Pakistan would sooner or later pay the price for its misaadventures…
Kamal Kant Sharma retired as Inspector General, CRPF, with over 35 years of experience in anti-terror and counter-insurgency operations in India’s most sensitive and challenging regions. He has fought terrorism in Punjab, insurgency in North East and Jammu & Kashmir, and Naxalism in Chhattisgarh, and Jharkhand, giving him deep operational insight into India’s internal security dynamics. In 1989, during the kidnapping of Rubaiya Sayeed, he played a pivotal role in initiating counter-terror operations from ground zero with no initial intelligence. He was instrumental in dismantling the early structure of terrorism in Kashmir. As DIG, Srinagar, he maintained law and order and restored peace during the sensitive period following the Burhan Wani incident. He has conducted numerous high-impact anti-terror operations in Kashmir.
There was never a dull moment in his life. He served as Inspector General of CRPF’s elite CoBRA force (Commando Battalion for Resolute Action) for nearly three years, overseeing specialised jungle warfare and counter-insurgency operations. He was awarded President’s Medal for Distinguished Services and Gallantry Medal for anti-naxal operations in Chhattisgarh in 2006. Excerpts from an interview with Neeraj Mahajan, Editor, Taazakhabar News.
How would you like to describe the Pahalgam attack, not just in terms of casualties, but also its symbolic impact on India’s internal security and tourism in Kashmir?
The Pahalgam attack is not just a terror incident; it is a direct assault on India’s internal security and the peace in Kashmir. The successful hosting of the G20 summit, growing international support for India, and Pakistan’s diplomatic isolation have left it frustrated. Humiliated by its failures in Balochistan and along the Afghan border, the Pakistani military orchestrated this attack to divert public attention and salvage its declining image.
By targeting tourists, the perpetrators behind the dastardly attack have tried to stall Kashmir’s return to normalcy. They intend to disrupt hope and reignite fear. Pakistan wishes to divert attention from its domestic problems, stroking the perception that Kashmir is not safe for the common citizens in India. Pakistan should not forget that many people in PoK wish to be a part of India.
The Prime Minister cut short his foreign trip, and the Defence Minister issued a strong warning. What message would India like to give to people who directly carried out the attack or those who sponsored, trained or provided logistical support?
The Prime Minister’s immediate response and the Defence Minister’s stern warning send a clear message: India will no longer be reactive—it will act decisively. Whether it’s the terrorists or their handlers, accountability will be enforced at every level.
It is a clear message to enemies—both domestic and foreign—that India will not suffer in silence. Those responsible, and those hiding behind them, will have to face the consequences. Our response will be precise, firm, and unforgiving.
Why is it that no Police/ CRPF or Home Guard personnel were present in Baisaran to protect the tourists in case of a mishap or accident? Shouldn’t there be tighter surveillance and protection protocols in places of tourist attraction?
The absence of security forces at tourist spots was part of a deliberate policy to maintain a peaceful atmosphere for visitors. However, after this tragic incident, the government must revisit this policy. Tourism is vital to Kashmir’s livelihood, and such attacks directly threaten local livelihoods.
Baisaran is a known hotspot, especially in peak season. We need to move from reactive deployments to pre-emptive security planning, particularly in vulnerable zones frequented by civilians.
Don’t you think incidents like this symbolise a lack of coordination between intelligence agencies, local administration, and security forces?
Yes, this reflects a failure in intelligence. That’s a hard truth we must accept. These attacks expose structural gaps in coordination. Timely intelligence, seamless sharing, and action-ready teams are non-negotiable in today’s threat landscape.
Does this incident indicate an intelligence failure on behalf of IB or R&AW?
As I said before, this incident reflects a lapse in intelligence. But it’s too early for conclusive blame.
Tourists have been coming to Kashmir for the last three or four decades, but they have not even been touched. This attack predominantly targeted male Hindu tourists— seems to be a major shift from the past? What was the reason behind this change of target?
The people of Kashmir have largely distanced themselves from terrorism. They were enjoying the fruits of peace and did not support separatism anymore. This attack was a message to the public: if tourists stop coming, locals would lose livelihoods and eventually be forced to turn back to the militants. But the people have made it clear—they stand against terrorism.
Historically, tourists were not direct targets. The communal targeting suggests a motive to create a wider polarisation, disrupt the secular ethos of Indian tourism, and provoke a national outcry.
How do you interpret the Defence Minister’s statement that India will reach not just the perpetrators, but also those ‘behind the scenes’? Could this mean targeting state and non-state actors beyond our borders?
The Defence Minister’s statement was unequivocal—India will not only target terrorists but also state and non-state actors and all those who indirectly support terrorism. Financial, ideological, or logistical supporters are now in India’s crosshairs.
We are looking at all enablers—those providing sanctuary, finance, or ideology. This includes both state and non-state actors. There will be a price to pay for proxy warfare.
Pakistan has called this a “false flag operation.” How should India counter such international narratives, especially when global perception plays a big role in shaping diplomacy?
