The tranquility of the meadows of Baisaran in Pahalgam, an exemplar of Kashmir’s touristic revival, was violently disrupted on April 22, when militants, in a targeted attack on tourists, killed at least 26 people, including foreign nationals, and wounded many others.
According to reports in the media, The Resistance Front (TRF), a shadow outfit of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) headed by Hafiz Saeed, claimed responsibility for the attack. However, in a statement issued on April 25, TRF denied responsibility.
According to eyewitness accounts, at least four operatives, dressed in camouflage uniforms, targeted Hindu men and shot them dead. U.S.-made M4 carbines and AK-47 assault rifles were used in the attack.
In the days following the attack, business communities and religious organizations called for a Kashmir Bandh (shutdown), reflecting both despair and anger. The attack will have a devastating impact on Kashmir’s economy. Tourism is a crucial economic lifeline for the Kashmir valley, especially during summer. Reports suggest widespread cancellations of tourism bookings.
The resurgence of militancy, erosion of administrative trust, and the threat of worsening relations with Pakistan will keep Kashmir in the spotlight in the coming weeks. The incident prompted India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi to cut short his official visit to Saudi Arabia. In a display of eroded trust, the prime minister chose to avoid Pakistani airspace on his flight home.
Widely described as the worst civilian massacre in the valley in recent memory, the attack at Pahalgam transcends the classification of a typical Islamist terrorist attack. It also appears to be a calculated act of strategic messaging, a direct rebuke to New Delhi’s narrative of “normalcy” in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K), post the abrogation of Article 370 in August 2019.
A Shift in Tactical Operation
Unlike traditional militant attacks in J&K in recent years, which targeted security personnel through ambush-style assaults or hit-and-run gun attacks on the minority Kashmiri Pandit community, the attack in Pahalgam was aimed at tourists. There has been low-scale targeting of tourists before; a tourist couple from Rajasthan was targeted in a gun attack in Pahalgam in May 2024.
However, the scale and casualty figures of the April 22 assault suggest a significant escalation. This shift reflects a recalibration in militant strategy from isolated symbolic acts to high-impact violence intended to disrupt any semblance of stability. Since the revocation of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, the tourism industry has been portrayed as a barometer of normalization in the region. Consequently, the targeting of tourists directly undermines this state-led narrative.
Source-based information indicates that the attack was likely carried out by an LeT unit operating out of Rawalakot in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. If preliminary assessments stand true, the operatives likely infiltrated through the dense terrain of the Pir Panjal range and reached Baisaran via Kokernag in Anantnag district.
India’s Counter-Insurgency Grid
The attack leaves behind a trail of questions. Did the Indian government’s Jammu-centric counter-militancy strategy compromise response time in Kashmir? This question gains relevance in light of reports that it took authorities nearly 20 minutes to return fire. The apparent lack of timely sanitization operations in Baisaran – despite the presence of hundreds of tourists there – raises concerns regarding force deployment in high-footfall areas.
Does this suggest a gradual erosion of human intelligence capabilities among Indian authorities in J&K? The Gujjar and Bakarwal communities, long considered the “eyes and ears” of the security forces, have historically played a crucial role in providing ground-level intelligence on insurgent activity. These nomadic communities, who inhabit the forested and mountainous terrain of the Union Territory, once formed a critical link in India’s counter-insurgency architecture.
Home Minister Amit Shah has repeatedly criticized previous administrations for being “soft on terror.” However, two major attacks have occurred in the Kashmir valley within six years – the suicide attack on a paramilitary convoy at Pulwama in February 2019 and the recent killing of tourists at Pahalgam. These indicate that the Indian government’s populist “strong-handed approach” appears to have done little to mitigate threat perceptions in the region. As such, under the current governance structure, the lieutenant governor administration, which has been directly overseeing the union territory since 2019, will have to address questions regarding the effectiveness of the counter-militancy grid.
Impact on India-Pakistan Ties
In the aftermath of the attack, New Delhi did not explicitly name Pakistan or present immediate evidence of its involvement. However, on April 23, India’s Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) announced a series of unprecedented measures signaling a freeze in political, cultural, and diplomatic engagement, including the unilateral suspension of the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), closure of the Attari-Wagah Integrated Check Post, suspension of all visas, and a sharp reduction in diplomatic staff, including the removal of defense advisers.
Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson expressed concern over the loss of tourists’ lives in the Pahalgam attack. “We extend our condolences to the families of the deceased and wish the injured a speedy recovery,” it said in a statement. In a television interview, Pakistan’s Defense Minister Khwaja Asif stated that Pakistan had “absolutely nothing to do with” the attack in Pahalgam. “We reject terrorism in all its forms and everywhere,” he added.
While rejecting India’s claims as “politically motivated,” Pakistan’s National Security Committee suspended all SAARC visas for Indians (except Sikh pilgrims), shut the border crossing, declared Indian military officials as persona non grata, and halted trade and Indian airspace access for a month. Islamabad further warned that India’s suspension of the IWT amounted to an “act of war” and claimed the right to hold the Simla Agreement and other bilateral pacts in abeyance.
The India-Pakistan tit-for-tat actions mark a steep diplomatic decline, departing from earlier norms of restraint and crisis management.
While backchannel talks have been nearly absent and the impasse in Track 2 dialogues continues, these initiatives may now be shelved or permanently derailed for the foreseeable future.
Possible Indian Response
New Delhi now faces a strategic crossroads. Following the Pulwama attack, the Indian Air Force carried out airstrikes in Balakot, Pakistan. The strategic decision-making in 2019 was also partially driven by the upcoming Indian general elections. Given this precedent, the Modi government may be inclined toward a muscular military response as a deterrence measure to gain domestic political mileage again.
However, the government has additional reason to opt for a strong military response this time. In Pahalgam, militants attacked soft targets, an important red line for India.
Some courses of action that New Delhi could opt for in the coming months include surgical strikes across the Line of Control (LoC) between India and Pakistan, missile strikes on known militant camps in Rawalakot or other regions in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, completely halting humanitarian exchanges such as the release of jailed fishermen, and pushing international stakeholders, including China and the United States in the long term, to re-categorize Pakistan in the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) grey list, exacerbating its already deteriorating economy.
Each of these measures will carry significant risks, both domestically and internationally. Given its precedent of leveraging national security narratives, the Modi government may turn this attack into a rallying point against Pakistan before the international community.