‘Started Work Within 3 Days Of Pahalgam Attack’: How India Got Terror Outfit Tag For Pakistan’s TRF

Last Updated:July 18, 2025, 18:06 IST

India briefed the US at least twice in senior official roles following the Pahalgam attack: immediately on April 25, 2025, and in May as part of an international lobbying campaign

India repeatedly presented concrete intelligence identifying TRF as a Lashkar-e-Taiba affiliate. (File)

Indian authorities provided to the United States (US) substantial evidence, including proof of leadership and its direct involvement in the Pahalgam terror attack, to get the terror outfit tag for Pakistan’s The Resistance Front (TRF).

The US State Department’s process of designating a group a terror outfit is highly technical, rigorous, and immune to political influence—unlike procedures followed at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). The designation process involves the submission and thorough verification of credible intelligence and data.

News18 learned that the information provided by New Delhi met the stringent standards of the US designation process, which is often regarded as more rigorous than the UNSC mechanism, where geopolitical interests may at times affect outcomes.

The US listing of TRF also highlights how Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar allegedly attempted to shield the group. Notably, Dar reportedly took pride in removing references to TRF from the Security Council’s condemnation message following the Pahalgam attack—an attack for which TRF itself had claimed responsibility.

The successful designation by the US serves as both a validation of India’s evidence and a diplomatic setback for efforts to obscure the group’s role. It also reinforces TRF’s identity as a front for the proscribed Lashkar-e-Taiba, affirming its operational ties and culpability in recent acts of terrorism.

Briefings To Multi-Party Delegations: How India Got TRF Named As A US-Designated Terror Outfit?

After the April 22 Pahalgam attack in which 26 civilians were killed, India’s diplomatic outreach to the United States was strengthened as part of its counter-terrorism initiative, with special emphasis on TRF.

On April 25, just three days after the attack, Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri briefed selected envoys, including those from the US, UK, China, Russia, and France, about the details of the Pahalgam attack. These briefings for G20 representatives included specifics on the modalities of the attack, the casualties, and preliminary intelligence pointing towards TRF’s involvement as a proxy for Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). Throughout this time, India made it evident that TRF was not a stand-alone group, but was operating as a front and proxy for Pakistan-based LeT—a fact consistently communicated to US and other Western allies.

Throughout late April and into May, Indian intelligence and diplomatic channels maintained ongoing briefings, sharing further information about TRF’s leadership (identifying its head Sheikh Sajjad Gul as the mastermind), and highlighting a pattern of TRF-claimed attacks targeting Indian civilians and security forces in 2024 and 2025. This sustained briefing campaign coincided with New Delhi’s efforts to secure international condemnation and further action against the group’s operators and sponsors. Following the attack, seven multi-party delegations from India traveled to 33 world capitals, including Washington, throughout May 2025 to underline Pakistan’s association with terror and the particular role of TRF.

Points of intelligence conveyed by India to the US

India’s communication with the US focussed on:

• TRF’s operational connections with LeT and its status as a proxy agency
• Evidence obtained by India’s National Investigation Agency that named Sheikh Sajjad Gul as TRF’s mastermind and leader of the attack
• Record of past TRF-claimed terror attacks in India
• The trend of TRF’s activity following that of Pakistan-based organisations.

These joint diplomatic initiatives reached a peak on July 18, 2025, when the US State Department officially listed TRF as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) and Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT), directly mentioning the evidence and intelligence produced by Indian authorities that confirmed TRF’s direct role in the Pahalgam attack and its LeT proxy character.

So, India briefed the US at least twice in senior official roles following the Pahalgam attack: immediately on April 25, 2025, and in May as part of an international lobbying campaign. In these meetings, India repeatedly presented concrete intelligence identifying TRF as a Lashkar-e-Taiba affiliate and insisted that it be listed as a terrorist group under US law. These initiatives lay at the heart of the US decision to list TRF as a terrorist group on July 18, 2025.

Despite US Backing, India’s TRF Blacklisting Faces China-Pakistan Resistance at UNSC

Pakistan’s membership on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) as a non-permanent member until December 2026 brings complexities to India’s attempt to include TRF in the UNSC 1267 sanctions committee, which focuses on groups related to Al-Qaeda and ISIL.

Being a Council member, Pakistan may do its best to sway the debate, engage in consultations, and frame the agenda. While the non-permanent members lack veto power, their dissent and procedural holds can make consensus-building challenging, particularly when listing entails groups said to be functioning from their own territory or connected to their establishments. Pakistan’s past stances and diplomatic activism on matters bordering on terrorism designations, or with respect to entities it is accused of supporting, similarly indicate that it will utilise its status to slow or water down any step it feels targets its interests.

The complexities are further compounded by China’s status as a permanent member (P5) of the UNSC with veto power. China has a historical record of protecting Pakistan on terrorism listings matters—most famously in earlier cases against Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed. As the UNSC 1267 Committee works by consensus, China’s veto alone can be sufficient to veto any proposal irrespective of support from the other members of the Council. Its strategic alliance with Pakistan and inclination to emphasise the requirement of “solid evidence" or greater consultations usually leads to procedural holds, requests for more information, and even the occasional outright blocks on listings requested by India.

Practically, the combined presence of Pakistan’s active engagement and China’s veto power presents a tough procedural obstacle for India. The procedure requires consent or, at least, no objection by all Committee members. As past listings indicate, China’s eagerness to exercise its veto—usually at Pakistan’s request—and Pakistan’s aggressive diplomatic activity result in Indian initiatives being put on hold, subjected to repeated technical holds, and even rejected until the composition of the Council or political calculations shift.

This highlights why, despite US support and a more robust evidence-based case after TRF’s designation in Washington, India has a diplomatic uphill battle to get the 1267 listing as long as Pakistan and China hold seats of power in the UNSC.

Location :

First Published:

News india ‘Started Work Within 3 Days Of Pahalgam Attack’: How India Got Terror Outfit Tag For Pakistan’s TRF