(Commonwealth_India) Mohammad Tawhidi, a prominent Islamic scholar, preacher, and imam affiliated with the Global Imam Council, has taken a clear and uncompromising stance on the recent Pahalgam terror attack, voicing his condemnation in terms that leave little room for ambiguity. In an interview with CNN-News18’s Anand Narasimhan, Tawhidi described the attack as a premeditated and violent act of terrorism, comparing the perpetrators’ modus operandi to that of internationally recognized extremist organizations such as ISIS and Hamas. His choice of words underlined the gravity of the event and the urgency with which the global community, particularly the Islamic world, should respond to such threats. Known for calling himself the “Imam of Peace,” Tawhidi has built a reputation for confronting extremism head-on, and his reaction to this incident was no exception.
Tawhidi emphasized that there should be no hesitation or euphemism when discussing events of this nature. He asserted that the attack was not merely a random act of violence or a simple lapse in security but rather a deliberate and orchestrated execution aimed at inciting fear, destabilizing the region, and advancing a radical ideological agenda. In his view, the incident was a textbook example of terrorism, and to categorize it as anything less would be both misleading and dangerous. He called upon world leaders, especially within Muslim-majority countries, to address such incidents with clarity and moral authority. For Tawhidi, it is essential that the international Muslim community denounce acts of terror and actively work to disassociate their faith from those who commit violence in its name.
He went on to acknowledge that a significant portion of the Muslim world has indeed taken this position, openly condemned acts of terrorism and distancing themselves from groups that exploit religious narratives to justify violence. According to Tawhidi, the core principles of Islam are rooted in peace, compassion, and justice, and the actions of extremists do not represent the faith or its teachings. He praised the widespread rejection of terrorism by Muslims across the globe, noting that such unified disapproval is crucial in undermining the ideological foundation of radical movements. However, he also warned that silence or ambiguous responses from influential Muslim nations could undermine these efforts and give room for extremist interpretations to persist.
Tawhidi’s critique grew more pointed when addressing Pakistan’s reaction to the Pahalgam incident. Rather than taking a firm and unequivocal stance against the attack, Tawhidi argued that Pakistan responded with defensiveness and diplomatic maneuvering, choosing to deny involvement and escalate tensions with India instead of joining the global condemnation of terrorism. He expressed disappointment that, at a moment that called for unity against extremism, Pakistan missed an opportunity to demonstrate moral clarity. In his view, such actions do not merely reflect poorly on Pakistan’s international image but also hinder collective efforts to isolate and eliminate terrorism from the region.
He argued that any country, especially one so intricately tied to the geopolitics of South Asia, should have made a swift and direct statement condemning the violence and expressing solidarity with the victims. By failing to do so, Tawhidi suggested, Pakistan inadvertently cast doubt on its commitment to fighting terrorism and risked sending a message of tolerance or indifference toward extremist actions. This, he warned, could further complicate an already volatile regional dynamic and impede progress toward long-term peace and cooperation.
Tawhidi concluded by reiterating his belief that terrorism must be addressed with unwavering moral and rhetorical clarity. He rejected any form of politicization, justification, or diplomatic balancing that could soften the condemnation of such acts. According to him, the global community must come together to confront extremism not just with military or legal tools, but with a united moral front that rejects hate and violence in all its forms. Only through such solidarity, he argued, can the world hope to dismantle the ideologies that fuel terrorism and move toward a more peaceful and secure future.
