Monitoring Desk: In a “Right of Reply,” Pakistan has said that once again, Islamabad is subjected to a sermon from its eastern neighbor on the subject of terrorism. On this matter, India occupies a deeply contradictory position, both in practice and in posture.
Its record, ranging from covert destabilization efforts and the weaponization of natural resources in the region to the overt exploitation of religious identity at home, constitutes, if not an instruction manual, then certainly a case study in calculated duplicity.
Responding to Indian allegations, the Additional Secretary Imran Ahmed Siddiqui
ASEAN Regional Forum Senior Officials Meeting, Penang, Malaysia, on 11 June 2025, said:
Pakistan categorically rejects the baseless allegation of involvement in the Pahalgam incident. This habitual finger-pointing reflects not evidence, but expedience. India’s own record, exposed through the arrest of Indian spy Kulbhushan Jadhav and confessions of its operatives, reveals a pattern of sponsoring terrorism inside Pakistan. If the region seeks accountability, it must begin with those who have turned subversion into statecraft and propaganda into policy.
At the heart of South Asia’s instability lies the unresolved dispute of Jammu and Kashmir. Recent attempts to distract from this central issue through theatrical military misadventures have achieved little beyond bloodied noses, bruised egos, and the temporary stimulation of domestic electoral campaigns.
When strategy begins to imitate Bollywood cinema, policy loses all credibility, and delusions transform into doctrine.
On Indus Water Treaty, India has not been fulfilling its fundamental obligations, from discussing issues in prescribed dispute resolution mechanisms to the sharing of data. It is not allowing even a single drop of water from the eastern rivers. It has been illegally constructing new structures on the western rivers.
There is, however, a tragic elegance to the performance. Here is a state that transforms religion into regulation and foreign occupation into a norm, yet speaks of peace with the solemnity of a preacher and the consistency of a dramatist. Were duplicity the measure of global leadership, India would undoubtedly hold a permanent seat.
We remain committed to peace, not as a slogan crafted for applause, but as a principle pursued with patience and discipline. We would respectfully suggest that before invoking the UN Charter, India might consider reflecting upon it. The language of diplomacy does not lend itself to the choreography of rallies, nor does serious statecraft draw its inspiration from the RSS handbooks.
