Mani Shankar Aiyar Sparks Outrage with Comments on Pakistan’s Role in Pahalgam Attack
On August 2, 2025, veteran Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar ignited a firestorm of controversy with his remarks questioning Pakistan’s involvement in the deadly Pahalgam terror attack that claimed 26 lives on April 22, 2025. Speaking in an interview with IANS, Aiyar claimed that no international body, including the United Nations or the United States, had explicitly blamed Pakistan for the attack, and he criticized the Indian government for failing to provide “concrete evidence” to support its accusations. His statements, perceived by critics as giving a clean chit to Pakistan, have drawn fierce backlash from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and sparked heated political debate across India.
The Pahalgam Attack: A Tragic Flashpoint
The Pahalgam terror attack occurred in the scenic Baisaran Valley of Jammu and Kashmir, where terrorists opened fire on tourists, targeting non-Muslims and killing 25 Indian citizens and one Nepali national. The brutality of the attack, which included the tragic death of Lt. Vinay Narwal and left his newlywed wife Himanshi grieving beside his body, became an emotional symbol of the tragedy. In response, India launched Operation Sindoor on May 7, 2025, targeting terrorist camps in Pakistan, with Union Ministers Amit Shah and S. Jaishankar confirming Pakistani links to the attackers, backed by evidence like identification documents found on the slain terrorists during Operation Mahadev.
India’s diplomatic outreach, dubbed Operation Sindoor, saw leaders like Congress MP Shashi Tharoor visit 33 countries to highlight Pakistan’s role in cross-border terrorism. However, Aiyar’s comments cast doubt on the effectiveness of this campaign, intensifying political tensions.
Aiyar’s Controversial Remarks
In the IANS interview, Aiyar stated, “None of the 33 countries that Tharoor and his team visited blamed Pakistan for the Pahalgam terror attack. Neither the UN nor the United States have held Pakistan responsible. We are the only ones saying that Pakistan is behind it.” He further argued that India had failed to present evidence convincing enough to pinpoint a specific Pakistani agency, adding, “Trump has claimed several times that the US brokered the ceasefire agreement between India and Pakistan, but our government is not ready to say that he is lying.”
Aiyar’s critique extended to India’s broader foreign policy, accusing it of lacking direction since 2014. He questioned why India was willing to engage in dialogue with China, despite its military presence alongside Pakistan during conflicts, but not with Pakistan. “Our diplomacy neither has knowledge of principles nor a clear goal,” he remarked, suggesting that India’s approach was inconsistent and ineffective.
At a separate book launch event in April 2025, Aiyar linked the attack to “unresolved questions of the Partition,” questioning whether Muslims in India feel “accepted, cherished, and celebrated.” He suggested that the tragedy reflected lingering divisions from 1947, a statement that further fueled accusations of him rationalizing the attack.
BJP’s Fierce Rebuttal
The BJP wasted no time in condemning Aiyar’s remarks, accusing him of “speaking Pakistan’s language” and undermining India’s fight against terrorism. BJP National General Secretary Tarun Chugh stated, “Congress leaders from Mani Shankar Aiyar to P. Chidambaram have often echoed the language of Pakistan’s media and military. Sometimes they demand explanations from our own Armed Forces, sometimes they seek NOCs, and at other times, they lay out red carpets for Pakistan.”
BJP spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla highlighted the United Nations Security Council’s concerns over the role of the Resistance Front (TRF), an offshoot of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), in the attack, arguing that Aiyar’s comments ignored this evidence. “Maybe Congress does not know that the birth of terrorism took place in Pakistan, be it LeT or JeM, whose camps we destroyed in Operation Sindoor,” he said.
Pradeep Bhandari, another BJP spokesperson, called Aiyar’s remarks “insensitive,” accusing Congress of “rubbing salt into the wounds of the Pahalgam attack victims” by refusing to unequivocally blame Pakistan. He referenced the emotional toll of the attack, particularly the loss of Lt. Vinay Narwal, to underscore the gravity of Aiyar’s statements.
BJP MP Praveen Khandelwal went further, suggesting that Aiyar had “lost touch with ground reality” and was defending Pakistan despite its history of sponsoring attacks like 26/11, Pathankot, Uri, and Pulwama. The party also criticized Congress for what it called a pattern of “appeasement,” pointing to earlier controversial remarks by leaders like Siddaramaiah and Robert Vadra.
Aiyar’s History of Controversy
This is not the first time Aiyar’s statements have stirred outrage. Known for his outspoken views, the former Union Minister and diplomat has previously faced criticism for remarks perceived as sympathetic to Pakistan. In 2015, his comments during a visit to Pakistan, where he reportedly sought help to “remove Modi,” drew sharp rebuke. His latest remarks have reignited accusations of disloyalty, with one social media user labeling him a “traitor” whose “loyalty is fully reserved for Pakistan.”
Aiyar’s defenders, however, argue that his comments reflect a call for evidence-based diplomacy rather than knee-jerk accusations. Some online reactions suggested that questioning the government’s strategy does not equate to being anti-national, emphasizing the need for nuanced discussions on terrorism and foreign policy.
The Broader Context
The Pahalgam attack has heightened India-Pakistan tensions, with India suspending the Indus Waters Treaty, revoking visas for Pakistani nationals, and shutting down the Attari border. Prime Minister Narendra Modi vowed to hunt down the perpetrators, while Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif offered to participate in a “neutral, transparent, and credible investigation.” Aiyar’s remarks, however, have shifted focus to India’s diplomatic challenges, with only Israel explicitly supporting India’s stance against Pakistan.
The controversy also highlights the polarized nature of India’s political discourse. While Aiyar’s comments have been widely criticized, they raise valid questions about the effectiveness of India’s global outreach and the complexities of attributing blame in international forums. The UN Security Council’s statement, which condemned the attack but did not name Pakistan, lends some credence to Aiyar’s point, though the BJP insists that evidence like Pakistani identification documents is conclusive.
Conclusion
Mani Shankar Aiyar’s remarks on the Pahalgam attack have once again placed him at the center of a political storm. By questioning Pakistan’s role and the government’s diplomatic efforts, he has drawn sharp criticism for allegedly undermining India’s position and sympathizing with Pakistan. The BJP’s fierce response, coupled with references to Congress’s history of “appeasement,” underscores the sensitivity of the issue, particularly given the emotional weight of the attack. As India continues its fight against cross-border terrorism, Aiyar’s comments serve as a reminder of the challenges in balancing diplomacy, evidence, and national sentiment in a deeply polarized environment.
Disclaimer: This blog is based on publicly available information from news sources and does not reflect personal opinions or endorsements. Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate all perspectives.
