Pahalgam terror attack: ‘We went to Kashmir believing that the heaven on Earth is safe'
'All along the route, there was so much security. But at the valley where we were, there was no security personnel. We had faith in the government. We went there believing that the place was safe, and wanted to see Kashmir, often called heaven on Earth... We three went, but now we are returning with one body in a box,' said a grief-stricken Pallavi R., wife of Manjunath Rao, who was killed in the terror attack at Pahalgam in Baisaran Valley in Kashmir on April 22.
On April 24, speaking to mediapersons on her way back to Shivamogga, her native place, with her son Abhijan and the mortal remains of her husband, Ms. Pallavi said, 'He died in no time after he was shot. I could not talk to him. I was just a few feet away when he fell down. He was shot in the neck. I rushed to him and held him in my hands. Within a few seconds, his clothes and my clothes were soaked in blood. I have kept the clothes safe, and will not wash them,' said Ms. Pallavi.
The terrorists with weapons, according to Pallavi, fired at her husband from a distance. 'There was a forest-like area a few metres away from the place where we were. My husband was purchasing snacks for my son, who was tired. I saw two people with weapons, and did talk to one of them,' she narrated.
In fact, she and her son, outraged over Manjunath Rao's death, told the terrorists to kill them too. 'They refused, but told us to convey this to Narendra Modi,' she recalled.
Help from locals
The terrorists, according to Pallavi, targeted men among the tourists. 'There was a young couple. They shot the newly-married person at close range. I saw at least 25 dead bodies. Only women and children were spared. We were all screaming for help. There was no phone network in that area,' she said.
Two local Muslim men, who were terrified by the incident and were repeatedly saying 'Bismillah', helped them come down from the valley. 'It was tough terrain. We walked for about one hour to reach the hospital. One of them carried my son on his back, and another helped me cross the stretch by holding my hand. I am thankful to them,' Ms. Pallavi said.
Started as a dream trip
For Abhijan, 18, the 'dream trip' to Kashmir has left him shattered. He told the media that the first three days of the trip to Kashmir were wonderful. The family visited a tulip garden and Mughal Gardens on the first day. On the second day, they took a ride in a shikara (boathouse), and visited Sonmarg and Doodhpathri. They spent the next two days in Pahalgam.
'It was my father's dream to visit Kashmir. We enjoyed a lot on the first three days. The fourth day was tragic. With his death, the place has become a hell for me,' said Abhijan.
The family had left for the trip soon after his II PU results were out. He had scored 97% in the commerce stream.
When his father was shot dead, Abhijan said he was infuriated. He wanted the terrorist to kill him too. The boy said he would never forgive the people who killed his father, and wants them to go through a similar pain.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
18 minutes ago
- News18
'Replace Stones With Books': Samik Bhattacharya's Debut Speech Signals BJP's Tactical Shift In Bengal
Last Updated: A closer reading of his speech reveals that Bhattacharya invoked Bengal's complex history, which includes several major riots both before and after independence. In a clear departure from the hardline, polarised politics that have characterised West Bengal in recent years, newly elected BJP state Chief Samik Bhattacharya, in his debut speech before party workers on Thursday, stated that Muslims in the state need to understand that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has never been against them. 'The BJP wants to replace stones with books and swords with pens in the hands of Muslim youth," Bhattacharya said, emphasising that Muslim youth have been used merely as a vote bank by Mamata Banerjee over the past one and a half decades. This statement is being seen as a major political shift for the BJP in West Bengal, especially with the crucial 2026 Assembly elections approaching. Political circles in the state, long accustomed to intensely polarised politics spearheaded by Leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari, have taken note. Adhikari has, on multiple occasions, publicly stated, 'We don't want a single Muslim vote to win West Bengal." This raises the question: is Samik Bhattacharya moving away from the BJP's core ideology? The answer appears to be no. A closer reading of his speech reveals that Bhattacharya invoked Bengal's complex history, which includes several major riots both before and after independence. He referred to the Great Calcutta Killings of 1946 and the trauma endured by people in Murshidabad, Nadia, and Malda when, during the drawing of the Radcliffe Line, these districts were initially assigned to present-day Bangladesh. It was only after strong persuasion led by Bengal leaders, including Syama Prasad Mookerjee, that they became part of independent India. Bhattacharya also referenced recent incidents in Bangladesh, where Hindu minorities were attacked, women were raped, and properties burned — subtly reinforcing the idea of protecting minorities