By Madhu Hebbar
On April 22, 2025, the idyllic Baisaran meadow near Pahalgam in Jammu and Kashmir’s Anantnag district became a scene of unimaginable horror. In one of the deadliest terror attacks in the region since the 2019 Pulwama bombing, militants affiliated with The Resistance Front (TRF), a proxy of the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), massacred 28 people, including 24 Indian tourists, two locals, and two foreign nationals from Nepal and the United Arab Emirates. Over 20 others were injured, many critically.
The attack, marked by chilling acts of religious profiling inspired by extremist interpretations of Islamic tenets, has sparked global outrage, domestic fury, and intense speculation about its geopolitical fallout.
The Attack: A Calculated Act of Ideological Violence
The assault unfolded around 2:30 PM when four to six militants, clad in military fatigues, emerged from the dense forests surrounding Baisaran meadow, a remote tourist spot accessible only by foot or pony. Eyewitnesses recounted a horrifying sequence of events: the attackers, wielding automatic rifles, first segregated the tourists based on their religious identities.
Survivors reported that the militants demanded that victims recite specific Islamic verses or display symbols associated with Islam, such as wearing a skullcap or identifying as Muslim. Those unable to comply—predominantly Hindus, but also some Sikhs and non-Muslims from other communities—were singled out for execution. In some cases, the attackers checked identification documents to confirm victims’ names, which often indicate religious or regional affiliations in India.
This deliberate targeting reflects an extremist ideology rooted in the interpretation of Islamic tenets, particularly the concept of jihad as a violent struggle against perceived enemies of Islam. The TRF, in its claim of responsibility, cited the 2019 revocation of Article 370 as a pretext, alleging it enabled “demographic changes” through the settlement of “non-Muslims” in Kashmir. The group framed the attack as a defense of an Islamic Kashmir, a narrative that aligns with LeT’s long-standing goal of establishing a caliphate-like state governed by strict Sharia law. Such ideologies have been used to justify violence against civilians deemed “infidels” or collaborators with the Indian state.
The victims included a diverse group: tourists from Karnataka, Kerala Mae, and Uttar Pradesh, a 26-year-old Indian Navy officer, and an Intelligence Bureau official. The scale of the attack, described by Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah as “an unprecedented assault on civilians,” aimed to shatter the region’s fragile peace and its booming tourism industry, which welcomed 3.5 million visitors in 2024.
Indian authorities responded swiftly. Helicopters scoured the area for the attackers, and security forces killed two militants in a follow-up operation in Baramulla. A lockdown was imposed in parts of Pahalgam, and helplines were set up for affected tourists. Prime Minister Narendra Modi canceled his Saudi Arabia visit, convening an emergency meeting with National Security Adviser Ajit Doval and External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar. Union Home Minister Amit Shah flew to Srinagar to oversee security measures.
Global Condemnation: World Leaders Denounce the Atrocity
The attack drew swift condemnation from world leaders, reflecting global horror at the targeting of civilians and the ideological motivations behind it. US President Donald Trump called the attack “a sickening act of terror” and, in a call with Modi, pledged unwavering support. Vice President JD Vance, who was in India during the attack, condemned the “cowardly” violence. Russian President Vladimir Putin labeled it a “monstrous crime,” while Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni expressed solidarity, stating, “Italy stands with India against this barbarity.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar denounced the attack’s “religious fanaticism,” drawing parallels to attacks in Israel. The European Union’s Ursula von der Leyen called it “despicable,” and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz termed it “an affront to humanity.” Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and leaders from Sri Lanka, the UAE, Iran, and Japan also condemned the violence. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres urged accountability for the perpetrators.
Notably, Pakistan, China, and Canada remained silent for nearly 18 hours after the attack, fueling speculation amid strained ties with India. Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif later denied involvement, calling the attackers “local insurgents,” but the claim rang hollow given TRF’s documented ties to LeT and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
Domestic Fury and Calls for Retribution
In India, the attack triggered widespread protests, particularly in Jammu, where crowds burned effigies of Pakistani leaders and demanded action. Political leaders united in condemnation. President Droupadi Murmu called it a “heinous act against humanity,” while Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, after discussions with Shah and Abdullah, stressed justice for victims. Congress leader Shama Mohammed’s call to “raze Rawalpindi” captured the public’s rage, with many advocating for severing all ties with Pakistan.
Former Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti highlighted the attack’s unprecedented targeting of tourists, urging a probe into security lapses. Analysts suggested the attack was a desperate bid by Pakistan-backed groups to destabilize Kashmir, especially during US Vice President Vance’s visit and Modi’s Saudi Arabia trip.
What Lies Ahead
The Pahalgam attack, with its explicit religious targeting, has heightened tensions in an already volatile region, raising questions about India’s response and international repercussions. Several scenarios are plausible:
India’s Military Retaliation: India’s history of retaliatory strikes, like the 2019 Balakot airstrike, suggests a potential response targeting LeT or TRF bases across the Line of Control. Posts on X speculated about a “Surgical Strike 3” or drone strikes on terror camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. However, escalation risks broader conflict, potentially requiring international mediation.
US Sanctions on Pakistan: The US’s strong condemnation and Trump’s engagement with Modi indicate possible sanctions targeting LeT or its backers in Pakistan. However, the US may prioritize intelligence-sharing or counterterrorism cooperation over broad economic penalties to avoid destabilizing Pakistan, a key regional player.
Diplomatic Isolation of Pakistan: India could leverage global outrage to isolate Pakistan, highlighting its role as a terror sponsor. Calls to halt trade, cultural exchanges, and cricket ties may gain momentum. China’s silence and alliance with Pakistan could complicate securing unanimous international support.
Enhanced Security in Kashmir: India will likely strengthen security in tourist areas, with increased surveillance and intelligence operations. The attack exposed vulnerabilities in remote locations, prompting calls for better coordination to counter local militant networks.
Regional Instability: The attack’s timing, coinciding with Pakistan’s Army Chief General Asim Munir’s provocative remarks on Kashmir, suggests an attempt to reassert influence. A weak response could embolden militants, while an aggressive one risks drawing in China or other regional powers.
Conclusion
The Pahalgam terror attack, driven by an extremist ideology that weaponizes distorted Islamic tenets, marks a tragic setback for Kashmir’s peace and prosperity. The deliberate religious profiling of victims underscores the attackers’ intent to sow division and fear. Global condemnation reflects a united stand against such violence, but the silence of Pakistan and China highlights geopolitical complexities. As India contemplates its response—military, diplomatic, or otherwise—the world watches, hoping to prevent further escalation in a region scarred by conflict. Justice for the victims and robust counterterrorism measures are imperative to safeguard Kashmir’s future.
About the Author:
Madhu Hebbar, an engineer, is an IIT graduate, living in the greater Los Angeles area. He is a practicing Hindu and an avid reader who is interested in Eastern philosophies and their general application to Western challenges. He is engaged in coaching youngsters interested in Hindu civilizational history, universal values, and their modern-day relevance. He has contributed to many intellectual engagements for a decade-plus in the Hindu community across the U.S. He is a keen student /observer of the media, trying to understand motives, narratives, and their impact on people and society.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Voice of Hindus. Any content provided by our contributors or authors is their opinion.
About Author
