SOURCE: AFI
In a calculated shift, Kashmiri terror outfits are shedding their overtly Islamist militant identities and adopting the guise of political “resistance” movements, drawing inspiration from Hamas and the Palestinian narrative. This rebranding, evident in their tactics, language, and propaganda, aims to recast their decades-long insurgency as a popular struggle against “occupation,” distancing themselves from the stigma of terrorism and seeking broader international legitimacy.
Below, we explore six key ways these groups are mimicking the Palestinian model, with profound implications for India’s security and the global perception of the Kashmir conflict.
1. Rebranding with Neutral Names
Gone are the days when groups like Hizbul Mujahideen, Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) dominated the Kashmiri terror landscape with overtly Islamist names tied to jihadist ideology. Newer outfits like the People’s Anti-Fascist Front (PAFF) and The Resistance Front (TRF) have emerged with deliberately neutral, secular-sounding names. This mirrors Hamas’s evolution from a purely militant group to one that positions itself as a “resistance” movement against Israeli “occupation.” By adopting vague, populist titles, these Kashmiri groups aim to present themselves as a broad-based “people’s movement” fighting Indian “oppression,” rather than radical Islamists with ties to global jihadist networks. The shift helps sanitize their image for international audiences and local recruits wary of extremist labels.
2. Language Shift: From Jihad to “Settler Colonialism”
The rhetoric of Kashmiri terror groups has undergone a dramatic transformation, borrowing heavily from the Palestinian lexicon. Terms like “settlers” and “colonizers” are now used to describe civilians, particularly Hindus and non-locals, in Jammu and Kashmir. This framing casts Indian citizens as foreign interlopers, despite Hindus being indigenous to the region for centuries, predating Islam’s arrival in India. The use of “settler colonialism” echoes Palestinian narratives that portray Israeli Jews as outsiders, ignoring their historical ties to the land. By adopting this language, groups like TRF and PAFF seek to reframe their violence as a legitimate struggle against an “occupying” Indian state, aligning with global anti-colonial and human rights discourses.
3. Target Selection Optics: A Shift Toward “Precision”
Historically, Kashmiri terror groups engaged in indiscriminate killings, targeting civilians, including women and children, to sow fear. Recent trends, however, show a more calculated approach, with groups like PAFF and TRF focusing attacks on “agents of occupation”—security personnel, government officials, or non-local workers—while avoiding women and children. This mirrors Hamas’s attempts to project itself as targeting only Israeli military or “settler” targets, despite its history of civilian attacks. The shift in Kashmir is less about morality and more about optics: by appearing selective, these groups aim to maintain a “resistance” image that resonates with international audiences and avoids the backlash associated with mass civilian casualties.
4. Slick Social Media and Propaganda Videos
The propaganda machinery of Kashmiri terror outfits has evolved from crude videos glorifying violence to polished productions that rival those of Hamas. Groups like PAFF release slick videos featuring dramatic background music, slow-motion visuals of masked “resistance fighters,” and tributes to “martyrs,” portraying Indian soldiers as brutal oppressors. These videos, often subtitled in English, are designed for global consumption, shared widely on platforms like Telegram and X to appeal to international sympathizers. The aesthetic and messaging closely resemble Hamas’s propaganda, which uses cinematic techniques to frame its fighters as heroic defenders of an oppressed people. This shift reflects a growing sophistication in shaping narratives and countering India’s efforts to label these groups as terrorists.
5. Internationalization of the Narrative
Historically, the Kashmir conflict was framed as a bilateral India-Pakistan issue, with terror groups operating within a regional jihadist framework. Now, outfits like TRF and PAFF are internationalizing their cause, adopting buzzwords like “human rights violations,” “indigenous people’s resistance,” “settler colonialism,” and “fascist Indian state.” These terms, lifted directly from the Palestinian playbook, recast the conflict as a global human rights struggle rather than a terrorist insurgency. By aligning their rhetoric with the Palestinian cause, which enjoys significant sympathy in parts of the Global South and among Western activist circles, these groups aim to pressure India diplomatically and gain traction in international forums. This shift also seeks to exploit anti-India sentiment in global media, where Kashmir is increasingly framed as a “liberation” struggle.
6. Lawfare and Engagement with International NGOs
Perhaps the most striking parallel with the Palestinian model is the use of “lawfare”—leveraging legal and diplomatic avenues to undermine India’s position. Pseudo-activist groups linked to Kashmiri terror outfits have begun filing reports and complaints at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), the International Criminal Court (ICC), and other forums, accusing Indian security forces of “genocide,” “war crimes,” and “settler violence.” This tactic mirrors Palestinian activist groups, which routinely use NGOs and international bodies to accuse Israel of systemic abuses. In Kashmir, these efforts are supported by sympathetic NGOs and diaspora networks, particularly in Pakistan and parts of the West, which amplify claims of Indian “atrocities.” The goal is to isolate India diplomatically, much as Palestinian groups have sought to do with Israel through boycott campaigns and UN resolutions.
Why This Shift Matters
The rebranding of Kashmiri terror outfits as political “resistance” movements is a strategic adaptation to changing global and regional dynamics. First, it reflects an attempt to distance themselves from the declining appeal of Islamist militancy, which has lost ground globally due to the fall of groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda. By adopting the Palestinian model, these groups tap into a narrative that enjoys broader legitimacy among activists, academics, and international organizations.
Second, the shift is a response to India’s aggressive counterterrorism measures and diplomatic efforts to isolate Pakistan, the primary backer of these groups. Since the 2019 abrogation of Article 370, which revoked Jammu and Kashmir’s special status, India has cracked down on terror networks and sought to integrate the region more fully into the national framework. The rebranding allows these groups to counter India’s narrative by portraying themselves as defenders of Kashmiri “self-determination” rather than proxies of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
Finally, the internationalization of the Kashmir narrative poses a long-term challenge for India. By framing their struggle in human rights and anti-colonial terms, these groups aim to pressure India through global institutions, media, and public opinion. The use of lawfare and propaganda risks amplifying anti-India sentiment, particularly in countries already critical of New Delhi’s policies.
India has responded to this evolving threat with a mix of hard and soft power. Militarily, counterterrorism operations in Kashmir have intensified, with security forces targeting TRF and PAFF operatives. Diplomatically, India has worked to expose the links between these “resistance” groups and Pakistan-based terror networks like LeT and JeM, urging global bodies to designate them as terrorist organizations. The Indian government has also invested in counter-propaganda, using social media and international forums to highlight the indigenous history of Hindus in Kashmir and the role of Pakistan in fueling violence.
However, India faces challenges in combating the lawfare and propaganda campaigns. The global sympathy for Palestinian-style narratives, coupled with selective outrage in Western media, complicates India’s efforts to control the narrative. Strengthening bilateral ties with key powers like the U.S., Israel, and Gulf states, which share concerns about terrorism, could help India counter these efforts. Domestically, addressing grievances in Kashmir through economic development and political engagement remains critical to undermining the appeal of “resistance” rhetoric.
NOTE: AFI is a proud outsourced content creator partner of IDRW.ORG. All content created by AFI is the sole property of AFI and is protected by copyright. AFI takes copyright infringement seriously and will pursue all legal options available to protect its content.