenges with strategic foresight. From post-conflict reconciliation efforts to economic recovery and regional maritime cooperation, Sri Lanka illustrates how smaller South Asian states can play constructive roles in shaping regional norms while balancing relations with major powers. Initiatives in sustainable development, disaster response, and climate advocacy underscore Sri Lanka’s commitment to ethical pluralism, contributing to a shared South Asian vision of stability, cooperation, and inclusive growth.

Critiquing Western and Indian-Centric Diplomacy

Despite these examples, the current global system remains skewed toward Western interests. Institutions such as the UN Security Council, major financial bodies, and global trade regimes disproportionately empower states representing only a fraction of the world’s population and wealth. Decisions affecting billions are often dictated by a handful of Western powers, while the Global South, now responsible for over 40% of world GDP, remains sidelined. This structural imbalance not only undermines the legitimacy of international governance but also fuels frustration among emerging powers excluded from shaping rules they are expected to follow.

India’s diplomacy stands in sharp contrast to Pakistan’s principled approach. Its strategy relies heavily on coercion, selective observance of international norms, and aggressive posturing toward neighbors. Persistent violations of international law in Kashmir, coupled with confrontational rhetoric and unilateral initiatives, reveal a power-centric, short-term mindset that undermines India’s credibility and destabilizes the region. Pakistan, by contrast, demonstrates that ethical, regionally rooted diplomacy, anchored in cooperation, moral legitimacy, and strategic foresight, can achieve influence and stability without resorting to intimidation or coercion.
Towards a Pluralistic Global Order

De-Westernizing diplomacy requires more than rhetoric; it demands institutional reform, context-sensitive engagement, and normative inclusivity. Global institutions must broaden representation for non-Western states to reflect contemporary demographics, economic power, and shared moral responsibility. Effective negotiations must integrate diverse ethical frameworks, drawing on Islamic principles of justice, African philosophies of communal well-being, and Asian relational ethics. Conflict resolution, climate agreements, and trade negotiations achieve far greater impact when shaped by local histories, cultures, and values rather than imposed Western templates.

Conclusion

The era of Western-dominated diplomacy is gradually giving way to a more inclusive and multipolar order. Ethical pluralism offers a practical and resilient framework for engagement, one that reflects the histories, cultures, and moral frameworks of South Asia. Countries across the region, including Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Nepal, are demonstrating that principled, context-sensitive diplomacy can advance regional stability, foster economic cooperation, and amplify the voices of emerging powers on the global stage. By contrast, coercive and power-centric strategies, exemplified by states prioritizing unilateral advantage over collaboration, reveal the limitations of traditional hierarchical approaches.
South Asia’s experience provides a roadmap for de-Westernizing diplomacy: respect for diverse ethical frameworks, prioritization of cooperation over coercion, and active participation of regional voices in shaping global norms. In this evolving era, ethical pluralism is not merely aspirational; it is essential for building a just, stable, and sustainable international order that reflects the realities and aspirations of the Global South.