in a manner that aligns with the BJP's core ideological framework. However, political analysts observe that Bhattacharya seems to recognise the limitations of extreme polarisation. His tone suggests a tactical shift: instead of consolidating Muslim voters against the BJP, the party could reach out to those among them who are interested in development and socio-economic upliftment — a strategy that could benefit the BJP in 2026. This is why Bhattacharya emphasised Bengal's secular and pluralistic legacy, appealing to the Bengali educated middle class, who have historically believed in pluralism. He even said he envisions a Bengal where Durga Puja immersion rallies and Muharram processions are co-organised without conflict or communal tension, as has been the case for many years in the state. Interestingly, Bhattacharya did not use the slogan 'Jai Shri Ram." Instead, he invoked deities with whom Bengalis as a whole culturally identify — Maa Durga, Maa Kali, and Prabhu Jagannath. At the same time, Bhattacharya shifted the blame for the rise in polarised politics onto Mamata Banerjee, accusing her of dividing Bengalis for political gain. Analysts say he has effectively set the early narrative for the 2026 Assembly elections. What Is The Narrative? For the first time, a senior BJP leader in Bengal is speaking about 'Bengal's asmita" — Bengali pride. Bhattacharya began his address by referencing Bengal's glorious economic contribution before British rule, when undivided Bengal accounted for 40 per cent of India's GDP, a figure that has now dwindled to 8 per cent. Thus, the narrative he is attempting to build for 2026 focuses on industrialisation vs corruption, democracy vs autocracy, and peace vs violence. Political watchers note that until now, the BJP's narrative in Bengal largely focused on exposing the corruption of the Trinamool Congress, with little clarity on what the party offered as an alternative. Bhattacharya sought to address that gap today, stating that in 2026, the BJP aims to offer a governance model built on the principles of 'good governance," as demonstrated under Prime Minister Narendra Modi in BJP-ruled states. Understanding that the BJP lacks a strong face to counter Mamata Banerjee, Bhattacharya also tackled this issue directly. He argued that Banerjee's once-iconic image as a symbol of honesty has collapsed under the weight of multiple corruption allegations, claiming the TMC can no longer portray her as an icon of integrity. In a strategic move, Bhattacharya reached out to other opposition parties — particularly the Left and the Congress — urging them not to indirectly support the TMC in the name of 'No Vote to BJP" campaigns. Instead, he called on them to fight independently to remove Mamata Banerjee from power in 2026, assuring them that once the TMC is defeated, there will be space for a healthy opposition — a departure from the governance styles of both the Left and TMC, which were often accused of stifling opposition voices. With this speech, Bhattacharya appears to be reaching across religious lines, aiming to appeal to the Bhadralok Bengali, who has historically viewed the BJP as 'untouchable" or culturally alien to Bengal. It is often said in Bengal politics that without the support of the Bengali Bhadralok, no political change is possible. This was true in 1977 during the Left's rise, and again in 2011 when Mamata Banerjee came to power. Bhattacharya, clearly aware of this history, is now trying to reach out to the educated middle class by shifting the narrative from Hindu vs. Muslim to governance vs. non-governance. That is why he made repeated references to Bengali literature, culture, and stalwarts like Syed Wajid Ali — symbols still deeply revered by Bengal's educated middle class. view comments First Published: News politics 'Replace Stones With Books': Samik Bhattacharya's Debut Speech Signals BJP's Tactical Shift In Bengal Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
News18
18 minutes ago
- News18
After The Hug, Comes The Hesitation: Why Raj Thackeray Isn't Sold On A Reunion Yet
Last Updated: Raj Thackeray's calculated vagueness is telling. He has, so far, offered no endorsement of Uddhav's leadership, no clarity on the MNS's role in future polls When Uddhav Thackeray and Raj Thackeray stood shoulder-to-shoulder on stage at the July 5 'Marathi Vijay Rally', it wasn't just another photo-op. Or so it seemed at the time. The cousins hugged, invoked Balasaheb's legacy, and for a moment, made thousands of old-school Shiv Sainiks and MNS loyalists believe that Maharashtra's original saffron family was making a comeback. But a week later, the afterglow has faded, and so has the talk of a political alliance. At an internal MNS meeting in Taigatpuri, Raj Thackeray made it clear, 'I went to the Vijay Rally with Uddhav Thackeray only on the Marathi issue." No mention of elections. No commitment to joint strategy. No sign of a formal handshake beyond the optics. In fact, he told party workers that any decision on alliance or seat-sharing would only come during the BMC and municipal elections, in November or December. So the real question now is: Did Raj Thackeray just distance himself from Uddhav? And was that emotional rally nothing more than nostalgia in saffron hues? Uddhav