1. Introduction – Setting the Context

Jammu and Kashmir, often referred to as the crown of India, has long endured the shadows of terrorism. Since the late 1980s, the region has witnessed a complex conflict fueled by separatist movements, cross-border insurgency, and proxy wars. Over the decades, civilians, soldiers, and public institutions have been caught in the crossfire, as various militant groups—often backed by external state actors—have sought to destabilize peace in the valley.

However, the terror attack on April 22, 2025, in Pahalgam, marks a deeply disturbing turn in this ongoing saga. In a horrific act of violence, 28 civilians were killed, including two foreign nationals, when terrorists ambushed a group of 40 unarmed tourists. The assault occurred in a remote mountainous area accessible only by foot or pony, making timely rescue efforts almost impossible. Victims were reportedly identified by their religious identity before being gunned down. Among them was Manjunath, a tourist who had posted a cheerful video of his visit to a houseboat in Srinagar just hours before he was murdered. His wife, who survived the attack, was deliberately spared and told to “go and tell Modi” Highlighting the political message behind the assault.

This attack is not just another tragic episode—it represents a strategic shift in terrorist operations. While attacks on civilians are not new, the deliberate targeting of tourists is both rare and symbolic. It challenges the narrative of “normalcy” that has been promoted in recent years, especially after the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019. The aim appears not just to kill, but to undermine the tourism economy, create fear, and provoke communal tensions across the country.

In this article, we explore how this attack fits into the broader historical and geopolitical context, and what it signals for India’s internal security and regional diplomacy.

2. A Timeline of Civilian Terror Attacks in Jammu & Kashmir

Jammu and Kashmir has seen multiple waves of terrorism over the past three decades. While security forces have often been primary targets, civilians—especially from minority communities—have also suffered devastating losses in carefully orchestrated attacks. Below is a timeline of key incidents that reflect the pattern and evolution of such terror acts, culminating in the 2025 Pahalgam attack.

2001: J&K Legislative Assembly Bombing

One of the most high-profile attacks of its time, this bombing took place on October 1, 2001, when a suicide bomber rammed a car loaded with explosives into the main gate of the Jammu and Kashmir State Assembly complex in Srinagar. The explosion and ensuing gunfire led to 38 civilian deaths. The Pakistan-based group Jaish-e-Mohammed claimed responsibility. The attack marked a significant escalation, signaling that even the state's political institutions were not off-limits.

2006: Doda Massacre

In April and May 2006, terrorists carried out a series of brutal attacks in the Doda and Udhampur districts, targeting Hindu civilians. Over 25 people were killed, many of them lined up and shot execution-style. These attacks aimed to reignite communal tensions and displace populations in mixed-religion areas.

2017: Amarnath Yatra Attack

On July 10, 2017, a bus carrying Hindu pilgrims returning from the Amarnath Yatra was ambushed in Anantnag. Terrorists opened fire, killing 8 pilgrims and injuring 19 others. The incident drew nationwide condemnation, as the pilgrims had no security role and were clearly non-combatants.

2025: Pahalgam Attack – A Disturbing Shift

The Pahalgam attack on April 22, 2025, differs from earlier incidents in both scale and intent. It involved the mass killing of 28 tourists, deliberately chosen for their religious identity. For the first time in recent memory, non-local, unarmed civilians visiting for tourism were directly targeted in such large numbers. This is not only a massacre but a message: to disrupt peace, shatter the image of a stable Kashmir, and trigger communal unrest.

What sets this attack apart is its symbolic and economic targeting—by killing tourists, the perpetrators aim to destroy public confidence, revive militancy narratives, and deal a blow to the region’s vital tourism industry. It marks a dangerous escalation in the civilian cost of conflict.

3. The Incident: What Happened in Pahalgam?

The terror attack in Pahalgam on April 22, 2025, is being described as one of the worst assaults on civilians in Jammu and Kashmir in recent memory. The attackers deliberately chose Baisaran Valley, a scenic meadow located about 7 km (4.3 miles) from Pahalgam town in Anantnag district, a region frequented by tourists and renowned for its natural beauty. often called “India’s Switzerland,” a region known for its serene valleys and tourism-friendly environment, surrounded by dense pine forests, the area is accessible only by foot or horseback, making it a serene yet vulnerable location—largely unguarded and remote. The choice of location—and timing—suggests not only strategic planning but also a desire to inflict maximum psychological and symbolic damage.

