A Slaughter in Paradise
On 22 April 2025, at 2:50 PM, Baisaran Valley—Pahalgam’s serene “mini Switzerland”—became a killing field. Seven gunmen emerged from dense pine forests, opening fire on tourists picnicking and trekking in this remote meadow, accessible only by foot or pony. The attack, claimed by TRF, a Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) proxy, killed 26: 22 Indian tourists, one Nepali national, and two locals, with 20 injured. Victims included a 26-year-old Indian Navy officer, Lt. Vinay Narwal, and an Intelligence Bureau official. Terrorists targeted non-Kashmiris, protesting alleged “demographic changes” post-Article 370 revocation in 2019.
The massacre, the deadliest civilian attack in Kashmir in a decade, shattered the region’s fragile peace. Pahalgam, a hub for tourism and the Amarnath Yatra, drew 2.1 million visitors in 2023, symbolizing stability. The attack’s timing, during US Vice President JD Vance’s New Delhi visit for strategic dialogues, fits a pattern: Pakistan-sponsored terrorists strike during high-profile US visits to internationalize the Kashmir dispute. Historical precedents include the Chattisinghpora massacre during President Bill Clinton’s March 2000 visit and the Kaluchak massacre amid Christina Rocca’s May 2002 talks. This calculated timing seeks to embarrass India, disrupt its global partnerships, and thrust Kashmir into global headlines, exploiting media focus on US-India ties.
Echoes of the Past
The Pahalgam attack echoes earlier Pakistan-backed terror strikes, notably the Chattisinghpora and Kaluchak massacres. On 20 March 2000, as President Clinton visited India (21-25 March) to strengthen bilateral ties, militants dressed in army uniforms massacred 35 Sikh villagers in Chattisinghpora, Anantnag district. The attack, attributed to LeT and Hizbul Mujahideen with ISI backing, aimed to communalise the Kashmir conflict and draw global attention during Clinton’s high-profile trip. On 14 May 2002, during US Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca’s visit (13 May) to de-escalate India-Pakistan tensions post the 2001 Parliament attack, LeT terrorists attacked an army family camp in Kaluchak, Jammu, killing 31, including 10 children and 11 women. The massacre targeted soldiers’ families to provoke India and spotlight Kashmir amid US diplomatic efforts. Both in 2000 and 2002, the militants even followed up with further attacks to keep up the tempo. Shortly after Clinton’s trip, the militants attacked the Nunwan base camp in Pahalgam, Kashmir, on August 2, 2000 targeting the Amarnath Yatra pilgrimage, resulting in the deaths of 32 people, including 21 Hindu pilgrims, 7 local Muslim shopkeepers, and 3 security personnel. Similarly, in July 2002, an attack at Chandanwari base camp killed 11 pilgrims, coinciding with Powell’s regional talks.
These attacks share chilling parallels with 2025: targeting civilians, exploiting symbolic moments (US visits), and leveraging ISI-backed networks. The 2000 and 2002 strikes aimed to undermine India’s developmental interventions in Jammu and Kashmir, communalize tensions, and internationalize the dispute. The 2025 attack, reportedly planned by LeT commander Saifullah Kasuri in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) and led by Asif Fauji of TRF, follows this playbook, targeting tourists to erode India’s narrative of progress in Kashmir and draw Western scrutiny during Vance’s visit.
Pakistan’s Terror Playbook: Calculated Provocation
Pakistan’s use of terrorism as a state policy against India is unrelenting. Since the 1989 Kashmir insurgency, the ISI has armed and trained groups like LeT, Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), and Hizbul Mujahideen for proxy warfare. High-profile attacks—2001 Parliament, 2008 Mumbai (26/11), 2016 Uri, 2019 Pulwama—demonstrate Pakistan’s strategy to destabilize India. Despite global scrutiny, Pakistan’s denials—such as Defence Minister Khawaja Asif’s claim of no involvement—lack credibility, given confessions like former President Pervez Musharraf’s admission of training militants for Kashmir. The Pahalgam massacre, with TRF’s claim of resisting “outsider” settlements, seeks to exploit local grievances while serving Pakistan’s agenda. Executed with careless abandon, such heinous attacks underscore Pakistan’s unmitigated use of terror as a foreign policy tool.
The timing during US visits is deliberate. In 2000, after Chattisinghpora massacre in March on the eve of Clinton’s trip, the killings of pilgrims in Anantnag followed in August, few months later, perhaps to counter India’s diplomatic gains. In 2002, Chandanwari attacks coincided with Powell’s de-escalation efforts. In 2025, striking during Vance’s visit, alongside PM Modi’s Saudi Arabia trip, TRF aimed to project Kashmir as a flashpoint, pressuring India’s allies and forcing US to take a relook at the issue. Areas in Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province and PoK remain terrorist sanctuaries, with LeT operating freely. Defence Minister Khawaja Asif’s denials lack credibility against evidence of ISI coordination and former President Pervez Musharraf’s admission of training militants in Kashmir.
