The Kashmir valley, divided since 1947 between India and Pakistan, has long been a flashpoint of conflict. India and Pakistan both claim the region and have fought multiple wars over it, while Kashmir’s Muslim-majority population has simmered under a decades-long insurgency. The Indian government frequently accuses Pakistan of backing Islamist militants to foment violence in Kashmir. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s 2019 revocation of Kashmir’s special autonomy was meant to bring stability and new investment; tourism surged as a result but tensions brewed under the surface. Hard-line local critics, however, warned of cultural friction as large numbers of mainly Hindu tourists arrived. This fragile peace was shattered on April 22, 2025, when gunmen opened fire on vacationers in Pahalgam.
Attack on Tourists in Pahalgam
The picturesque Pahalgam valley in Kashmir (file image from 2015) became the scene of a deadly attack on April 22, 2025. At about 2:45 pm that day, four militants dressed in camouflage emerged from the forest into the Baisaran meadow, a scenic picnic area reachable only by foot or pony, and “opened indiscriminate fire” at tourists. The assault lasted only minutes but left 26 people dead, among them Hindu pilgrims from various Indian states and at least one foreign visitor and many more wounded. Survivors said the gunmen herded men and women into separate groups and even ordered male victims to kneel and recite an Islamic prayer; those who could not chant correctly were executed on the spot. A local Muslim pony ride operator, who tried to wrest a weapon from the attackers, was also killed.
This was the deadliest civilian massacre in Kashmir in many years. Al Jazeera reported it as “the deadliest such attack in a quarter-century” in Indian-administered Kashmir. Witnesses and officials noted the apparent religious targeting: men were asked their names and faith, and Hindu men were singled out before being shot. A U.S. commission later condemned the “explicit targeting of Hindus and other non-Muslims.”
The group calling itself the Kashmir Resistance (The Resistance Front, TRF) claimed credit online, saying it struck back at the recent settling of “outsiders” in the valley. Indian analysts and security officials say TRF is essentially a front for the Pakistan-based militant organization Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a U.S.-designated terror group accused in past attacks such as the 2008 Mumbai assault. Pakistan’s government denies it sponsored any attack, insisting it only offers Kashmir rebels moral support.
India’s Response
India reacted swiftly and with outrage. On April 24, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri announced a series of diplomatic and political measures. He said India would suspend the Indus Waters Treaty, the decades-old water-sharing pact with Pakistan, “until Pakistan credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism.” India also closed the Attari-Wagah land border crossing, canceled all regular visas for Pakistani nationals, and sent home several Pakistani diplomats and defense officers. The Indian Army reported it had responded to “unprovoked” firing from Pakistani posts along the Line of Control, and India raised military alert levels.
Misri vowed that India would get results. At a press briefing, he said that in a security meeting, it had been established the attackers had cross-border links and that “the perpetrators of the attack will be brought to justice and their sponsors held to account”reuters.com. Prime Minister Modi, who cut short a Middle East trip to return home, echoed this stance. He called the attack “shocking and painful” and assured the nation that “those responsible would be brought to justice.” In Srinagar, President Droupadi Murmu condemned the massacre as a “dastardly and inhuman act.” At the same time, other leaders across India, from the governing party and opposition, uniformly demanded firm action against anyone found complicit. Jammu and Kashmir’s Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, in a special state assembly session, said this atrocity was “much larger than anything we’ve seen directed at civilians in recent years.”
On the ground, the government stepped up security. Thousands of additional troops and police fanned out to protect other tourist sites. Investigators gathered evidence: they detained hundreds of suspects and checked communications. Officials later reported that two of the identified gunmen were Pakistani nationals. However, Pakistan flatly rejected the claim as “baseless.” The Indian government’s actions, especially suspending the Indus Treaty, are meant to send a message that it holds Pakistan responsible for any aid to militants. New Delhi also moved to downgrade diplomatic ties: it told Pakistani envoys to leave by May 1 and froze planned high-level contacts.
Pakistan’s Response
Pakistan’s official reaction was one of denial and counter-accusation. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif convened his National Security Committee on April 25 to discuss India’s steps. Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar posted on social media that New Delhi’s claims were “concocted” and that Islamabad “has nothing to do with this incident, period.” At a press conference, Information Minister Attaullah Tarar went further, warning that Pakistan had “credible intelligence” of an Indian strike in “the next 24–36 hours on the pretext of concocted and baseless allegations” about Pahalgam. Dar and Pakistani media portrayed India’s response as an overreaction or even a “false-flag” provocation. Pakistan denied involvement, saying it would only consider an independent investigation if evidence were shared.