The Setting: A Vulnerable Terrain

The attack took place in a relatively remote area of Pahalgam, accessible only by ponies or on foot. This location significantly delayed emergency response efforts. With no nearby motorable roads and limited mobile connectivity, the terrain worked in favour of the attackers and against rescue operations. This wasn’t a random act of violence—it was carefully choreographed to trap and isolate the victims.

The Ambush and Targeting

According to early reports and eyewitness accounts, around 40 tourists were en route to a scenic trail when they were surrounded by a group of heavily armed militants with M4 carbines and AK-47 rifles. The attack occurred broad daylight. Survivors described how the terrorists checked identity documents, identified Hindu tourists, and opened fire at close range. The assault lasted only a few minutes, but its impact was devastating.

The death toll stood at 28, including two foreign nationals, making it one of the deadliest civilian-targeted attacks in the region in over two decades. Several others were injured, some critically, and many remain traumatized by the brutality they witnessed.

Manjunath’s Final Moments

Among the victims was Manjunath, a tourist from Karnataka, who had arrived in Kashmir with his wife, Pallavi. Just hours before the attack, he recorded a cheerful video during a Shikara ride in Srinagar, praising the hospitality and beauty of the valley. In the clip, he mentioned their itinerary and shared their joy at experiencing the region’s natural charm. It would become his final message.

Survivors reported that when the attackers asked for his identity, Manjunath responded honestly. Upon confirming his Hindu background, they shot him. His wife reportedly pleaded for her own life to be taken as well, but the militants chillingly replied, “Go and tell Modi what happened here.”

This exchange has become symbolic of the political messaging behind the attack—it was not just about killing but about sending a message of terror and intimidation across the country.

An Attack Designed to Shock

Unlike previous attacks that focused on military personnel or local political targets, this massacre deliberately targeted non-local civilians—tourists with no stake in the political conflict. Baisaran Valley was targeted not just for its strategic vulnerability, but for what it represents: peace, tourism, and a returning sense of normalcy in Kashmir. By turning a peaceful tourist site into a scene of mass murder, the attackers sent a clear message: no place is safe, and no visitor is beyond reach. It signals a disturbing tactical shift in the objectives of militancy in the region.

This shift highlights a deepening desperation among militant groups, as well as an attempt to reignite communal tensions and destabilize perceptions of peace in Kashmir. The Pahalgam attack stands as a brutal reminder that the battle for Kashmir is not just territorial, it is psychological, symbolic, and tragically, increasingly aimed at innocent lives.

4. Tactical Shift: Why Target Tourists?

In recent years, tourism has become a powerful symbol of normalcy in Kashmir. With the return of peace and the removal of Article 370 in 2019, the region witnessed a boom in tourism, with both domestic and foreign travellers returning in large numbers. In 2023 alone, Kashmir welcomed over 2 million tourists, contributing significantly to the local economy and promoting a narrative of stability.

By attacking tourists, militants aim to undermine this fragile peace. Their goal is not just to inflict physical harm, but to send a message—that Kashmir is still unsafe, and that normalcy is an illusion. Such acts are meant to instil fear among potential visitors, discourage economic growth, and provoke political embarrassment for the Indian state.

Psychological and Economic Impacts

The psychological impact of the attack cannot be overstated. When ordinary families and honeymooners become targets, the fear resonates far beyond Kashmir. It shakes national confidence and damages India's image abroad. Economically, the consequences are severe: hotels, transport services, local artisans, and seasonal workers all suffer from a sudden drop in visitors.

Hybrid Warfare and Proxy Messaging

This incident also aligns with the growing use of hybrid warfare—a combination of conventional violence, propaganda, and asymmetric tactics. Militant groups like the Resistance Front (TRF) frame such attacks as responses to “demographic change” or political suppression, pushing narratives through social media and messaging platforms. The deliberate sparing of Manjunath’s wife with the instruction to “tell Modi” Indicates that the attackers were not just killing, but broadcasting a threat.

In targeting tourists, militants have redefined the battleground. It is no longer just a fight for territory—it is a battle for perception, economy, and public morale.

5. Who Is Behind the Attack?

In the hours following the Pahalgam massacre, an unverified claim of responsibility emerged from a group known as The Resistance Front (TRF)—a relatively new but increasingly active militant outfit in Jammu and Kashmir. While not as widely recognized as traditional terrorist groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) or Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), TRF has quickly gained prominence for its guerrilla-style tactics, online propaganda, and its attempt to rebrand old militancy under a new local face.

