India’s narrative warfare against Pakistan is not something new. It has existed since the dawn of digital platforms. In recent years, the campaign has shifted from slow, institutional lobbying to real-time information warfare waged in the middle of live crises. The nature of the narrative campaign has evolved from lobbying to live warfare. In 2020, the lobbying strategy was exposed in a report by EU Disinfo Lab, a Belgium-based think tank. The report was titled “Indian Chronicles,” detailing a 15-year campaign of fake NGOs and manufactured media. The May 2025 Pahalgam crisis became the clearest example of the unfolding of that strategy. The Indian media channels relied on jingoistic reporting during the crisis to shape the narrative in India’s favor, while Pakistan adopted a fact-based and more measured response. The distinction matters beyond optics because propaganda used during an active crisis is far more dangerous than propaganda in peacetime. It can inflame public sentiment quickly enough to push political and military leaders toward escalation before facts can be verified and made public.
This information war can be traced back to the early 2000s. One detail captures its strangeness best. In 2011, Professor Louis B. Sohn was listed as attending an event organized by “Friends of Gilgit-Baltistan” in Washington, D.C. Actually, the professor had died in 2006. His resurrection was not an accident. It was one thread of a coordinated 15-year influence campaign spearheaded by India. It encompassed the revival of more than 10 dormant NGOs, 750 fake media outlets, and the identity theft of individuals to serve its national interests, and produce negative content about Pakistan, as reported by EU Disinfo Lab in 2020. Given India’s track record against Pakistan, it was a deliberate move to mislead, which India did little to disown. The exposure of this “zombie-NGO” campaign marked a turning point. After 2020, India shifted toward faster, more aggressive, real-time tactics for shaping the narrative.
India’s old playbook relied on slow, institutional lobbying, like using fake NGOs and manufactured forums to shape anti-Pakistan opinion in Geneva and other international centers in the long run. In contrast, the new strategy operates on intense, live propaganda unleashed during a crisis, aimed at shaping perception before facts are presented to the public. The shift demonstrated the Modi government’s strategic attempt for narrative control, unconcerned about accuracy, and it moves the battlefield from international institutions to the split-second contest for domestic and global public opinion during an actual clash. The Pahalgam crisis was a practical manifestation of this new strategy.
During the May 2025 Pahalgam Conflict, Aaj Tak News channel of India broadcast fake news, falsely claiming that the Indian Navy had attacked the Karachi Port for the first time since 1971, illustrating the claim with recycled footage from Israeli strikes on Gaza. Amid the war hysteria, reporting by “Godi Media” reached new levels of absurdity and falsehood. From ridiculous claims like the Pakistani Army Chief being arrested to Indian army capturing Islamabad, Indian media channels like Republic TV, Times Now, and Zee News made relentless attempts to convince the local audience that they were winning decisively. This jingoistic reporting was compounded by an information blackout where access to the Kashmir region and perspectives from Pakistani sources were also shut out of Indian coverage. Notably, Indian authorities also pressed the BBC to refer to the Pahalgam attackers as “terrorists” rather than “militants,” aimed at steering foreign outlets towards inaccuracy (not just domestic ones).
This deliberate distribution and jingoism were just one facet of the narrative campaign. The other was AI-driven manipulation to deceive the masses. A deepfake of the Director General of ISPR admitting the loss of JF-17 jets spread rapidly and was later debunked by forensic expert Hany Farid, who confirmed it was AI-generated. A second manipulated clip went further, showing the Prime Minister of Pakistan accepting defeat and blaming China and the UAE for lack of support. Whereas, in the original footage, he was actually praising the Pakistan Air Force. This AI-generated deep-fake spread rapidly. often pushed directly into breaking news cycles for the sake of virality before facts could be verified. The cumulative effect led Al Jazeera’s Media Institute to call the crisis coverage a “national embarrassment.”
The “national embarrassment” was not just routine propaganda. It was carried out during a live conflict, not manufactured months later for a slow-moving lobbying campaign. In the heat of battle, propaganda at this level can fuel public anger and foment nationalism. It leads to pressure on the military and political leaders to respond to perceived threats rather than verified ones, raising the odds of disproportionate retaliation. In the case of India and Pakistan, this becomes more serious as it increases the risk of accidental escalation between nuclear-armed neighbors, as observed by South Asian Voices. Seen this way, India played with fire by carrying out intense live propaganda during the May 2025 Crisis.
In contrast to India, Pakistan’s media strategy during the crisis was rational and measured. India’s disinformation initially stoked public resentment against Pakistan, but the latter countered with an assertive, fact-based approach rather than matching the theatrics. Unlike Indian media’s jingoistic reporting, ISPR held regular briefings and promptly delivered facts and evidence to prevent the public from speculations. This response, in effect, elevated the international credibility of Pakistan and helped keep the crisis from escalating further. Subsequently, Trump’s own words undercut India’s version of events. In the months after the crisis, he repeatedly told domestic and global public that Pakistan had shot down Indian jets, and India never contradicted, as it was true. Meanwhile, New Delhi refused any independent probe into the Pahalgam attack it used to justify the war, even as China’s foreign minister publicly backed Pakistan’s call for a neutral investigation. A country confident in its evidence does not usually decline the chance to prove it. Indian failure to respond was, in fact, an indirect admission of the loss.
Despite a military and diplomatic win for Pakistan in the May 2025 crisis, the evolution of India’s narrative strategy matters, as real-time propaganda during a crisis demands instant debunking to prevent escalation and uphold credibility. Given this, Pakistan can consider strengthening its counter-narrative strategy by establishing a dedicated body to combat misinformation during a live crisis. But institutions alone would not be enough. Citizens on both sides of the India-Pakistan border also have a responsibility to verify information and fact-check before believing it to be true. Media literacy is the most effective tool for countering propaganda amid the fog of war. Taken together, India has adopted the strategy of live broadcasting propaganda during crises to shape the narrative against Pakistan. It signals a shift from its previous strategy of institutional lobbying, exposed by the EU Disinfo Lab in 2020. The May 2025 Pahalgam crisis was the clearest example of this shift. Nevertheless, the new tactic is not only a narrative-shaping exercise but also carries the risk of conflict escalation. Pakistan’s more disciplined, fact-based response showed that restraint can outlast noise. As regards, India proves that the Modi government can go to any lengths to achieve its objectives, even to the extent of misleading its own public.
Sabahat Mazhar is an intern at the Center for International Strategic Studies (CISS), Islamabad.
