Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

In a stunning turn of events, Pakistan appears to have gained the upper hand in the information war during its recent military confrontation with India, despite India inflicting greater physical damage in the conflict. The engagement, which drew global attention particularly due to China’s overt military support of Pakistan, has sparked serious questions about India’s strategic communications approach.

The topic emerged as a key point of discussion at the inauguration of the Centre for National Security Studies (CNSS) at the Pune International Centre (PIC) earlier this month. The event, attended by serving and retired military officers along with strategic studies experts, examined how Pakistan managed to control the narrative despite military setbacks.

Pakistan’s information warfare strategy proved remarkably effective on multiple fronts. When India accused Pakistan of orchestrating the Pahalgam terrorist attack that killed 26 innocent civilians, Pakistan countered by portraying itself as a fellow victim of terrorism, claiming it had no control over terrorist organizations operating within its borders and demanding evidence of its involvement.

The Pakistani military leadership also skillfully leveraged the nuclear threat, reminding the international community that both nations possess nuclear arsenals and suggesting that an unchecked conflict could spiral into catastrophe. This approach apparently contributed to securing U.S. President Donald Trump’s intervention, which resulted in an immediate ceasefire agreement.

Despite India’s objections and calls for international sanctions against Pakistan for its alleged terrorism links, Pakistan secured a $1 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund. President Trump also promised enhanced trade relations with both countries, effectively re-hyphenating India and Pakistan on the world stage—a diplomatic setback for New Delhi, which has long worked to establish itself as the dominant regional power.

Perhaps most damaging to India’s prestige was Pakistan’s successful promotion of claims that its air force, aided by sophisticated Chinese J-10 aircraft and missiles, had shot down India’s prized Rafale jets. CNN reportedly ran this story with confirmation from Dassault Aircraft, the French manufacturer of the Rafale, while Indian denials appeared unconvincing to international observers.

The outcomes of the conflict created a stark contrast in national moods. While Pakistan celebrated to the extent that military leader General Asim Munir was elevated to the rank of field marshal and hailed as a national hero, India experienced deep disappointment over the premature ceasefire, the Rafale controversy, U.S. intervention, and the diplomatic re-hyphenation with Pakistan.

When questioned about Pakistan’s effective information management at the PIC event, Lieutenant General Vinod Khandare, Principal Adviser to India’s Ministry of Defence, noted the structural advantage Pakistan holds in information warfare. “By and large, the Pakistani media was under the control of the army, especially during the war situation. India, in contrast, had a large and diverse media which did not face similar constraints,” he explained.

The conflict highlighted the challenges democratic nations face in information warfare during military engagements. While wartime typically grants governments expanded powers to impose censorship and control information flow, India’s approach appeared fragmented. The government blocked some domestic websites reporting on the Rafale incidents, but many television stations and social media platforms continued broadcasting exaggerated claims about India’s military successes, including false reports about bombing Karachi Port.

Information warfare has become a constant in international relations, regardless of whether nations are at peace or war. The proliferation of fake news, manipulated videos, and targeted messaging campaigns—now amplified by artificial intelligence—creates a complex information environment. Political parties maintain dedicated IT cells and digital armies to promote their narratives while attacking opponents, with these campaigns increasingly crossing international boundaries.

The consequences of promoting manufactured narratives can be severe, as demonstrated by the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 based on false claims about weapons of mass destruction. Similarly, India’s “India Shining” campaign ahead of the 2004 general elections failed to resonate with voters despite its sophisticated messaging.

As one expert at the conference noted, “A nation which thrives and promotes fake narratives faces the risk of suffering the consequences of its own delusions.” The most effective counter to information warfare remains a strong, diverse, and independent media ecosystem that prizes accuracy and credibility while providing space for multiple perspectives and viewpoints.

Verify This Yourself

Use these professional tools to fact-check and investigate claims independently

Reverse Image Search

Check if this image has been used elsewhere or in different contexts

Ask Our AI About This Claim

Get instant answers with web-powered AI analysis

👋 Hi! I can help you understand this fact-check better. Ask me anything about this claim, related context, or how to verify similar content.

Related Fact-Checks

See what other fact-checkers have said about similar claims

Loading fact-checks...

Want More Verification Tools?

Access our full suite of professional disinformation monitoring and investigation tools

14 Comments

  1. The article raises important questions about the role of media manipulation and strategic messaging in modern conflicts. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for assessing the true nature of events and their implications.

  2. Isabella P. Davis on

    This is a timely and relevant topic given the heightened tensions in the region. The ability to effectively counter accusations and shift the narrative appears to have been a decisive factor in Pakistan’s information warfare strategy.

    • It will be interesting to see how this plays out going forward and what lessons can be drawn for managing information flows and public perceptions in military confrontations.

  3. Isabella L. Brown on

    Fascinating insights into the information war dynamics between India and Pakistan. It’s intriguing how Pakistan was able to shape the narrative despite military setbacks. Controlling the messaging and portraying oneself as a victim of terrorism seems to have been a key strategic move.

    • Michael Martinez on

      The article raises important questions about the role of media manipulation and strategic communications in modern conflicts. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for assessing the true nature of events.

  4. The article highlights the growing importance of information warfare in modern conflicts. Pakistan’s apparent success in this domain, despite military setbacks, is quite remarkable and worthy of further analysis.

  5. The article raises important questions about the role of media manipulation and strategic messaging in modern conflicts. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for assessing the true nature of events and their implications.

  6. The article highlights the growing importance of information warfare in modern conflicts. Pakistan’s apparent success in this domain, despite military setbacks, is quite remarkable and worthy of further analysis.

  7. Emma W. Martinez on

    This is a timely and relevant topic given the ongoing tensions in the region. The ability to effectively counter accusations and shift the narrative appears to have been a key factor in Pakistan’s information warfare strategy.

    • Oliver G. Martin on

      It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the long term and what lessons can be drawn for managing information flows and public perceptions in military confrontations.

  8. This is a complex issue with significant geopolitical implications. The ability to control the narrative and shape public opinion can be a powerful tool in the arsenal of nations engaged in military conflicts.

    • It will be interesting to see how India responds to these information warfare tactics and whether they can develop more effective strategic communications strategies in the future.

  9. This is a complex issue with geopolitical implications. The ability to control the narrative and shape public opinion can be a powerful tool in the arsenal of nations engaged in military conflicts.

    • It will be interesting to see how India responds to these information warfare tactics and whether they can develop more effective strategic communications strategies in the future.

Leave A Reply

A professional organisation dedicated to combating disinformation through cutting-edge research, advanced monitoring tools, and coordinated response strategies.

Company

Disinformation Commission LLC
30 N Gould ST STE R
Sheridan, WY 82801
USA

© 2025 Disinformation Commission LLC. All rights reserved. Designed By Sawah Solutions.