Malaysia’s Anwar Ibrahim Says No Intelligence Evidence Establishes Pakistan State Role in Pahalgam Attack
By Robeka Irfan — SCN NEWS
NEW DELHI — Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has declined to endorse an Indian television interviewer's attempt to characterize Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism, saying the intelligence available to his government had not established Pakistani state responsibility for terrorism linked to India.
The exchange came during Anwar's interview with Indian broadcaster NDTV on the sidelines of the BRICS summit. After Anwar described Israel's conduct in Gaza as "state terrorism," interviewer Vishnu Som asked whether he would apply the same description to Pakistan over the April 2025 Pahalgam attack and other violence attributed by India to Pakistan. Anwar refused to make that leap.
Anwar said allegations of state sponsorship had to be established rather than assumed. He stressed that he was not denying that terrorist attacks had occurred, but said Malaysia's intelligence establishment — despite its engagement with India — had not given him an assessment establishing Pakistani state sponsorship.
His response is significant because it drew a clear distinction between acknowledging terrorism and attributing an attack to another government. Anwar also acknowledged the sensitivity of the issue in India, noted his close relationship with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and said Malaysia also engages with Pakistan, expressing hope that disputes between the two South Asian neighbours can be resolved.
The April 22, 2025 attack in Pahalgam killed 26 people and triggered one of the most serious India-Pakistan crises in years. India accused Pakistan of involvement, while Islamabad denied responsibility and called for a neutral investigation. The accusations were followed by military confrontation between the nuclear-armed neighbours before a ceasefire halted the fighting.
Anwar's remarks should not be interpreted as a Malaysian finding that Pakistan had been exonerated from every allegation raised by India. His narrower position was that the evidence and intelligence available to him did not justify describing Pakistan as responsible for state-sponsored terrorism. He also said Malaysia did not simply dismiss information supplied by India and emphasized continuing intelligence and defence cooperation between Kuala Lumpur and New Delhi.
That nuance makes the exchange diplomatically important. Anwar delivered the remarks while visiting India and while explicitly describing Modi as a close friend, yet declined to accept the premise that Pakistan's responsibility could be treated as established fact without evidence satisfying Malaysia's own intelligence assessment.
For Pakistan, the comments strengthen Islamabad's longstanding argument that allegations surrounding Pahalgam should be subjected to credible investigation rather than treated internationally as settled attribution. For Malaysia, however, Anwar's position appears designed to preserve relations with both South Asian states: acknowledge India's security concerns and terrorism problem while refusing to assign state responsibility beyond what Kuala Lumpur believes the evidence establishes.
The episode also illustrates a wider diplomatic challenge following the 2025 confrontation. India continues to press its case internationally regarding Pakistan-linked terrorism, while Pakistan rejects those accusations and seeks external scrutiny of the evidence. Anwar's answer placed Malaysia firmly on the narrower principle that attribution to a state requires substantiation — without requiring Kuala Lumpur to endorse either country's broader narrative.