By New Delhi/Islamabad — In a controversial revelation, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar disclosed that he played a key role in ensuring the removal of The Resistance Front (TRF)’s name from a United Nations Security Council (UNSC) statement that condemned the recent deadly terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir.
The April 22 attack, which left 26 civilians — primarily tourists — dead in the serene Baisaran valley, was claimed by the TRF, a known proxy of the banned terrorist organization Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). Despite global outrage and firm condemnation, Pakistan has continued to reject any involvement, even taking steps to revise the language used in international diplomatic responses.
Speaking on the floor of Pakistan’s National Assembly, Ishaq Dar admitted that he personally intervened to have TRF’s name dropped from the draft statement circulated by the United States at the UN. The original draft, according to Dar, had directly mentioned TRF as the perpetrator of the attack.
Dar said, “The U.S. shared a draft press statement condemning the Pahalgam incident. I raised two objections: first, the document referred only to ‘Pahalgam’ without including the term ‘Jammu and Kashmir’; second, it named The Resistance Front as the group responsible for the act. I conveyed clearly that both points were unacceptable to Pakistan.”
He elaborated that due to time zone differences, there was significant back-and-forth communication. Nonetheless, he instructed Pakistan’s permanent representative at the UN to insist on the changes. “We remained firm on our position despite mounting international pressure. Many countries called me directly to persuade us to accept the original language, warning that the delay in issuing the statement would be blamed on Pakistan,” he said.
Dar emphasized that Pakistan maintained there was no conclusive proof linking the TRF to the Pahalgam attack and rejected what he termed as premature accusations. “We demanded that the release be amended to remove TRF’s name and instead refer more broadly to Jammu and Kashmir. Eventually, we succeeded in getting our edits accepted,” he told the assembly, earning applause from fellow lawmakers.
India Vows Strong Response
The remarks come as New Delhi remains firm on its stance that the Pahalgam attack was a cross-border terror operation, with Pakistani-based handlers directing the assault. In response, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi convened a high-level meeting with top military and intelligence officials earlier this week.
During the meeting, PM Modi authorized the armed forces to respond at a time and place of their choosing. According to sources, the Prime Minister told military commanders they have “complete operational freedom” regarding how to retaliate for the barbaric attack. The move signals India’s resolve to hold those behind the massacre accountable, irrespective of geographical boundaries.
Senior Indian officials believe the TRF is merely a front for Lashkar-e-Taiba, used to distance such operations from direct Pakistani state involvement. Intelligence agencies reportedly intercepted communications between handlers and attackers both before and after the incident, pointing to cross-border coordination.
Diplomatic Fallout
Dar’s admission is likely to inflame diplomatic tensions further. Indian officials have criticized Pakistan’s efforts to shield terror outfits by manipulating international statements. “This is nothing short of obstruction,” said a former Indian envoy, adding, “They not only refused to condemn the attack meaningfully but actively worked to erase the identity of the perpetrators.”
The controversy also places the UN under scrutiny, with analysts questioning how a group that openly claimed responsibility for a mass-casualty attack was omitted from an official condemnation due to political lobbying.
Meanwhile, the UNSC statement that was eventually released condemned the attack in general terms but made no mention of the group responsible. The watered-down language has disappointed India and many other nations seeking a unified stand against global terrorism.
International Reactions and Next Steps
India is expected to raise this issue at upcoming diplomatic forums and push for a stricter global response against groups like TRF and their supporters. Western countries, while expressing sympathy and outrage over the incident, have also expressed concern over delays and dilutions in the global response to terrorism due to geopolitical considerations.
Security has been heightened across Jammu and Kashmir, and several measures, including the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty and the closure of border crossings, have already been taken by New Delhi as part of its broader diplomatic and strategic pushback.
As the region continues to reel from the impact of the Pahalgam massacre, the political fallout from Pakistan’s manipulation of the UNSC statement could have long-term consequences for South Asian diplomacy.
