Pahalgam Terror Attack: What Can Sri Lanka Learn? – Analysis
While references to a “ceasefire” between India and Pakistan have emerged, India has not officially declared the end of Operation Sindoor. Military activity has merely been paused, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi emphasizing that India maintains the prerogative to respond further if necessary. Meanwhile, Sri Lankan President Anura Kumara Dissanayake has expressed support for the de-escalation and reaffirmed Sri Lanka’s dedication to fostering peace and stability within the region
The Pahalgam terror attack on April 22, which resulted in the loss of 22 lives, prompted India to initiate Operation Sindoor and introduce what officials have described as a “new normal” in security doctrine. In a carefully measured response intended to prevent further escalation, the Indian Air Force conducted precision strikes on nine terrorist infrastructure sites within Pakistan, reportedly resulting in the deaths of over 100 militants associated with groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Taiba.
Through these actions, India has signaled to both Pakistan and the international community that cross-border terrorism will be met with cross-border measures. Notably, Prime Minister Modi refrained from pressuring neighboring countries to publicly declare their allegiance, diverging from the post-9/11 approach of the Bush administration “Are you with us or against us?” stance.
However, it is important to consider the lessons India’s neighbors, particularly Sri Lanka, may be drawing from the ongoing pattern of Pakistan-sponsored terrorist activities in the region. As a close neighbor with deep historical ties, Sri Lanka faces unique challenges and has much to gain from a careful assessment of the Pahalgam attack’s implications.
According to sources, Adil Ahmed Thoker, one of the perpetrators of the Pahalgam massacre, left his home in Gurre and traveled to Pakistan on a student visa in 2018, returning six years later with several other militants. Intelligence reports suggest that Thoker underwent ideological and paramilitary training during his time in Pakistan, coming under the influence of Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based terrorist group.
This raises a pertinent question: Is Sri Lanka sufficiently vigilant regarding similar risks? Sri Lankan students frequently travel to Pakistan under schemes such as the Higher Education Support Scheme, the Allama Scholarship, and the Jinnah Scholarship Scheme. The Pahalgam attack underscores the need for closer monitoring of individuals traveling to and returning from Pakistan, particularly in terms of their activities upon their return.
Sri Lanka’s foreign policy establishment has historically relied on non-aligned rhetoric, a stance that now appears outdated in a rapidly changing global political environment. The official statements issued by Colombo following recent Indo-Pakistan tensions reveal the dilemmas inherent in this approach. This predicament is not solely the result of the relative inexperience of the National People’s Power government; rather, it reflects a continuation of long-standing policies rooted in Bandaranaike’s “philosophy of neutralism”.
After the Pahalgam massacre, President Anura Kumara condemned the attack and expressed Sri Lanka’s solidarity with India in the fight against terrorism. In the aftermath of India’s response—Operation Sindoor—cabinet spokesperson Nalinda Jayatissa reiterated Sri Lanka’s policy of maintaining good diplomatic relations with both India and Pakistan, emphasizing a non-aligned stance, respect for sovereignty, and a commitment not to allow Sri Lankan territory to be used for hostile actions against any country.
However, it is worth noting that Sri Lanka, at a historical turning point in the South Asian political landscape, supported Pakistan in ways that have raised questions about its commitment to the non-aligned movement. During the Indo-Pak war of 1971, Colombo provided transit and refueling facilities to Pakistani warplanes, fully aware that these aircraft would be deployed against India.
A fundamental contradiction emerges: while Colombo claims to remain equidistant from both countries, it simultaneously pledges support to India on counter-terrorism efforts. If Sri Lanka’s support for India in combating terrorism is genuine, how can Pakistan—widely accused of using terrorism as a tool against India—be treated as an equal partner?
Sri Lanka’s strategic community has yet to develop a foreign policy that is responsive to the complexities of the new global political landscape. The country’s ongoing political instability is a significant contributing factor. Nevertheless, the National People’s Power government has an opportunity to make a course correction in Sri Lanka’s policy to address new realities. During Sri Lanka’s civil war, Colombo sought assistance from various countries, including Pakistan, to defeat the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. However, evolving political dynamics cannot be assessed solely through the lens of past alliances. As Prime Minister Modi has observed, Pakistan continues to act as a ‘university of terror,’ posing a perennial threat to lasting peace in South Asia.
In light of these developments, it is time to reassess whether Sri Lanka’s traditional policy of non-alignment and balance remains the most effective approach to addressing the emerging security challenges of South Asia. Within this shifting landscape, slogans such as “Sri Lanka Pakistan Zindabad” may no longer be relevant to the nuanced challenges and strategic considerations shaping the region’s security environment.