As the Government of India has begun military action in Pakistan in retaliation for the 4/22 massacre targeting Hindu civilians, we know from experience that Indian Americans broadly — and Hindu Americans especially — will unfairly be expected to answer for India’s actions, for no other reason than your national origin and/or religious identity. 

As geopolitical tensions rise abroad, there is a heightened risk here at home that Hindus may be harassed, bullied, or even become victims of hate incidents in response to the actions of a foreign government. If you are accosted with any of the following tropes, we hope this guide will assist you in responding in a manner that is in line with our Hindu Dharmas: calm, reasoned, truthful, and capable of diffusing any hostile encounters.

“Even cruel words should be endured with steadiness. None should be treated with disrespect. No anger should be directed in turn towards one who is angry. The words spoken in return should be calm and collected.” — Nārada Parivrājaka Upaniṣad 3.42-43

We encourage you to also have conversations with your children and university students on how to respond if they are on the receiving end of any unwarranted backlash. Please remain vigilant of your safety and surroundings. If you or someone you know is a victim of hate, please report it to your local police and HAF’s reporthate@hindumerican.org

As we engage in conversations, we have the opportunity to deepen our dialogue and effectiveness by using our sadhana (to come in calmly) and evidence based tools (to give us more influence). Whether you’re speaking with someone adversarial or with someone who is ignorant about some of the facts of the situation, remember that coming in with the assumption of similarity can decrease defensiveness and hostility. The assumption of similarity is that you and your conversation partner may hold certain values, desires, and personality traits in common that help you see each other as humans worth engaging with. 

HAF’s Managing Grief & Anger guide provides details and examples on how to do this. The highlights are to listen without an agenda, to speak without engaging in personal criticisms, and to be able to make positive requests that add to the conversation rather than trying to use subtractive language to control the flow of the conversation. There are many myths and misconceptions that many may share in their conversations with you, and we’ve put together some factual counterpoints for you to effectively correct biased and inaccurate narratives. 

These tools are for you to engage those who show some willingness to better understand the conflict, rather than for those who are so mired in their stance that dialogue is unwelcome and ineffective.

Additional HAF Community Resources

Claim: This is just India and Pakistan fighting yet again because they hate each other.

Response: What happened on April 22 was not simply “India and Pakistan fighting yet again” but a deliberate massacre by Pakistani-sponsored terrorists, as it has done for years, with the intent to undermine a secular, pluralistic democracy where Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists alike are thriving, participating in democracy, and enjoying stability for the first time in a decade. While India and Pakistan have fought on many occasions, it is inaccurate to assume that this is because of inherent differences rather than based on unacceptable actions. 

Claim: Hindus, Hindutva, and Hindu nationalism are to blame for the 4/22 attacks.

Response: The terrorists who attacked innocent civilians are solely to blame for the attacks on April 22. The terrorists sought out innocent tourists, sorted them by gender and religion, and murdered Hindu men with precision. Hindutva or Hindu nationalism are irrelevant to terrorists who massacre dozens of innocents in cold blood, simply because of their religion.

Claim: Hindus are Islamophobic, that’s why you support India’s actions.

Response: Hinduism is not Islamophobic. Hindu traditions encourage mutual respect and peaceful coexistence no matter someone’s religion. 

A personal layer: As the spiritual homeland of Hindus, I personally support India’s self-defense because I am against terror and I support peace and stability. Terrorism is incompatible with freedom and democracy.

Claim: India / BJP / Hindutva / Hindu nationalists are unjustly using collective punishment against the people of Pakistan. The people of Pakistan have done nothing wrong.

Response: India is not carrying out collective punishment. It undertook precise military action against terrorist infrastructure. It did not target Pakistani civilians, military members, nor government entities. 

Pakistan’s response has been targeting innocent civilians in India, including firing indiscriminately into India and storming a Sikh Gurdwara, killing innocents, including children and Sikh community members.

Claim: Kashmiris have a right to self-determination.

Response: They do and that’s why India held the first election in a decade in the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir last year, where a democratically-elected Kashmiri Muslim, Omar Abdullah, was chosen by the people of Kashmir to be their Chief Minister. Additionally, since 2019, the indigenous Kashmiri Pandits who were ethnically cleansed from the Kashmir Valley have had the right to return to their ancestral homeland restored. 

Kashmir has always been a part of India. When India won its independence, the Princely States of British India were given the option to remain part of secular India, or join the newly created theocracy of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The maharaja of Jammu & Kashmir chose to join India after Pakistan preemptively invaded his lands before a decision had been made. 

Claim: The perpetrators of 4/22 were lone wolf actors; the Pakistan government and its people are not really a threat.

Response: It is well documented, including by US intelligence sources, that Pakistan has harbored terrorists and has been a state-sponsor of terrorism. Osama Bin Laden had been hiding out in Pakistan until his death, and the US Department of State designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), whose affiliate took credit for the attacks on April 22, is a Salafi jihadist terror outfit based in Pakistan. 