Who Is The Resistance Front (TRF)?

TRF was first identified in 2019, shortly after the abrogation of Article 370, and has since claimed responsibility for a series of attacks targeting security forces and political figures in the region. It presents itself as a “homegrown resistance movement” fighting against Indian rule in Jammu and Kashmir. However, security analysts and intelligence agencies widely believe that TRF is nothing more than a front organization for Lashkar-e-Taiba, designed to mask Pakistani involvement and give the illusion of a local insurgency.

Reports indicate that while TRF recruits local youth, its leadership, weapons, and financial networks are deeply embedded in cross-border logistics managed by Pakistan-based handlers. The group’s emergence is part of a broader hybrid warfare strategy aimed at maintaining plausible deniability for Pakistan in international forums such as the Financial Action Task Force (FATF).

The Propaganda Narrative: Demographic Change

Shortly after the Pahalgam attack, a viral message allegedly from TRF began circulating on social media platforms. The message accused the Indian government of issuing over 85,000 domicile certificates to “non-locals” in an effort to change the demographic composition of Jammu and Kashmir. It claimed that these non-locals arrive posing as tourists, eventually settle, and “act as if it’s their land.”

This framing of tourists as “agents of demographic change” is particularly dangerous. It seeks to legitimize violence against civilians by portraying them as political threats, rather than non-combatant individuals. By blurring the lines between tourists, settlers, and state actors, TRF is attempting to justify terrorism as a form of resistance.

Local Face, Cross-Border Agenda

Despite TRF’s efforts to appear indigenous, the nature of its operations suggests otherwise. The sophistication of the attack, the timing, and the logistics of ambushing tourists in a remote area point to significant planning and training—resources that are typically available only through larger, well-established terrorist networks like LeT. Intelligence inputs following the attack have suggested that two local operatives may have been involved, but they were reportedly assisted by at least six foreign terrorists who infiltrated from across the border days before the incident.

By adopting a name that evokes local resistance, TRF aims to deflect international scrutiny from Pakistan and avoid sanctions. But the underlying pattern remains familiar: cross-border terrorism disguised as local militancy.

The Pahalgam attack thus reveals not only a new tactic, but a carefully crafted narrative war—one where the battlefield extends beyond the valley into the digital and diplomatic spheres.

6. Pakistan’s Role and Strategic Interests

The attack in Pahalgam cannot be fully understood without examining the broader role of Pakistan’s long-standing proxy war in Jammu and Kashmir. For decades, Pakistan has supported insurgency in the region through covert funding, training camps, arms supplies, and cross-border infiltration. Groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), and now The Resistance Front (TRF) have been repeatedly linked to Pakistani intelligence agencies, particularly the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).

A Strategy of Proxy Warfare

Since the 1990s, Pakistan has carefully pursued a strategy of "plausible deniability." Rather than engaging India in direct conflict, it supports terror groups that operate under the guise of “freedom fighters” or “resistance movements.” This approach allows Pakistan to destabilize the region, project itself as a sympathizer of Kashmiris, and internationalize the Kashmir issue, all while avoiding the consequences of formal warfare.

The FATF Factor: Why Denial Matters

One major reason Pakistan avoids direct responsibility today is the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)—an international body monitoring terror financing and money laundering. Between 2018 and 2022, Pakistan was placed on FATF’s grey list, severely damaging its international image and access to global financial systems. In response, Pakistan promised action against terrorist groups and even banned some on paper.

However, experts argue that this was largely cosmetic. Groups like TRF have emerged as rebranded entities, enabling Pakistan to maintain its proxy infrastructure while claiming compliance with FATF. Acknowledging involvement in attacks like Pahalgam would risk re-sanctioning and undermine Pakistan’s fragile economy.

Public Denial and Diplomatic Deflection

In the aftermath of the Pahalgam attack, Pakistani officials were quick to deny involvement, with former foreign ministers stating that the incident occurred “far from the Pakistani border” and should not be attributed to them. These statements follow a familiar pattern of distancing, despite mounting evidence of cross-border infiltration and foreign terrorist presence.

At the same time, social media campaigns and sympathetic voices within Pakistan have tried to frame the attack as a “local reaction” to Indian policies, particularly the alleged demographic changes in Kashmir.

This dual narrative—official denial and unofficial justification—forms the backbone of Pakistan’s hybrid warfare. The Pahalgam massacre, in this context, becomes not just an act of terror, but a calculated strategic maneuver in a broader geopolitical conflict.