Pakistan’s claim of a “false flag operation” holds no weight. India should present its solid evidence—intercepted calls, satellite images, and captured terrorist testimonies—on global forums. Pakistan has become a rogue state, and the world no longer takes its lies seriously.
India, on the other hand, should host international briefings, release verified forensic data, and call out propaganda. We must control the narrative, especially on global platforms.
The suspension of the Indus Water Treaty and downgrading of diplomatic relations is a significant escalations. In your view, are such moves sustainable in the long run?
Until now, responses to Pakistan’s terror sponsorship haven’t directly affected its population. But now, India must apply pressure that reaches the common people—only then will they question and reject their state’s support for terrorism. That is the only sustainable solution.
They’re strategic levers. Not permanent, but powerful enough to demonstrate intent. Sustainability depends on Pakistan’s willingness to stop using terrorism as an instrument of its state policy.
The timing of the attack coinciding with the 50th vice president of the United States J D Vance’s visit to India has raised eyebrows. Could this have been an attempt to internationalise the Kashmir issue or send a message to Western powers?
This attack coincided with the visit of U.S. Vice President JD Vance, much like the Chittisinghpura massacre during Bill Clinton’s visit. Pakistan seeks to exploit such occasions for international attention. But the world now sees through these tactics and condemns them outright.
The timing is too precise to dismiss as coincidence. It was likely aimed at grabbing global headlines, especially in the West. But such acts only expose the terrorist nexus—strengthening India’s case internationally.
India’s decision to shut down the border and cancel visa exemptions will affect ordinary citizens on both sides. How do we balance national security with humanitarian or people-to-people interaction in such a volatile environment?
When dealing with a rogue state, temporary sacrifices by people are sometimes necessary. India must sever all diplomatic and commercial ties with Pakistan as long as it supports terrorism. Only then will real pressure be exerted.
That’s unfortunate. But national security takes precedence. We can explore alternate models—restricted access, trackable visas—but trust must be rebuilt for normal channels to resume.
Is India prepared for the diplomatic and economic pressures in the aftermath of this incident, especially in terms of water sharing or trade restrictions, and international mediation?
India is now an economic and strategic powerhouse. Its leadership has taken these decisions with full awareness of every consequence. No price is too great when it comes to protecting national pride and citizens. Nations that stood firm for their self-respect are the ones that truly progressed.
We are far more prepared than a decade ago. Our global partnerships are stronger, our economy is resilient, and our international credibility gives us the upper hand in navigating fallout diplomatically.
What do such attacks mean for the fragile peace and economic growth in Kashmir, which had just begun to stabilise in the past few years?
It’s a setback, but not a collapse. Kashmiri society is resilient. Kashmiris have embraced peace and economic growth. The attack aimed to instil fear and reverse this trend. But the people understand that terrorism only brings ruin. Major tourist sites must be secured, and access to remote areas by outsiders should be temporarily restricted.
The state needs immediate economic assistance, reassurance, and security presence to restore tourist confidence quickly.
What can be done to protect tourists and non-locals, without over-militarising the Valley and further alienating the local population?
The answer lies in technology using drones, and AI-driven surveillance. India must adopt a clear policy for community participation, and intelligence-led policing. It will have to take necessary step to protect its people and its borders. India is a peace-seeking nation, but that does not mean that it can compromise on security.
Is there a need for a doctrinal shift in India’s counter-terrorism and counter-infiltration strategy, particularly in light of changing patterns of terrorist targets and methods?
India must embrace cutting-edge global technologies like AI, facial recognition, drone surveillance, and data analytics for national security. There should be no rigidity in adopting the best tools and strategies available to protect the nation.
We need a hybrid doctrine—cyber warfare, financial disruption, de-radicalisation programs, and targeted strikes. This is a multi-front war and we must respond accordingly.
Which terrorist group was behind this massacre? How do you intend to make them pay for their sins?
We are certain that Pakistan is behind these terror attacks. The names of terrorist groups are irrelevant—they are mere puppets. The real masterminds are the Pakistani government, military, and ISI. Our response must target the root.
Initial indications point to cross-border groups with known histories. Our response will be multi-dimensional—military, and diplomatic. Justice will be delivered.
Do you believe a purely military response is adequate or should this be accompanied by economic, psychological, and narrative warfare to defeat such ideologies?
Terrorists understand no other language. Once a decisive military response is executed—even in limited form—all other elements like psychological warfare, economic pressure, and narrative control will naturally align and strengthen.
No war is won by the gun alone. We need a comprehensive strategy—economic rehabilitation, ideological counter-narratives, and psychological warfare. This is about defeating both the attacker and the ideology.
Do you foresee peace and unity in Kashmir in the present or future?
The world thrives on hope, and Kashmir is now a land of hope. The people, especially the youth, have tasted the benefits of peace. They have seen the difference between pre-2019 and post-2019 Kashmir. They will not go back to terrorism. I am confident they will oppose both terrorists and Pakistan, and neutralise the few remaining sympathisers within.
The majority of Kashmiris want peace. We must empower those voices. The road is hard, but not hopeless. Hope, after all, is the most strategic weapon we have.