It is also well-known that Pakistan sold the technology for developing a nuclear weapon to many of America’s adversaries, including Iran and North Korea. While India and Pakistan are both nuclear states, Pakistan’s direct military capacity is less than India’s, and so it has instead relied on harboring and financing terrorism as an indirect form of warfare against opponents it cannot match in conventional military terms. 

Claim: The attack in Kashmir happened because India is a colonial occupier state.

Response: India is not a “colonial occupier” of Kashmir. First, Kashmiri Pandits, who are Hindu, are the indigenous native people of Kashmir. Second, Kashmir has always been a part of India as far back as recorded history.  However, since Partition, Pakistan has been attempting to take control of Kashmir in its entirety and illegally occupies a portion of Kashmir.

Claim: The attack in Kashmir was retaliation because India suppresses Muslims in Kashmir.

Response: India does not suppress Muslims in Kashmir. As a pluralistic democracy, India has promoted religious freedom and equality for all Indians, regardless of their faith. Last year, India held the first election in over a decade in the Union Territory of Kashmir, where a democratically-elected Kashmiri Muslim, Omar Abdullah, was chosen by the people of Kashmir to be their Chief Minister. Muslims, Christians, and Hindus alike have flourished economically since stability came to the Union Territory in 2019, and all have been hurting following the attacks. In fact, one of the first victims of the April 22 attack was a Kashmiri Muslim, who made a living by working with Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians, and Muslims alike.

Claim: This attack was inevitable since India robbed Kashmir of its autonomy in 2019 with the abrogation of Article 370.

Response: The Pakistan government’s state sponsorship of terrorism in Kashmir has been happening since the partition of India in 1947 and is well-documented. As the Union Territory of Kashmir has flourished under stability since 2019, Pakistan-occupied Kashmir continues to flounder. The government of Pakistan has a vested interest in continuing the conflict and preventing a stable, peaceful Kashmir Valley.

Claim: India has been intentionally trying to change the Muslim-majority demographics of Kashmir, what did they expect?

Response: Kashmiri Pandits are indigenous to the Kashmir Valley, but a violent ethnic cleansing of Hindus in the 1990s forced them out. India’s policy of opening up the Union Territory of Kashmir to all Indians was intended to help Kashmiri Pandits return to their native homeland. The perpetrators of the Pahalgam attack claimed one of the aims of their terrorism was to once again expel non-Hindus from the Kashmir Valley.

Claim: The attack was really planned by India to make Pakistan look bad / justify military intervention so that Hindutva nationalists can colonize more Muslim territory.

Response: That is simply untrue. This is misinformation that has been spread by conspiracy theorists sympathetic to Pakistan. There is no evidence nor factual basis to this claim.

Claim: Why won’t India collaborate with Pakistan to track down the perpetrators of this attack?

Response: India has asked Pakistan for help to eradicate the terrorism in the past, and Indian officials said they had waited two weeks for Pakistan to track down the perpetrators and hold them accountable, but the Pakistan government failed to do so. The United Nations, United States, United Kingdom, and numerous other governments have also asked Pakistan to address counterterrorism within its own borders, with little success.

Claim: This is a foreign problem, why are you bringing foreign problems into America?

Response/Personal Context: As the spiritual homeland of Hindus, I care deeply about India. On a human level, the horrific murder of innocents for no other reason than their faith is absolutely revolting. As a Hindu American, I not only support America, but democracy and pluralism globally.

Claim: Hindus have always hated Muslims.

Response: While there have been historical periods of tension and trauma between Muslim and Hindu communities in the subcontinent — particularly exacerbated by colonial powers that sought to exploit discord for their own gain — India has been a secular democracy since the devastating partition of India in 1947. Muslims and Hindus have worked together, gone to school together, laughed together, and they grieved together following the horrific attack on their own people by terrorist insurgents on April 22. Hindu traditions encourage mutual respect and peaceful coexistence no matter their religion. However, Hindus on the subcontinent have been victims of anti-Hindu violence, including the 1971 Bangladesh Genocide, the ethnic cleansing of indegenous Kashmiri Pandits in 1990, and the 2008 terrorist attacks on Mumbai. The pain we may be witnessing at this moment is reactionary, not inherent to the Hindu religion.

Claim: I thought Hinduism was a peaceful religion, so why is India attacking Pakistan?

Response: First, India is not attacking Pakistan. It’s defending itself from cross-border terrorism. Second, “Indian” and “Hindu” are not interchangeable. And yes, Hindu traditions espouse ahimsa (non-violence), pluralism, equality, social harmony, and righteous action in the face of evil. 

Since independence, India has been a pluralist parliamentary democracy, and Hindu principles have profoundly influenced Indian leaders throughout history. As the world’s largest democracy, India has a right to defend itself against terrorists who seek to undermine its democratic institutions, challenge its sovereignty, terrorize its citizens, and upend peace.