Pakistan’s involvement with terrorist groups: Can India respond without starting a war?

By Bharat Dogra 

The April 22 attack in the famous tourism resort of Pahalgam, which resulted in the killing of 26 tourists and a local person who had come to the rescue of the tourists in a most cruel way, has been condemned strongly all over the world. The UN Security Council has not only strongly condemned the perpetrators of the horrible attack, it has also called for the accountability of the “organizers, financiers and sponsors.” Apart from the great distress caused to the near and dear ones of those killed and injured in the attack, this incident has sharply escalated tensions between India and Pakistan with both the adversaries (both are nuclear weapon powers) announcing a number of hostile decisions.

Seen from the perspective of peace in South Asia and world peace, there is urgency of reducing the menace of terrorism as well as ensuring that any further escalatory actions can be contained in such a way as to avoid any possibility of war. 

So, where do we go from here? 

India has insisted from the very beginning that Pakistan is behind this attack, and this is widely believed at world level because of the alleged and widely believed past record of Pakistan in instigating terrorist attacks in Jammu and Kashmir as well as elsewhere in India, including the widely reported terrorist attacks in Mumbai (2008) and on the Indian Parliament in Delhi (2001). There has been a past history of Pakistan first denying its involvement, and then this being exposed in instalments, sometimes in self-confessions being made in the course of internal tussles, as in the case of the self-confessions made in the context of Kargil War (1999). In 2018 Nawaz Sharif, three-time Prime Minister of Pakistan had asked in exasperation why his country “allows non-state actors cross the border and kill 150 people in Mumbai” (see The Times of India, 26 April, 2025, report titled ‘Why Pakistan’s denial has zero credibility). 

Pakistan’s involvement with terrorist groups and its extended spells of functioning as a leading hub of terrorism are widely recognized and extensively documented. The linkages of Pakistani army and intelligence agencies with terrorist groups in Jammu and Kashmir are well-established. Another troubling aspect has been the extraordinary powers exercised by the Pakistani army and the capacity of its Generals to sideline civilian leadership to conduct highly dangerous operations largely on their own initiative, as at the time of initial Kargil intrusions which started a war in 1999.  

What is more, recently the Pakistan army chief Gen Asim Munir has been making incendiary statements (just before the Pahalgam attack) which can lead to making religious minorities in South Asia unsafe everywhere by increasing intolerance and hostility. His highly provocative statements can also be seen as a signal by Pakistani assets and agents in other countries to increase their aggression and violence. Others in important positions in Pakistan have also recently made aggressive statements. (see article in The Tribune, India, by Vivek Katju titled ‘Pahalgam Terror : Govt at Strategic Crossroads, 24 April,2025).   

As often seen in the past Pakistan’s aggression, and that of pro-Pak terror groups, increases in Jammu and Kashmir when there are increasing signs of Kashmir achieving more and better integration with the rest of the country. The recent horrible attack on tourists at a time of fast increasing advent of tourists is in line with this trend.

It is in the context of this background that Pakistan’s insistence on its non-involvement in the Pahalgam attack has not carried much credibility. However for the record and for presenting all points of view it should be mentioned here that Pakistan has announced its willingness for an international investigation. As such an investigation is hugely unlikely and even if likely will take a long time to arrive, if at all, at any definite conclusion, such a stand by Pakistan has hardly added to its credibility. If at all an international investigation is conducted, it should be to find out to what extent, if at all, Pakistan has reduced its terror infrastructure and its links to terror groups in recent years.

The bigger question is—given the very high likelihood of Pakistan’s involvement in the Pahalgam, how should India respond? World peace being already threatened at various levels, India should seek to reduce the threat of terrorism while at the same time reducing any likelihood of fast escalation and war.

India should seek to mobilize world opinion as much as possible to increase pressure on Pakistan to reduce its support for terrorism in various ways. India should also make proper and balanced use of carefully gathered intelligence to take strong action against suspected terrorists and terror groups in Jammu and Kashmir and elsewhere, as well as their support networks. India should of course substantially improve security arrangements in Jammu and Kashmir and in other threatened areas. While all these and related steps are certainly needed, India should avoid the kind of escalatory steps that can significantly increase the possibility of a war. In its response, India should be guided not only by the extreme distress and understandable anger of its people post Pahalgam terror attack, it should be guided also by the responsibility for maintaining peace in a world already troubled immensely by war and conflict. True, Pakistan has acted time and again with increasing recklessness in instigating terror attacks and supporting terror groups, but given this difficult situation, the response of India must be in ways which decease distress related to violence and do not increase distress related to violence. 

Both India and Pakistan should adopt helpful attitude towards ordinary people affected by the increasing tensions, for example visitors to and from the two countries who get stranded and cannot return to their home country in time due to new restrictions. Both countries should act swiftly to prevent the rise in tensions leading to any violence against minorities. Both countries should adoptive protective attitudes towards the river systems and other common heritage of South Asia.   

---

The writer is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Planet in Peril, A Day in 2071, and Man over Machine—The Path to Peace