Pahalgam attack must elicit whole-of-nation response

Hans India

05-05-2025

The recent terror attack in Pahalgam, which claimed the lives of 26 civilians, has sparked outrage and demands for a more decisive Indian response. Although the Indian government has taken diplomatic, economic, and strategic steps against Pakistan—such as banning imports, halting incoming mail and parcels, and denying docking rights to their ships—these actions fall short of a comprehensive response to the gravity of the provocation. What is now urgently required is a whole-of-nation strategy, one that involves not just the government but also businesses, civil society, and individual citizens. The inadequacies in the government's response have drawn criticism from national security experts and commentators; they have pointed out contradictions in the country's broader foreign and economic policies. While we have rightfully taken a hard line against Islamabad, our continued commercial and diplomatic engagement with Turkey—a nation that has deepened defence ties with Pakistan and consistently backs Islamabad on Kashmir—undermines our strategic objectives. Turkey's alignment with Pakistan is no longer subtle or symbolic. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan visited Pakistan in February and reaffirmed Ankara's support for Pakistan's position on Kashmir, advocating for a UN resolution-based approach—language that aligns with Islamabad's narrative.
Moreover, Turkey has become a key supplier of advanced weaponry to Pakistan, including Bayraktar TB2 and Akinci drones, and is partnering with them on the KAAN fifth-generation fighter jet. Six Turkish military transport aircraft arrived in Pakistan delivering defence cargo, just days after the Pahalgam attack. Despite this, Indian carriers like IndiGo continue their lucrative codeshare partnership with Turkish Airlines, offering joint flights to over 30 destinations in Europe and the United States. According to recent reports, Turkish Airlines is gaining disproportionate economic benefits from this arrangement. Critics argue that such partnerships strengthen a country that openly aids Pakistan, both militarily and diplomatically. Sushant Sareen of the Observer Research Foundation was incensed: 'India is not a serious country... We feed snakes and then wonder why they bite us.' His remark points to a larger problem: India's lack of consistency between its national security priorities and its economic policies. In the wake of these developments, public voices are growing louder. Journalist Vikram Chandra questioned why Indians continue to use Istanbul as a transit point to Europe, noting that they should instead strengthen ties with Turkey's regional rivals like Greece.
Former foreign secretary Kanwal Sibal even suggested suspending all flights between India and Turkey, a sentiment echoed by many who believe that symbolic gestures alone are insufficient in times of national crisis. A robust response to the Pahalgam attack requires not only government action but also public participation. This means citizens should become more conscious of their choices—be it travel routes, products, or services that economically empower nations hostile to India's security interests. Indian businesses must also align with the national interest, reevaluating partnerships that indirectly support adversarial regimes. Ultimately, national security cannot be the responsibility of the government alone. A whole-of-nation approach, where policy, economy, diplomacy, and public behavior converge, is the only sustainable forward path. The attack in Pahalgam is not just a wake-up call; it is a test of India's resolve. To ensure such attacks do not repeat, people and the Centre must shed their ambivalence, enforce consistency in their international engagements, and harness a collective will and tenacity.