In a damning revelation by The Print, raises serious questions about international oversight and cross-border terrorism, investigative reports have uncovered that high-resolution satellite images of Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, were ordered in unusually high volumes from a US firm, Maxar Technologies, just weeks before the terror attack in April 2025 that killed 26 tourists.
These satellite imagery requests, peaking in February, were routed through an Indian intermediary but traced to Pakistani-linked interests, suggesting a sophisticated reconnaissance effort. After the attack, India’s National Investigation Agency (NIA) used similar imagery for a 3D terrain analysis, revealing the attack was meticulously pre-planned.
The firm at the centre of the controversy is Pakistan-based Business System International Pvt Ltd (BSI), owned by Obaidullah Syed, a Pakistani-American previously convicted in the US for illegally exporting high-performance computing systems to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons agency, the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC). His activities were found to be aimed at helping Pakistan bypass U.S. sanctions and build nuclear and missile capabilities.
Despite Syed’s 2021 conviction, BSI was publicly listed in 2023 as an official partner of Maxar Technologies, raising concerns about vetting practices. Though Maxar has denied that BSI placed direct orders for the Pahalgam imagery in 2025, it has since removed BSI from its partner list after media exposés and public scrutiny.
Further reports indicate that BSI had been engaged in repeated dealings involving sensitive geospatial data and that their partnerships extended beyond Maxar, potentially including other international imaging providers. Maxar has since announced a review of its reseller and partner policies.
Experts believe this pattern mirrors prior Pakistani behaviour. After India’s 2019 revocation of Article 370, high-resolution images and military movements from Pakistan’s side were closely monitored, and analysis indicated strategic build-ups. This aligns with a consistent pattern of Pakistan using satellite data and dual-use tech for hostile planning.
The sequence of events, the surge in satellite imagery orders, the use of terrain familiarization techniques, the timing of the terror attack, and the involvement of a convicted proliferator’s firm, suggests far more than coincidence. This was a deliberate, Pak state-sponsored act of terrorism enabled by international loopholes in the regulation of sensitive geospatial technologies.
The international community must not turn a blind eye to how civilian satellite platforms can be manipulated by state-linked terror networks. India must demand accountability, and global satellite firms must urgently overhaul partner due diligence mechanisms to prevent such egregious exploitation.
Comments