2 days Ago
The statements emerging from both Pakistan and India following the recent attack in Kashmir reveal a stark contrast in mindset, sincerity, and approach. While India wasted no time in blaming Pakistan—escalating inflammatory rhetoric and unleashing a frenzied media campaign that veered into Islamophobic and genocidal territory—Pakistan has responded with restraint, clarity, and the kind of responsible conduct expected in international diplomacy. In the face of India’s hysteria, Pakistan’s Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) Director General, Lt-Gen Ahmed Sharif, addressed a press conference in which he noted that, even after seven days, India had failed to present a single piece of evidence to substantiate its allegations.
In contrast, Lt-Gen Sharif laid out a detailed and verifiable account of Indian involvement in terrorist activity within Pakistan. This included hard evidence: records of money transfers, seized equipment, and the names of Indian handlers allegedly working in coordination with terrorists in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. Crucially, this information was not kept behind closed doors, but presented publicly for international scrutiny—a model of how serious allegations should be substantiated.
Digital Future The press conference not only undercut India’s claims, it exposed the hollowness of its narrative. Pakistan’s approach has resonated on the global stage, with its representatives even taking the matter to the United Nations. There, Pakistan presented what it described as credible evidence linking India to the Jaffar Express attack and broader support for terrorism within Pakistani territory.
This is how responsible states act: if you have evidence, bring it forward—openly and transparently—before the international community. In contrast, India has relied on innuendo, propaganda, and the deliberate seeding of hatred. Its unwillingness to engage through proper channels or provide proof only deepens scepticism about the credibility of its claims.
Tags: providing.