7. Security Lapses and Systemic Weaknesses

While the Pahalgam terror attack has been rightly condemned for its brutality, it also raises serious questions about security preparedness and systemic vulnerabilities within India’s counter-terror apparatus. Despite heightened tensions in Jammu and Kashmir and the seasonal increase in tourist traffic, no security forces were deployed in the area where over 40 tourists were ambushed. This lack of protection in a tourist-heavy zone has triggered widespread concern.

Why Was There No Security?

Pahalgam, a popular tourist destination, was expected to host thousands of visitors in the lead-up to the Amarnath Yatra, one of the region’s largest annual religious pilgrimages. The area was already witnessing high footfall, yet basic security protocols—such as patrols, checkpoints, or surveillance—appeared to be absent on the day of the attack. Given past incidents of targeted killings and the region’s sensitive history, this oversight is both alarming and inexcusable.

A Questionable Timing: JD Vance’s Visit

What makes the security lapse even more perplexing is that the attack coincided with the presence of U.S. Vice President JD Vance in India. Historically, major terror attacks in Jammu and Kashmir have occurred during visits by international dignitaries, such as during U.S. President Bill Clinton’s visit in 2000. That pattern repeating now suggests either a calculated provocation by the attackers or a failure to anticipate heightened threat levels during international engagement.

Lessons Not Learned from Pulwama

This is not the first time that intelligence and operational failures have enabled a high-casualty terror attack. In 2019, the Pulwama attack, which killed 40 CRPF personnel, was later found to have involved 300 kg of RDX—smuggled and deployed without detection. In that case too, questions were raised about insider information, surveillance lapses, and the failure to act on prior intelligence inputs.

The Insider Threat and Systemic Gaps

The Pahalgam incident also raises suspicions of insider involvement or surveillance leaks. How did the attackers know the exact route, timing, and vulnerability of the tourist group? Were they aided by local sympathizers or compromised elements within administrative structures? These are not hypothetical concerns—they point to deep structural issues that remain unaddressed despite previous tragedies.

In the aftermath of every attack, the call for accountability rises. But unless those systemic gaps—in intelligence sharing, local coordination, and rapid deployment—are addressed, the risk of recurrence remains dangerously high.

8. India’s Political and Military Response

The Pahalgam terror attack prompted swift and strong reactions from India’s political leadership. Prime Minister Narendra Modi condemned the killings in the strongest terms, describing the attack as a “cowardly and inhuman act.” He assured the nation that the perpetrators would face consequences and that those who aid terrorism will be held accountable. Home Minister Amit Shah immediately flew to Kashmir, holding a high-level security review meeting that lasted late into the night. His presence underscored the gravity of the situation and the central government’s commitment to restoring control and calm.

Immediate Actions and Strategic Mobilization

In response to the attack, security forces launched a massive cordon-and-search operation in the region. Surveillance drones and military helicopters were deployed to locate the attackers, who were believed to have escaped into the surrounding forests. The Army, CRPF, and local police were put on high alert across southern Kashmir, particularly in tourist zones and pilgrimage routes.

While such tactical responses are essential, questions are also being raised about long-term strategic planning. Are existing counter-terrorism frameworks equipped to address hybrid warfare and identity-targeted violence? Is India’s intelligence infrastructure adequately integrated at the central and local levels? These concerns have returned to the forefront following this latest tragedy.

Should India Respond Militarily? Lessons from Uri and Balakot

Following previous attacks, such as Uri (2016) and Pulwama (2019), India responded with surgical strikes and airstrikes on terror camps in Pakistan. These actions were aimed at deterring future attacks and sending a clear message that cross-border terrorism would not be tolerated.

Now, voices are growing louder for a “disproportionate response”—one that does not merely target militant hideouts, but potentially disrupts infrastructure, training camps, and logistical networks operating across the border. The logic is simple: retaliatory strikes must increase the cost of sponsoring terror, rather than allowing it to be absorbed as a manageable risk.

A Need for Sustained Strategy

While India's military is capable and confident, the real challenge lies in maintaining a consistent and long-term policy. This includes a mix of military deterrence, diplomatic pressure, cyber-monitoring, and community engagement. The Pahalgam attack was not just a breach of physical security—it was an assault on the perception of peace. Responding to it requires more than force; it demands strategic depth, resilience, and unity.

