The attack on a tourist site in Pahalgam, IIOJK, is yet another classic example of Indian false flag operations. India has been employing tactics to malign Pakistan’s international posture and brand the Kashmir freedom struggle as state-sponsored terrorism. The intensification of such operations has surged since the inception of the Modi-led BJP regime. India, despite its role as a transnational terrorism Launchpad, remains confident in externalizing its security challenges. Consistent with its previous trajectory, the Indian government unleashed a premeditated campaign blaming Pakistan, relying on emotionally charged narratives rather than verifiable facts. The timing of this coordinated campaign against Pakistan amid US Vice President J.D Vance’s India visit once again triggered a debate about the Indian attempt to defame Pakistan and to neutralize the Kashmir freedom struggle via pre-planned media blitz to overshadow the reality of the false flag operation. Another mounting concern is how the attackers could have managed to intrude LOC and travel 400 km undetected.

The Indian government is facing growing scrutiny over the discrepancies surrounding the official narrative regarding the attack. One of the major strings in the pearl is that Indian claims of eliminating attackers were not empirically backed, as no video or images of the bodies were released. The assailants of the attack revealed that the attackers were dressed up in military uniform, replicating the Chhatisinghpora and Nadimarg false flag operations. One of the concerning aspect about the attack lies in the fact that, the incident happened in broad daylight at a highly secured tourist site in IIOJK. The region is recognized as one of the most heavyily militarized zones around the globe with civilian-to-soldier ratio of approximately 1:9, highlighting the extensive military presence. Despite these sophisticated security measures, the execution of attack raises apprehensions about security lapses and orchestration. One should have a bearing on the fact that, the assailants used the M4 carbine rifles, a US made weapon abandoned by US forces in Afghanistan during withdrawal in 2021. India has been involved in terrorist plots inside Pakistan; it has been revealed that recent Jaffar express attacks were leveraged by India. There exists a similarity in both attacks, as the terrorists who attacked Jaffar Express also used M4 carbine rifles.

Furthermore, Indian media outlets’ quick assignment of guilt to Pakistan without doing any preliminary investigation or providing any forensic proof suggests that India had already planned to quickly place blame on Pakistan. This trend of quick media trials and accusing language is consistent with earlier cases when these kinds of attacks have been strategically employed to create an adversarial external foe and divert attention away from internal instability. When India’s alleged false flag operations are critically examined, a recurrent strategic pattern with historical precedent is shown.

The history of Indian false flag operations can be traced to 1971, coinciding with the early operational years of the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), which was established in 1968. A notable early case was the hijacking of the Indian Airlines aircraft Ganga, an incident initially attributed to Pakistan by Indian media and official narratives. This narrative gained considerable international traction at the time, particularly in the context of the escalating tensions between the two states. However, this version of events was later contested by R.K. Yadav, a former officer of RAW, who in his 2014 publication  Mission R&AW, acknowledged the agency’s direct involvement in orchestrating the hijacking as a strategic maneuver to ban Pakistani overflights into India—a move that significantly influenced the geopolitical dynamics leading up to the Indo-Pak war of 1971.”

India remained consistent in employing its covert operations over time. On March 20, 2000, in Chittisinghpura IIOJK 36 Sikhs were killed cold-bloodedly by gunmen in Army uniform. India without any verifiable evidence swiftly framed Pakistan behind the incident.  It was a calculated move, strategically timed to coincide with the visit of US President Bill Clinton to defame Pakistan internationally. Later on, Lt Gen Gill (Retd), a member of the investigative team, acknowledged the involvement of the Indian army in the massacre in 2017. In December 2001, the Indian parliament was the target of another simulated attack. The attack was executed as it was high time for India to ripe an opportunity to brand Pakistan internationally with the 9/11 attack. Later on, a former home ministry official accused the Indian government behind the Parliament attack, and 26/11 was another well-known instance of false-flag operations. Once more, the goal was to deflect international attention from the horrors carried out by the occupational forces in IIOJK, subjugate the indigenous freedom struggle, and portray Pakistan as a state that supports terrorism. Elias Davidson in his book, “The Betrayal of India,” raised hundreds of questions, to which no Indian ever replied. The book concluded with major revelations exposing the Indian intelligence service’s involvement in the attacks.

The false flags remained one of India’s calculated moves strategically timed with international developments. The global war on Terror intensified in 2003 when the US invaded Iraq. To bring international condemnation to Pakistan and to derail the Kashmir freedom struggle, India planted the Nadimarg Massacre in March 2003. The massacre resulted in the killings of 24 Kashmiri Pandits carried out by gunmen in counterfeit military uniforms. Following the attack, Indian Deputy Prime Minister L.K. Advani, a hardline Hindu chauvinist, immediately blamed Pakistan for the Nadimarg massacre, provocatively declaring that India’s “neighbour has a hand” in “every single terrorist act in Kashmir or elsewhere in the country.” In 2013, former Indian Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde exposed the connection between the ruling BJP and the extremist Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), claiming that the latter was responsible for the explosions at Malegaon, Mecca Masjid, and Samjhauta Express.

Recent attack in Pahalgam must be viewed not in isolation, but as part of a broader continuum of state-driven narratives and covert operations that have historically served India’s strategic aims in the region—particularly in projecting internal unrest in IIOJK as a cross-border threat orchestrated by Pakistan. This pattern of fabricated rationale has been seen time and time again, particularly in times of domestic political exigency or diplomatic sensitivity.
The credibility of India’s narrative is weakened by the repeated lack of independently verified proof and victim testimonies that defy government assertions. There are striking parallels between incidents like Pahalgam, Nadimarg, and Chittisinghpora—not just in terms of their operational plans, but also in terms of the subsequent media coverage and timing. Both have been used to undermine the indigenous resistance movement in IIOJK and to make the argument for externalizing security lapses.

This strategy has taken a new direction under the Modi-led BJP administration. False flag operations are now used as pretext for direct military action and are no longer just used in information warfare. A notable example is the 2019 Balakot episode. India launched an aerial assault inside Pakistani territory after the Pulwama attack. In retaliation, Pakistan successfully downed an Indian MiG-21 capturing its pilot, who was later returned in a de-escalation gesture. Pakistan also intercepted the Indian aircraft and launched a measured retaliatory strike across the Line of Control. This series of incidents made it clear that any mishap involving Indians in the future would not go unanswered and would be addressed with a strong, well-prepared response.

Given this context, the Pahalgam episode should be a cause for grave alarm. Indian authorities’ increased rhetoric, which includes statements about Azad Kashmir and repeated unsupported allegations of infiltration, points to a conscious attempt to develop strategic rationale for further action. The Pakistani military will resolutely respond if this false flag is used as justification for military escalations. Both the international community and regional parties should be reminded of the historical pattern set by the post-Balakot retaliation: South Asia cannot afford another staged crisis that drives its nuclear-armed neighbors closer to the edge.

False flag operations, when coupled with offensive military posturing, pose a serious threat to regional peace and stability. India’s move from multilateral dialogue to unilateral action reflects a deeper strategic transformation that is increasingly dependent on narrative control, coercion, and manufactured consent.

Authors

Syeda Tahreem Bukhari, Associate Director at Center for International Strategic Studies AJK

Abdul Basit, Associate Research Officer at Center for International Strategic Studies AJK