Pakistan’s deeper motive is to perpetuate Kashmir as a conflict zone, legitimizing the Pakistan Army’s grip on power. The military, controlling politics and economy, thrives on the Kashmir narrative, justifying its dominance as a bulwark against India. By fuelling unrest, Pakistan avoids resolution, ensuring the Army’s relevance and suppressing democratic reforms.
Pakistan’s Blueprint for Terror Resurgence
Pakistan’s planning for a terrorism resurgence in Kashmir has intensified, driven by militant rallies, jihadi rhetoric, and strategic posturing to rally domestic support. In early April 2025, LeT and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) held public rallies in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). On 18 April, LeT’s Jammu Kashmir United Movement (JKUM) organized an event in Rawalkot, where commander Abu Musa declared, “Jihad will continue, guns will rage, and beheadings will continue in Kashmir,” vowing to resist alleged demographic changes. JeM, in Muzaffarabad, echoed calls for “reviving jihad,” with leaders urging youth to cross the Line of Control (LoC). Politicians, including PoK’s so-called “prime minister,” amplified these calls, promising “heads will roll” to reclaim Kashmir, signalling state complicity.
On 16 April 2025, Pakistan’s Army Chief, General Asim Munir, delivered a provocative speech, calling Kashmir Pakistan’s “jugular vein” and reaffirming moral and political support for the “Kashmiri cause” under the two-nation theory. This rhetoric, laced with anti-Hindu sentiment, aimed to win over anti-India factions within the military and counter Imran Khan’s populist surge, which threatens the Army’s grip. Munir’s speech, followed by LeT’s 18 April rally, suggests a coordinated push to escalate militancy, with Pahalgam’s attack as a direct outcome.
Pakistan’s escalation may also reflect a tit-for-tat strategy, part of its asymmetric war. Official and unofficial Pakistani statements, including from military circles, baselessly allege Indian involvement in the rising Baloch insurgency (e.g., Operation Herof, August 2024, Hijack if Jaffar Express, 11 March 2025) and TTP attacks (e.g., 852 fatalities in 2024). This narrative, lacking evidence, fuels Pakistan’s belief that India is stoking unrest, prompting subversive activities like Pahalgam to destabilize Kashmir and divert domestic scrutiny from internal failures. This reckless strategy, prioritizing military agendas over peace, undermines South Asia’s stability and regional security.
India’s Iron Fist: Counter-measures
On April 23, 2025, India’s Cabinet Committee on Security, chaired by PM Modi, unveiled a five-pronged response to the Pahalgam attack, each step calibrated to impose costs on Pakistan:
- Indus Waters Treaty Suspension: Pakistan’s agriculture relies on Indus waters (80% of its farmland). Suspension of the 1960 treaty is aimed at pressurising Pakistan economically, signalling India’s readiness to leverage strategic assets against terrorism, especially after repeated violations of bilateral trust.
- Attari-Wagah Border Closure: Shutting the check-post, with a 1 May 2025, traveller deadline, disrupts Pakistan’s trade and cultural exchanges, isolating it regionally and punishing its failure to curb cross-border militancy.
- SAARC Visa Exemption Cancellation: Barring Pakistani nationals and voiding visas (with a 48-hour exit order) is aimed at curbing ISI’s use of civilian cover for espionage, protecting India’s security amid Pakistan’s refusal to dismantle terror networks.
- Expulsion of Military Attachés: Declaring Pakistan’s defence advisors persona non grata and withdrawing India’s Islamabad staff seek to counter ISI’s covert operations through diplomatic channels, disrupting intelligence-gathering post-attack.
- Diplomatic Downsizing: Capping High Commission staff at 30 by 1 May 2025, freezes bilateral ties, signalling global disapproval of Pakistan’s terrorism and reducing its diplomatic influence in India.
These measures align with UN Security Council Resolution 1373, mandating action against terrorist financing and safe havens. India’s “punitive deterrence” model— Uri surgical strikes (2016), Balakot airstrikes (2019)— escalates costs for Pakistan without risking war. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh’s vow of a “loud and clear response” underscores India’s zero-tolerance policy, justified by Pakistan’s persistent aggression, especially during US visits.