Thackeray, who now leads the Shiv Sena (UBT) after losing the party's name and symbol to Eknath Shinde, has been searching for a revival strategy. With Sharad Pawar's NCP now split, and the Congress struggling to energise its base in urban Maharashtra, Uddhav has every reason to bring Raj into the fold. A joint Thackeray front could plug the leak in the Marathi vote bank, especially in Mumbai, Thane, Pune, and Nashik, where divided loyalties have helped the BJP and Shinde's faction gain ground. But the problem is that Raj Thackeray hasn't committed to seat-sharing. He hasn't agreed to contest elections with the Maha Vikas Aghadi, which includes the Congress and NCP(SP). And sources say he's still running the numbers, calculating whether the MNS has more to lose or gain by siding with Uddhav. The emotional power of that Vijay Rally was undeniable. Long-time Shiv Sainiks wept. MNS workers chanted Balasaheb's name. Leaders like Anil Parab and Kishori Pednekar called it a 'dream moment" that the Sena supremo would've loved to see. But behind the scenes, the arithmetic isn't adding up. The MNS still holds sway in pockets of Mumbai and Nashik, but hasn't translated charisma into seats in years. Uddhav's Sena, while wounded, remains organisationally stronger. If they join forces, who gives up which turf? Whose cadres dominate local 'shakhas'? Who controls ticket distribution? That's not just a negotiation, it's a minefield. And that's before factoring in the Congress and NCP, whose ideological pitch is far more inclusive than the MNS's past rhetoric on migrants and reservations. Aligning with Raj could alienate Muslim voters in urban seats, something the Congress will not accept lightly. Raj Thackeray's calculated vagueness is telling. He has, so far, offered no endorsement of Uddhav's leadership, no clarity on the MNS's role in future polls, and no indication that a realignment is imminent. He's keeping his options open, and that includes walking away. What this suggests is that the July 5 rally may have been a strategic pause, not a turning point. Raj got the optics, Uddhav got a morale boost, and both reconnected with their base. But neither offered anything concrete. And in a state where the BJP-Shinde machine is already gearing up for the next round of municipal polls, that vagueness could cost them. So did Raj snub Uddhav? Maybe not outright. But he certainly hasn't said yes. And in politics, silence often speaks louder than words. Raj has promised to 'decide later", after weighing the pros and cons. But time is not on their side. The BMC polls are looming. The BJP and Shinde are mobilising. And unless the cousins can sort out their differences and present a united front with real policy, shared seats, and a common agenda, the Marathis will continue to watch the Thackeray drama from the sidelines, not the voting booth. view comments First Published: July 15, 2025, 11:43 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
News18
37 minutes ago
- News18
Munir's White House Welcome: Trump's Risky Bet On Pakistan's Terror-Linked General
Donald Trump's narrative, bolstered by Asim Munir's presence, raises questions: Is this genuine diplomacy or a bid for influence in South Asia? The invitation of Pakistan's Army Chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, to a White House lunch with U.S. President Donald Trump has ignited diplomatic tensions, particularly with India. Trump's claim that he brokered a May 2025 ceasefire between India and Pakistan, following a four-day conflict sparked by the Pahalgam terror attack, has been debunked by New Delhi. India asserts the ceasefire was a direct military agreement, with no U.S. involvement. Yet, Trump persists, linking his alleged mediation to trade incentives and offering to resolve the Kashmir dispute—a proposal India has long rejected. Munir's visit, amid accusations of his role in the Pahalgam massacre and Pakistan's military attending terrorist funerals in Muridke, amplifies concerns. Trump's narrative, bolstered by Munir's presence, raises questions: Is this genuine diplomacy or a bid for influence in South Asia? Munir's provocative rhetoric before the attack, coupled with Pakistan's overt support for terrorists, underscores his destabilising influence. The May 2025 conflict, triggered by a Pakistan-backed terrorist attack in Pahalgam on April 22 that killed 26, escalated with cross-border strikes and nuclear threats. On May 10, a ceasefire was announced, halting hostilities. Trump claimed he mediated a 'full and immediate ceasefire" through a 'long night of talks." India's Ministry of External Affairs, however, stated the truce was negotiated directly between the Indian and Pakistani DGMOs, with Pakistan's DGMO initiating contact at 3:35 PM on May 10 due to military pressure from India's strikes on Pakistani airbases. No US mediation occurred. Munir's role in provoking the conflict is evident: on April 16, he delivered a speech invoking the two-nation theory, calling Kashmir Pakistan's 'jugular vein" and urging Pakistanis to highlight Hindu-Muslim differences. This rhetoric, described as a 'dog-whistle" by Indian officials, preceded the attack by six days, with terrorists targeting non-Muslims, aligning with Munir's communal framing. Former Pakistani officer Adil Raja claimed Munir ordered the attack via the ISI, a charge echoed by U.S. expert Michael Rubin, who likened Munir to a terrorist. Trump's narrative, amplified by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, ignores these facts, straining U.S.