India and Pakistan Are Not Equals When It Comes to Terrorism: Why the World Must Recognize the Difference

 India and Pakistan Are Not Equals When It Comes to Terrorism: Why the World Must Recognize the Difference

In the aftermath of the horrific terror attack in Pahalgam, India's strong response through Operation Sindoor — which included the use of BrahMos missiles — sent a clear message. But the fight against terrorism isn’t just being waged with weapons. At a time when India faces global misunderstanding and misleading narratives, another weapon has proven just as effective: political unity.

Over the past few weeks, seven all-party delegations were sent abroad to engage with foreign governments and media. These delegations, representing India’s political spectrum, have arguably made more impact for less than half the cost of a single BrahMos missile — which is about ₹35 crore. Like the missile, they hit their mark. Their job wasn't military, but diplomatic — correcting global misperceptions about India’s situation, especially regarding Pakistan’s role in sponsoring cross-border terrorism.

It’s no secret that the West, and particularly its media, have long failed to understand the real nature of Pakistan’s actions and intentions. There’s a tendency to treat India and Pakistan as two equal sides of a regional dispute — both seen as aggressive, both blamed for tensions. This false equivalence has persisted for decades, and it harms India’s efforts to garner international support in its fight against terrorism.

Many foreign opinion-makers still view Pakistan as a nation wronged — forced to break away from India, then victimized by its own internal challenges. They ignore or underplay the fact that Pakistan has long used terrorism as a tool of statecraft, nurturing groups that carry out attacks in India while portraying itself as a victim of terror. They forget that India did not cause the 1971 conflict — Pakistan’s own internal repression and refusal to accept democratic results led to the secession of East Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh.

Equally troubling is the tendency to refer to terrorists operating in Jammu and Kashmir as “militants,” a word that waters down the brutality of their actions. This soft language masks the reality — that these are not freedom fighters or aggrieved youth but trained terrorists, often armed and supported across the border.

Worse still is the lack of attention given to the Pakistani military’s dominant role in its government. The idea that Pakistan is a typical democracy struggling with extremism misses the point entirely. Its military continues to pull the strings, both politically and in foreign policy, especially in relation to India and Afghanistan. Civilian governments have little real power, and any peace overtures are quickly overruled by the army when it suits their interests.

Against this complex and dangerous backdrop, India’s decision to send united political delegations abroad is both bold and necessary. This isn't just a job for diplomats; political voices carry weight, especially when they reflect a national consensus. Foreign leaders and media houses must be told — clearly and without apology — that India and Pakistan are not two sides of the same coin.

India is a democracy with a commitment to the rule of law. Pakistan, meanwhile, continues to sponsor terrorism and destabilize the region. Until the world stops equating the two, India's fight against terror will remain that much harder — not because of what it faces on the battlefield, but because of what it battles in global perception.