In the immediate aftermath of the tragic terror attack in Phalagam, Indian media outlets once again leaped to a familiar and predictable conclusion: Pakistan is to blame. Without any formal investigation, verified evidence, or official inquiry, headlines and talking heads were already pointing fingers across the border. This knee-jerk reaction isn’t new— it’s an old, well-worn script that continues to undermine the potential for truth, accountability, and regional peace.
For Pakistan, this latest accusation is viewed as yet another chapter in India’s routine blame game. After every incident of violence in Indian-administered Kashmir, a default narrative emerges— regardless of the circumstances or the complexity of local dynamics, Pakistan is swiftly, almost ritualistically, named as the prime suspect. The events in Phalagam, though tragic, are being used to repeat this pattern once again.
What makes this repetition particularly concerning is the systemic disregard for any alternative explanations. There is no consideration of internal factors— local grievances, political alienation, or even possible intelligence and security lapses on the Indian side. The Kashmir region has long been a volatile area, shaped by decades of unrest, deep-rooted socio-political tensions, and a complex interplay of regional politics. Yet, these factors are often dismissed in favor of a singular external culprit.
This rush to assign blame is not just irresponsible—it’s also dangerous. It prevents meaningful introspection and deflects attention from critical questions. Why was there a security breach in Phalagam? What were the lapses in intelligence gathering? Were there warning signs that were ignored? An immediate external attribution prevents Indian authorities and the public from engaging in this necessary self-examination. Instead, the focus is shifted toward an easy target.
The role of the Indian media in this cycle cannot be overstated. Within minutes of the news breaking, anchors and commentators were already laying the groundwork for Pakistan’s culpability. This alignment with the government’s unverified stance illustrates how sections of the Indian media have increasingly become an uncritical mouthpiece rather than an independent watchdog. Responsible journalism demands waiting for facts, asking hard questions, and holding all sides accountable. Sadly, this standard appears to have been abandoned in favor of sensationalism and jingoistic fervor.
Moreover, the political timing of the accusations cannot be ignored. With US Vice President JD Vance currently on an official visit to India, the narrative conveniently provides an opportunity to reinforce India’s geopolitical messaging about Pakistan being a sponsor of terror. This amounts to an opportunistic exploitation of a tragedy to score diplomatic points and cement foreign policy agendas. It transforms a human tragedy into a rhetorical weapon— a deeply unethical move by any standard.
Today’s tragedy in Phalagam should be a moment of reflection— not reaction. It should inspire an honest reckoning with the realities of the Kashmir conflict, the role of media in shaping public perception, and the dangers of weaponizing blame. Pakistan remains open to cooperation on counterterrorism, but not at the cost of its dignity or based on accusations devoid of evidence. Let the facts speak before the rhetoric does.
Pakistan, like any responsible state, condemns terrorism in all its forms. It has itself suffered immensely from the scourge of terrorism and understands the pain and devastation such attacks cause. But being automatically presumed guilty— especially in the court of public opinion shaped by hostile media— before any investigation begins, is a violation of due process and international norms.
This premature blame also erodes the credibility of Indian institutions. When accusations are made before any evidence is presented, it suggests a pre-determined conclusion rather than a commitment to justice. The idea of “innocent until proven guilty” is thrown aside in favor of narrative control and political convenience. Such practices not only hurt bilateral relations but also tarnish India’s global image as a democratic state committed to the rule of law.
Furthermore, the pattern of blaming Pakistan immediately after attacks often serves another, more insidious purpose: it acts as a smokescreen to cover domestic security failures. By externalizing the threat, authorities deflect accountability for internal lapses. The Phalagam attack, like others before it, raises pressing questions about the preparedness and coordination of Indian security forces in a high-risk area. Ignoring these issues in favor of an external scapegoat does a disservice to the victims and hinders long-term solutions.
If India is truly committed to combating terrorism, then it must begin with a commitment to truth and transparency. That means conducting a thorough, impartial investigation into the Phalagam incident, examining all potential leads—including local elements—and presenting verifiable evidence before making public accusations. Only through this approach can credibility be maintained, justice served, and tensions in the region deescalated.
Today’s tragedy in Phalagam should be a moment of reflection— not reaction. It should inspire an honest reckoning with the realities of the Kashmir conflict, the role of media in shaping public perception, and the dangers of weaponizing blame. Pakistan remains open to cooperation on counterterrorism, but not at the cost of its dignity or based on accusations devoid of evidence. Let the facts speak before the rhetoric does.
The world is watching. And in times of tragedy, responsible nations don’t point fingers—they seek truth.
