Terrorism has no religion, no justification and no place in a democratic society. Its only language is violence, fear and destruction. Any serious national security policy must therefore leave no room for ambiguity when confronting terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. The Modi government has repeatedly articulated a policy of “zero tolerance” against terrorism. In 2026, the government’s PRAHAAR strategy placed prevention, swift response, inter-agency coordination, counter-radicalisation, international cooperation, human rights and recovery among its seven pillars. That approach is significant because modern terrorism is no longer confined to the gunman or the bomber. It operates through financing networks, arms trafficking, infiltration, recruitment, propaganda and increasingly through digital platforms. Breaking the terror ecosystem therefore requires more than military operations. It requires intelligence sharing, financial investigations, border management, technology and strong policing. Recent government actions have reflected this broader approach. In July 2026, the Ministry of Home Affairs designated 23 individuals as terrorists under the UAPA, citing their alleged involvement in terrorist activities, recruitment, financing, arms trafficking and cross-border infiltration. In September, the Shahzad Bhatti Network was declared a terrorist organisation under the UAPA. But a zero-tolerance policy must also mean zero tolerance for complacency. Every terrorist module dismantled is important, but every potential recruit prevented from entering the terror pipeline is an even greater victory for society. Jammu and Kashmir remains particularly important in this context. The Union Home Ministry has said that counter-terror operations must continue to target terrorist infrastructure and terror financing while security agencies maintain close coordination. Peace cannot be reduced to the absence of gunfire; it must also mean an environment where young people choose education, employment and opportunity over violence. The fight against terror must consequently remain firm, lawful and evidence-based. Security agencies need resources, intelligence and freedom to act, but every action must remain anchored in the rule of law and constitutional safeguards. Terrorism seeks to weaken institutions and divide societies. The answer must be the opposite: stronger institutions, greater public resilience, better intelligence and unwavering commitment to law. There can be no justification for terrorism—and no space for those who finance, facilitate or promote it.