-India ties. By crediting himself, Trump emboldens Pakistan's military, which faces domestic unrest, to leverage U.S. support, risking further escalation in a fragile region. INDIA'S STANCE: NO ROOM FOR MEDIATION India has consistently rejected third-party mediation on Kashmir, citing the 1972 Simla Agreement's bilateral framework. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in a June 2025 call with Trump, clarified the ceasefire was a military-to-military agreement, not U.S.-brokered. Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri dismissed Trump's trade incentive claims, stating no such talks occurred. India's stance reflects its sensitivity to external involvement in Kashmir, an integral part of its territory. Trump's mediation offer, coupled with praise for Munir and Modi, disregards India's red lines, risking domestic backlash. The Indian opposition, led by Congress, has questioned Modi's silence on Trump's claims, fearing it may signal tacit acceptance of mediation. India's rebuttal is a strategic message to global powers, cautioning against interference in South Asia's nuclear flashpoint. Munir's provocative speech and the Pahalgam attack's timing underscore Pakistan's intent to destabilise India, yet Trump's engagement with Munir ignores this context. By aligning with Pakistan's military, accused of state-sponsored terrorism, Trump undermines US-India relations, critical for countering China. India's warning against Pakistan's 'nuclear blackmail" and its diplomatic offensive, including suspending the Indus Waters Treaty, signal its resolve to maintain strategic autonomy, making Trump's overreach a costly miscalculation. THE GEOPOLITICAL CONTEXT: MUNIR'S VISIT AND PAKISTAN'S GAMBIT Munir's White House invitation, a rare honour for a military chief without civilian leaders, signals a US tilt toward Pakistan's military establishment. His visit follows his nomination of Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize for averting nuclear war, aligning with Trump's ceasefire narrative. However, it coincides with damning evidence of Pakistan's terror links. At a funeral in Muridke on May 8, 2025, for terrorists killed in India's Operation Sindoor, top Pakistani military officials, including Lt. Gen. Fayyaz Hussain Shah and Maj. Gen. Rao Imran Sartaj, attended, alongside Punjab police chief Usman Anwar. Coffins draped in Pakistani flags and wreaths laid on behalf of Munir and Punjab CM Maryam Nawaz underscored state patronage. Lashkar-e-Taiba's Hafiz Abdul Rauf, a US-designated terrorist, led the ceremony, exposing Pakistan's military-terror nexus. Munir's ties to terrorism are further evidenced by his tenure as ISI chief during the 2019 Pulwama attack and claims by ex-Pakistani officer Adil Raja that Munir masterminded Pahalgam with ISI support. Domestic protests in Pakistan, with hashtags like #ResignAsimMunir, accuse him of orchestrating the attack to deflect from internal dissent. Pakistan's support for Iran amid tensions with Israel complicates Munir's US engagement, yet Trump's outreach may aim to counter Iran via Pakistan's nuclear leverage. This risks alienating India, a vital Indo-Pacific partner. Munir's visit, alongside a Trump family-linked crypto deal in April 2025, suggests personal motives may cloud U.S. strategy, enabling Pakistan's military to exploit Trump's overtures while deepening regional instability. Trump's ceasefire falsehoods and Munir's White House visit have profound implications. First, they strain US-India ties, critical for countering China, as India's public rebuttal signals distrust. Second, they embolden Pakistan's military, accused of backing terrorists, as seen in Muridke's state funerals. Munir's provocation through his April 16 speech, inciting communal violence, and his ISI history link him directly to terror networks, yet Trump's engagement legitimizes him. Third, the ceasefire's fragility—evidenced by violations hours after its announcement—highlights the limits of Trump's diplomacy. Without addressing Kashmir or cross-border terrorism, the truce risks collapse, with Trump's premature claims eroding US credibility. Fourth, Trump's Kashmir mediation offer inflames Indian sentiment, potentially weakening Modi's domestic standing. Globally, Trump's actions project a US administration disconnected from South Asia's realities, undermining its neutral arbiter role. Munir's visit, framed as a diplomatic win, instead exposes Trump's transactional approach, prioritizing optics over strategy. To mitigate risks, the U.S. must respect India's bilateral framework, engage Pakistan's civilian leadership, and avoid Kashmir rhetoric. Failure to do so could fuel escalation, empower Pakistan's military-terror nexus, and destabilise a nuclear-armed region, with Trump's overreach bearing the blame. The author teaches journalism at St Xavier's College (autonomous), Kolkata. His handle on X is @sayantan_gh. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views. view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