Meanwhile, Pakistan took its retaliatory steps: it suspended visas for Indian nationals and closed its airspace to Indian flights. It also expelled some Indian diplomats. The Pakistani army reported it had again destroyed militants in mountainous border areas (claiming 71 in one sweep). It warned that its forces were “vigilant.” Defence Minister Khawaja Asif even suggested the attack was part of a broader “home-grown” insurgency against India in many states, dismissing the idea that Pakistan orchestrated it. Despite the rhetoric, Islamabad says it is wary of war: its leaders insisted that any military escalation by either side would have grave consequences.
In short, the two neighbors entered a full diplomatic standoff. India accused Pakistan of cross-border terrorism, while Pakistan accused India of saber-rattling. Both have withdrawn diplomats and increased military alerts. Experts note that the cycle of tit-for-tat risks spinning out of control: a Council on Foreign Relations analysis warned that “India and Pakistan have taken escalatory moves” like border skirmishes and that miscalculation could spark a broader conflict. No further attacks have occurred for now, but the atmosphere remains tense.
International Reactions and Calls for Diplomacy
World leaders and international bodies uniformly condemned the Pahalgam massacre and urged restraint. On April 25, the UN Security Council issued a rare statement blasting “the terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir” and reaffirming that terrorism is a grave threat to peace. The statement expressed sympathy for the victims and their families. It stressed that “those responsible for these killings should be held accountable.” It underlined that all nations must cooperate in bringing the perpetrators to justice.
The United States voiced strong support for India while calling for a de-escalation. A State Department spokesperson told Reuters that Washington “stands with India and strongly condemns the terrorist attack in Pahalgam” but also noted it was in touch with both sides and encouraged a “responsible resolution” of the crisis. U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice President Jim Vance (who was in India then) offered condolences and solidarity. China, India’s rival and Pakistan’s ally, extended “sincere sympathies” to the victims’ families and said it “strongly condemns this attack” while urging both India and Pakistan to “exercise restraint” to avoid further instability. Other foreign leaders from Britain, France, Russia, Australia, and elsewhere condemned the violence as “barbaric” and offered condolences. Canadian politicians, for example, denounced the “barbaric assault on humanity” and insisted the attackers be brought to justice. In general, the global community called the killings unjustifiable and urged both governments to avoid a military spiral.
Looking Ahead: Justice and Diplomacy
Many analysts stress that dialogue and law enforcement, not violence, must prevail as the diplomatic standoff continues. The U.S. has explicitly urged both sides to work toward a “responsible solution” rather than retaliation. Likewise, the UN and other nations have reminded India and Pakistan of their obligations to combat terrorism through investigation and cooperation. Within Kashmir, Muslim leaders have condemned the attack and held prayers for the victims, saying Kashmiris “stand shoulder to shoulder with the victims,” and decrying any attempt to link ordinary Kashmiris with the crime.
Whatever investigations proceed, officials on both sides say those behind the killings must be identified and punished. India says it will hunt down the attackers wherever they are; Pakistan insists it will do the same if evidence is shared. Outside observers note that the Pahalgam attack demonstrates why both governments need better intelligence-sharing and conflict-resolution channels. India and Pakistan hope to prevent such tragedies through sustained diplomacy and trust-building. As one analyst put it, the perpetrators and their “financiers and sponsors” must be held accountable by law. Still, lasting peace will require addressing Kashmir’s political grievances and avoiding the cycle of tit-for-tat reprisals. In the tense days ahead, voices on all sides call for justice delivered through the rule of law and for cooler heads to prevail.
Ultimately, not coming together in a moment like this may have disastrous ramifications for the world. Both India and Pakistan are nuclear powers, and any conflict between the two will prove catastrophic. Should Pakistan be proven correct that Information Minister Attaullah Tarar be proven correct that an Indian strike is inbound, it would only lead to more conflict. However, there is reason to be optimistic because his supposed 24-36 hour window has already passed. In these trying times, the world needs more cooperation and not less. The burden falls on India and Pakistan to hold up their end for collaboration to be reached. India needs to prove it is going after only terrorists and seek Pakistani permission, and Pakistan cannot shelter them and needs to take action on its own. In addition, both sides must share relevant information. In the end, this is the only way.
Add comment
Comments