The recent Islamist terror attack on Hindu tourists in Kashmir has once again exposed the stark double standard in how global media and political narratives respond to violence, with some lives deemed more worthy of outrage than others.
— The Australia Today (@TheAusToday) April 26, 2025
Federation Square vigil: #Indian #Australian community’s message of hope and solidarity
Today, members of the Indian Australian community gathered at Melbourne’s Federation Square to honour the victims of the recent terror attack in Kashmir.
In a moving show of unity,… pic.twitter.com/flI8J5Y3E2
In the wake of the tragedy, the Indian diaspora has rallied across cities worldwide to honour the victims and protest against Pakistan, a known hub for terrorism. Yet, a troubling silence persists among prominent figures within the leadership of the Indian diaspora community. Many who privately support these causes remain silent, unwilling to risk professional or social repercussions.
Suhag A. Shukla, Executive Director of the Hindu American Foundation (HAF), captured this paradox in a candid reflection on X, where she noted that despite overwhelming private agreement with her views, many influential Indians in the diaspora fear speaking out due to gatekeeping and social exclusion in their respective fields. This culture of self-censorship weakens their ability to shape a more nuanced global narrative about India, Hindus, and the complex socio-political landscape of the region.
I’ve lost count of the number of private DMs, texts or calls I get from prominent Hindu/Indian Americans — policy influencers, academics, journalists, business leaders, et al — who quietly express
— Suhag A. Shukla (@SuhagAShukla) April 27, 2025agreement with things I’ve called out or said, but are unwilling to speak out… https://t.co/uUyjT1ulh3
Shukla’s observations were sparked by a thought-provoking post from Vishal Ganesan, who highlighted the weaponization of the term “Hindutva” by anti-India forces on the Left. Ganesan argued that the smear has successfully deterred Indian diaspora from expressing support for India or Hindu causes, with many of these same figures quick to condemn India on issues such as the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) or farm bills, despite often lacking full understanding of the issues.
While this reluctance to engage in “thorny political issues” is commonplace, a growing wave of solidarity from ordinary members of the Indian diaspora is challenging the silence. In response to the Kashmir terrorist attack, thousands of people gathered in major cities across the globe to honour the victims and stand united against terrorism, particularly against Pakistan. These vigils and protests demonstrate that, despite the fear of exclusion, there are moments when silence cannot be an option, and collective action becomes necessary.
The global silence surrounding certain acts of terrorism is compounded by the broader issue of selective outrage in media coverage. Om Dwivedi, in his recent piece for The Australia Today, poignantly addressed this discrepancy, asking why some lives are mourned by global tabloids like The New York Times and The Guardian, while the killings of others—such as those of Hindus in Kashmir—are conveniently overlooked. Dwivedi argued that the world’s refusal to equally condemn terrorism and violence, regardless of the victims’ religion or nationality, exposes a moral perversion that has become entrenched in intellectual and media circles.
Dwivedi also questioned the “anxiety of numbers,” a phenomenon where the scale of tragedy is minimised based on the identities of the victims. He emphasized that this should not be a reason to let terrorists go unpunished, nor should it allow us to reduce terrorism to a mere political issue to be parsed by numbers or group identities. Instead, the true challenge lies in acting together to rid the world of terrorism, not by selectively condemning the killings of particular groups.
This question of where our global outrage is directed raises a critical point: Are we so divided by our ideological commitments that we fail to see the need for a collective defence of humanity? Dwivedi called for a commitment to universal human values, where the condemnation of terrorism and violence is not reserved for one group, but extends to all who suffer from the scourge of terror.
International Relations expert Surya Kanegaonkar adds another dimension to this conversation, highlighting the shift in India’s approach to global narratives. He argues that the fear of being ostracized has traditionally kept the narrative in line with the global left, with media and influential figures conforming to dominant positions. However, Kanegaonkar contends that this dynamic no longer matters. “The Indian public has simply ceased to care about censorship,” he says, and now, there is a singular focus on permanently ending cross-border terrorism and taking ownership of India’s foreign policy. The Indian narrative is no longer reliant on external validation, and New Delhi is now focused on forging diplomatic consensus, as Kanegaonkar concludes, “This, New Delhi is taking care of.”
The call to action, then, is clear. It is not enough to mourn some lives and ignore others. The fight against terrorism must transcend religious and ideological boundaries. As Dwivedi notes, we must protect the very gift of life, irrespective of the religion or nationality of the victims. Terrorism cannot be justified or ignored, whether it strikes Hindus, Muslims, or any other community. The global community must rise above selective outrage and instead commit to a collective stand against the perpetrators of violence. The silence surrounding these attacks must be broken, and the fight against terrorism must be a cause that unites us all.
Support our Journalism
No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.
