New Delhi: It began with a condolence message, and ended with a digital walkout! In the aftermath of the 22 April Pahalgam terrorist attack, a firestorm erupted within a WhatsApp group of South Asian Women in Media (SAWM), a cross-border collective of women journalists from across the region.
Several Pakistani members exited the group Friday in protest, after what they perceived as Islamophobic and politically charged backlash to Pakistani journalist Nasim Zehra’s message, which ended with the phrase “Allah o Akbar”.
Zehra had posted her message a day after the deadly attack in Jammu and Kashmir, offering condolences to Indian citizens, while also lambasting New Delhi for what she called its “fascistic occupation” and “engineering” of deaths in Kashmir.
She accused Indian government of weaponising water—referring to the decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty—and used phrases like “mega law breaker” and a “bully spoilt by international indulgence” to criticise New Delhi. She claimed India is now on a “mad destructive path”, but insisted, “Pakistan will always fight back.”
“Pakistan Zindabad. Kashmiris Zindabad. Allah o Akbar,” she wrote, concluding her post.
That final phrase, a commonly used expression of devotion in Islam, became the flashpoint, triggering a wave of responses from journalists on both sides.
Indian journalist Jyoti Malhotra, editor-in-chief, The Tribune, immediately criticised the use of the phrase, calling it a “war cry instead of journalism”. As messages poured in, some journalists supported Malhotra’s objection, while others tried to mediate. But the ideological rift continued to grow in the already tense atmosphere.
Indian journalist Anuradha Bhasin, known for her reporting on Kashmir, urged a return to civility. “It’s sad when journalists start war cries and peddle hate,” she wrote. “We should be talking about pragmatic approaches and peace.”
Pakistani journalist Marvi Sirmed said that she did not agree with Zehra’s message, but the effort at damage control was short-lived.
Pakistani journalists—many of them longtime members of SAWM—began leaving the group. Beena Sarwar, a prominent Pakistani journalist and peace activist, posted a message of concern and condemnation, but that could not stem the tide.
Also Read: From Bajwa to ‘Munir Doctrine’ & peace in Kashmir—why India believes Pakistan greenlit Pahalgam
‘War cry’ vs ‘phrase of faith’
When SAWM was founded in 2008, it was envisioned as a borderless collective committed to free expression and gender equality in the media. But the events of this week showed that even such sisterhood is not immune to geopolitical tremors.
The members’ debate quickly escalated. Indian journalist Madhu Trehan weighed in, reminding the group that Indian media had covered Kashmiri militancy “years before Hindutva”. She cited Newstrack’s 1989 interviews with Kashmiri militants, long before the “current wave of State-backed nationalism”.
Malhotra, in an apparent attempt at de-escalation, later added, “Let’s not get into us versus them. Let’s just be together—united, unconditionally.” Others suggested moving past the controversy by refocusing on the group’s original aim: stories, solidarity and shared struggles.
But Nasim Zehra wasn’t done.
In a follow-up, she defended her use of “Allah o Akbar,” writing, “It is NOT a war cry… Surely ALL of you have interacted enough with Muslims to know that ‘Allah o Akbar’ is a deeply held phrase of faith… invoked in dangerous, precarious times—as is now, from the tragedy at Pahalgam to the Indian government and overwhelming media’s hysterical warmongering!”
“It is appalling that Allah o Akbar is labelled as a ‘war cry’ and then one person is singled out for writing that. For those confused, Allah o Akbar means God is Great,” she wrote.
Still, it was Trehan’s comeback that reignited the fire: “How would it be interpreted if an Indian journalist ended a post with ‘Jai Shri Ram’?”
“Allah o Akbar when used in prayer has a different meaning, Jai Shree Ram in a prayer has a different meaning. Both are also used as war cries,” she posted.
In response, one Indian journalist acknowledged the complexity: “‘Allah o Akbar’ is not a war cry… neither is ‘Jai Shri Ram’… unfortunately they have been appropriated by certain groups… and therefore, best for us to keep those out.”
It was a moment of agreement, but it came far too late. Some Pakistani journalists had already left the WhatsApp group, walking out of SAWM, at least in spirit. Some other journalists, however, continue as members of the group.
This is an updated version of the report.
(Edited by Ajeet Tiwari)
Also read: Pakistan ISI is killing Hindus for 45 years. To turn India into a nation at war with itself
The joke is that the so called liberal journalists thought of Nasim Zehra as a moderate. Anyone who is remotely familiar with her reporting knows how communal and anti India she is. To put things into context, she gaslighted General Bajwa along with Hamid Mir to stop the peace process initiated after the ceasefire agreement.
Not surprised at all these given the bias exhibited by the usual suspects present in the group, but I am incredibly stunned at the naivete of many of them. And at the hypocrisy. Mrs Malhotra makes a point about Noida based journalists often but then we learn that she is trying to “in solidarity” with individuals of questionable repute as Nasim Zehra.
After years of parroting their propaganda, slandering the state and many more questionable acts (these are all different from criticism and questioning the government), I could not think of any low points for this band of journos. Until I read that they consider themselves as likeminded comrades of Nasim Zehra.