I don't see that Pakistan's stance seems to be falling for any such lollipop. In-fact, OIC realized the importance of Pakistan and how the scenario changed from Indian propaganda into Pakistan's diplomatic victory. I agree that there's been mistrust due to turbulent diplomacy in OIC but then again, whether big or small platform, these voices matters in the end like adding bit by bit to support narrative.
The OIC on its own is useless, it's a meaningless organisation without any locus standi. How it can become useful for Pakistan or any other country, is if whoever agrees with a particular country's stance, then goes on and takes actions that will be to the detriment of the antagonistic country, India in our case.
Who amongst the OIC members is willing to go ahead and economically sanction India and go after Indian economic and geo-political interests globally? How will it benefit them? Do they see Pakistan doing enough on the ground to eventually win over the dispute, whether that be by force or otherwise? What is better - to overwhelmingly favour India and sideline Pakistan or vice-versa for these countries?
From a personal viewpoint, we should utterly resent these so-called "Muslim" nations for their inaction on disputes where Muslims are being persecuted and their rights being infringed, but from a geo-political sense, many of them cannot do much and the ones that can, we must carefully dissect the argument for pros/cons and see the nuance behind their stance.
Yes, these apparent steps of the next OIC meeting being held in Isloo and Pakistan becoming an executive member is merely ceremonial, but will an unanimously backed OIC statement supporting Pakistan's stance on Kashmir change anything?