9. Communal and Social Implications

One of the most dangerous consequences of terror attacks like the one in Pahalgam is the risk of communal flare-ups. When civilians are deliberately targeted based on their religion—as was the case in this incident—there is a real possibility of retaliatory anger, misinformation, and polarisation spreading across communities in other parts of the country.

This is not accidental; it is by design. Groups like the Resistance Front (TRF) and their handlers understand the deep fault lines in Indian society. Their strategy is not only to cause loss of life, but also to provoke communal discord, weaken internal unity, and damage India’s social fabric. Identity-based killings, like asking for religious identity before shooting victims, are meant to ignite fear and fuel hate—both within Jammu and Kashmir and beyond.

The Importance of Social Resilience

India must resist this trap. The true failure of such a terror attack would be if it successfully leads to sectarian unrest or communal violence. Maintaining peace, supporting the victims across religious lines, and reinforcing inter-community trust are not just moral imperatives—they are also strategic responses to terrorism. A nation divided is a nation weakened, and the sponsors of this violence know it.

Managing Protests and Public Emotion

In the aftermath of the attack, some protests erupted in Srinagar and other parts of the valley. While public mourning and democratic expression are valid, there is a genuine risk of these protests turning into flashpoints for further violence. It is essential for the government, civil society, and media to discourage inflammatory rhetoric, monitor sensitive regions, and ensure peaceful conduct of public gatherings.

India’s strength lies not just in military might, but in its ability to remain united in the face of adversity.

10. Global Reactions and International Diplomacy

The Pahalgam terror attack has drawn strong international condemnation, further highlighting the global community’s increasing support for India in its fight against terrorism. Leaders across the world have expressed solidarity, recognizing the deliberate targeting of civilians as a clear violation of humanitarian norms.

Among the first to react was U.S. Vice President JD Vance, who was already visiting India at the time of the attack. In a public statement, he described the killings as a “horrific act of terrorism” and expressed unwavering support for India’s right to defend its citizens. The U.S. President Donald Trump also voiced his concern, stating that the United States stood with India “in its fight against evil and terror.” Russian President Vladimir Putin condemned the attack as “senseless and barbaric,” reinforcing the view that targeting civilians, especially tourists, is a red line for the global community.

A Moment for Strategic Diplomacy

These reactions reflect India’s rising global credibility and offer a diplomatic opening. With countries increasingly recognizing Pakistan’s proxy role in regional instability, India can use this moment to internationalize the issue of cross-border terrorism. The aim should be not only to isolate terror outfits but also to expose the infrastructure that sustains them, especially when disguised as local movements like TRF.

The FATF Dimension

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) remains a key pressure point. Though Pakistan was removed from the grey list in 2022 after promises of reform, attacks like Pahalgam revive concerns over whether it has genuinely dismantled terror-financing networks. India can use documented evidence and international support to push for renewed scrutiny.

Diplomatically, this is a moment to reframe the Kashmir conflict not as a local issue, but as part of a global struggle against terrorism and extremism.

11. Conclusion: What Lies Ahead?

The Pahalgam terror attack is more than a tragic episode—it is a turning point in the trajectory of violence in Jammu and Kashmir. With 28 innocent lives lost, including tourists and foreign nationals, the message from the perpetrators is unmistakable: to break the perception of peace, spread fear, and provoke division. The deliberate targeting of civilians in a tourist destination signals a shift not only in tactics but in the psychological warfare being waged by terror outfits.

This attack has exposed both external threats and internal vulnerabilities. While evidence points toward cross-border involvement and support from Pakistan-backed groups like The Resistance Front, the incident also reveals worrying gaps in domestic intelligence, local surveillance, and risk assessment. The absence of security in a well-known tourist area during peak travel season, despite clear historical precedents, raises serious concerns that demand immediate and honest introspection.

What lies ahead must be shaped by balanced, strategic action. India’s military has proven its capabilities through precision strikes and counter-insurgency operations. However, military strength alone is not enough. What is needed is a sustained, coordinated policy—one that combines tactical defence, international diplomacy, intelligence reform, and community engagement.

At the same time, the response must remain measured and unified. Falling into the trap of communal division or reactive violence would only serve the interests of those who seek to destabilize the country from within and without.

The Pahalgam attack is a reminder that the fight against terrorism is not just about eliminating gunmen—it is about protecting what they aim to destroy: India’s unity, stability, and democratic values. The road ahead is difficult, but with resolve, clarity, and vigilance, it is a battle that can and must be won.

.    .    .