Bilateral Relations: A Cycle of Betrayal
The Pahalgam attack further dims prospects for India-Pakistan dialogue, revealing Pakistan’s policy of disrupting peace through spoiler attacks. India has repeatedly sought comprehensive dialogue, from the 1999 Lahore Declaration to the 2015 Ufa talks, only to be derailed by Pakistan-orchestrated terror: the 2001 Parliament attack, 2008 Mumbai massacre (26/11, killing 166), 2016 Pathankot airbase attack, 2016 Uri attack (19 soldiers killed), and 2019 Pulwama bombing (40 CRPF personnel killed). Each strike, linked to LeT or JeM, followed diplomatic overtures, exposing Pakistan’s bad faith. Interestingly, when the two countries thought of restarting the dialogue after a pause in November 2008, following nearly three years of comprehensive dialogue (2004-2007), the day the Pakistani foreign minister visited New Delhi, the terrorists struck in Mumbai on 26/11.
Right-minded peaceniks in India often express profound dismay at Pakistan’s strategy of sabotaging dialogue to perpetuate conflict. The Pakistan Army, wielding disproportionate power, benefits from Kashmir’s unrest, using it to justify its political dominance and suppress democratic voices. By fostering militancy, Pakistan avoids resolving the Kashmir issue, preferring a simmering conflict that legitimizes military control and diverts attention from internal failures— economic collapse, Baloch insurgency, and TTP violence. The Pahalgam attack, like its predecessors, is a deliberate act to scuttle peace, ensuring Kashmir remains a flashpoint for the Army’s relevance.
Reviving dialogue requires Pakistan to dismantle terror infrastructure and prosecute figures including LeT’s Hafiz Saeed. Without this, India’s trust remains eroded, and bilateral ties face a bleak future, with further escalation likely if Pakistan persists in its duplicity.
Global Outcry: A Moment for Accountability
The Pahalgam attack drew global condemnation, amplifying pressure on Pakistan. US President Donald Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Nepali PM K.P. Sharma Oli, the Saudi government, Canadian PM Mark Carney and even Chinese foreign ministry denounced the attack, with Trump pledging counter-terrorism support during Vance’s visit. Nepal, mourning a citizen, reaffirmed its anti-terror stance. Protests in Kashmir and Jammu rejected Pakistan’s narrative.
Pakistan’s condolences, paired with denials, ring hollow. Its history of sheltering Al-Qaeda post-9/11 while posing as a US ally undermines trust. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey-listed Pakistan for terror financing, with its 2022 exit based on cosmetic reforms. The Pahalgam attack, executed by LeT’s TRF, demands renewed scrutiny of Pakistan’s compliance with global anti-terror norms.
Punitive Measures: A Global Imperative
The international community must impose stringent measures:
- FATF Blacklisting: Re-listing Pakistan would choke its financial access, forcing terror network closures.
- Diplomatic Isolation: Downgrading ties with Pakistan would pressure it to shut PoK terror camps.
- Arms Embargo: Halting military aid would weaken proxy war capacity.
- Backing India’s Operations: Supporting India’s counter-terrorism effort would deter attacks.
Pakistan has taken a heavy internal toll losing men (as per SATP data over 70,700) and material ($126.79 during 2001-2018) over the last two-and-half decades which highlights the blowback, destabilising South Asia. Inaction risks escalation, with attacks during visits by US officials to the region amplifying global stakes.
Kashmir’s Defiance: Reclaiming Peace
The Pahalgam attack aimed to choke tourism and revive fear, but Kashmiris have stood firm. Protests upheld “Kashmiriyat,” rejecting violence. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board in India has paused its protests in solidarity. India’s security response—deploying helicopters, releasing suspect sketches, intensifying patrols— seeks normalcy. The National Investigation Agency’s probe targets external handlers.
India has no option but to bolster intelligence, secure tourist sites, and counter Pakistan’s propaganda. Long-term, investing in Kashmir’s development and countering radicalization will strengthen resilience. Engaging global forums to expose Pakistan’s role is critical.
Conclusion: No Haven for Terror
The Pahalgam massacre, timed with JD Vance’s visit, underscores Pakistan’s cynical use of terrorism to communalise the environment, derail normalcy and India’s developmental initiatives in Kashmir and bring misery and economic hardship to the people of Kashmir by choking tourism. India’s response— suspending the Indus Water Treaty, closing borders, cutting ties— is justified by Pakistan’s violations of international law and its repeated sabotage of dialogue for peace and normalisation. Pakistan’s Army thrives on unrest in Kashmir, perpetuating the conflict to cling to power. The world must impose punitive measures— FATF blacklisting, UN sanctions, diplomatic isolation— to dismantle Pakistan’s terror networks. The blood shed by the innocent in Pahalgam demands justice for the 26 lives lost and a future free from violence. Pakistan must face consequences, or terror will endure.
