Countering Disinformation and Deepfakes: Strengthening Crisis Communications Between India and Pakistan

The escalating crisis between India and Pakistan in May 2025 took on a dangerous new dimension as both nuclear powers weaponized disinformation during their four-day military confrontation. The integration of AI-generated deepfakes and false information into conventional warfare made distinguishing fact from fiction nearly impossible, creating a perilous environment where even seasoned journalists and government officials were deceived.

The crisis revealed how rapidly synthetic content can intensify tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbors. While disinformation may not trigger conflicts, it significantly amplifies existing ones by creating strategic confusion and increasing the risk of catastrophic misinterpretation.

A particularly dangerous episode emerged when social media platforms circulated false allegations that India had attacked Pakistan’s Kirana Hills nuclear site, causing radioactive leakage. A fabricated letter about the incident went viral, lending credibility to the hoax. The situation escalated when Indian Defense Minister Rajnath Singh publicly stated that “Pakistan is an irresponsible state and [the International Atomic Energy Agency] should take charge of the nuclear weapons of Pakistan.” Though the IAEA later confirmed no radioactive event had occurred, Singh’s statement had already lent credibility to the false narrative.

Communication breakdowns further complicated the crisis. Following a terrorist attack in India-administered Kashmir in April 2025 that killed more than two dozen people, India expelled Pakistani diplomats and recalled its own from Pakistan. This diplomatic rupture eliminated crucial channels for clarification and de-escalation. India’s subsequent ban on social media accounts belonging to Pakistani celebrities and scholars created information silos where each country’s government controlled the narrative, making objective assessment virtually impossible.

Indian news outlet WION falsely reported that Pakistan had convened a meeting of its nuclear weapons authority, a claim Pakistan’s defense minister Khawaja Asif immediately denied. This incident highlighted how misinformation can disrupt clear signaling during crises and potentially trigger catastrophic misperceptions.

Security analysts have identified five policy recommendations that could mitigate the dangers of disinformation between these nuclear rivals.

First, both countries need robust state-run fact-checking mechanisms. While India’s Press Information Bureau actively debunked claims during the crisis, it focused exclusively on Pakistani disinformation. Pakistan’s equivalent platform, Fake News Buster, was inactive during the critical period, allowing falsehoods like the Kirana Hills hoax to proliferate unchallenged.

Second, independent media fact-checking capabilities must be strengthened. During the 2025 crisis, mainstream media in both countries often amplified misinformation rather than scrutinizing it. News organizations should establish dedicated verification desks modeled after international standards like Reuters Fact Check and BBC Verify. Pakistan’s Geo News has developed a fact-checking initiative that could serve as a template, while most Indian news channels lack similar resources.

Third, cross-border journalistic presence should be restored. Until 2014, both countries maintained correspondents in each other’s territories, providing first-hand verification of claims. The absence of these journalists during the crisis left both populations vulnerable to unchecked social media assertions.

Fourth, backdoor diplomatic channels must remain open even when official relations deteriorate. Historical precedent suggests that Track 1.5 and Track 2 initiatives – semi-official and unofficial diplomatic efforts – can be particularly valuable during tense periods. The Neemrana Dialogue and collaborative work between experts like Pakistan’s Rabia Akhtar and India’s Rohee Neog demonstrate how neutral platforms can facilitate productive exchange even during politically charged times.

Finally, a direct leader-to-leader hotline between prime ministers should be reactivated. While a military hotline exists, it typically functions only after escalation has begun. The prime ministerial hotline, established in 1989 and used during the 1999 Kargil War, would enable immediate high-level communication to clarify intentions and prevent misinterpretation.

Implementation of these measures faces significant challenges. Government fact-checking efforts must overcome institutional biases that prioritize national narratives over objective truth. Reinstating cross-border journalists and diplomats requires a level of trust that has eroded over years of antagonism.

Most critically, political will remains the greatest obstacle. The 2022 BrahMos incident, when India accidentally fired a cruise missile into Pakistan, demonstrated that existing communication channels often go unused precisely when they are most needed.

The May 2025 crisis has shattered previous assumptions about escalation limits between these nuclear powers. In South Asia’s increasingly volatile security environment, where fabricated information can rapidly inflame tensions, the margin between restraint and catastrophe may ultimately depend on whether reliable communication and verification mechanisms exist – and whether leaders choose to use them when it matters most.