Special Report
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”- Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Germany’s chief propagandist.
Recently, this chilling doctrine of political deception seems to have found a new disciple in the RSS backed Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) regime in India. After the Pahalgam, New Delhi launched not just a military response but a far more dangerous campaign-a battle to control narratives, suppress dissent, and manufacture public consent through relentless propaganda. Just like Goebbels understood the power of repetition over truth, the BJP has turned Pahalgam into a political masterstroke. Not to mourn the dead or seek peace-but to tighten its grip on power, marginalize the opposition, and silence any voice that dares challenge its version of events.
Now, let’s step into how this strategy unfolded-and how Pakistan’s measured but firm response shattered not just India’s military arrogance, but also its carefully built illusion of diplomatic supremacy.
In the stormy aftermath of the Pahalgam incident and the ensuing Indo-Pak military conflict, what has emerged is not just a geopolitical clash-but a deeper crisis of political legitimacy and diplomatic coherence within India itself. While headlines screamed military escalation, the real battlefield may have been India’s internal political theater, where the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party executed a calculated maneuver to silence the opposition, manipulate public sentiment, and control the narrative both at home and abroad.
The BJP’s response to the crisis was not merely reactionary; it was a meticulously curated political gambit.
Perhaps the most telling indicator of this strategy was the inclusion of opposition figure Dr. Shashi Tharoor in an international outreach delegation. Initially touted as a sign of bipartisan unity, this move quickly revealed itself to be a classic case of political bait. As Congress leader Rahul Gandhi initiated a sharp campaign against Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s handling of national security, the BJP co-opted Congress’ global face into a tightly controlled narrative framework-thus neutralizing the very voices that had begun to question the government’s performance.
This strategic co-optation left India’s opposition boxed in. Publicly roped into national security affairs, yet politically muzzled at home, the Congress found itself inadvertently validating a narrative it privately contested. By the time the domestic discourse turned towards accountability-particularly over questions like the actual damage inflicted on India’s military infrastructure and aircrafts during Operation Sindoor-it was too late. BJP had already framed itself as the sole custodian of national interest.
Contradictions of Indian Diplomacy
India’s diplomatic messaging during the crisis revealed a stark inconsistency. On one hand, New Delhi clung to its long-standing doctrine that Kashmir is a bilateral issue under the 1972 Simla Agreement. On the other, it launched a wide-ranging international lobbying effort, engaging Gulf states, African nations, and members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. The contradiction did not go unnoticed. The Foreign Ministry’s conspicuous silence- especially the absence of Minister Subramanyam Jaishankar during critical junctures-further underscored the incoherence of India’s foreign policy. In his place, a patchwork of unofficial diplomatic envoys was deployed, but this lacked strategic clarity. What emerged was a paradox: a state claiming bilateralism while actively internationalizing conflict with Pakistan.
Diplomatic Isolation, Not Consolidation
India’s efforts to diplomatically isolate Pakistan backfired. Contrary to its expectations, a number of global and regional powers extended diplomatic backing or moral support to Pakistan’s call for de-escalation and dialogue. Countries like Turkey, China, Azerbaijan, and Central Asian bloc unequivocally supported Pakistan’s position. Even traditionally neutral Western actors such as the United States and the European Union stopped short of endorsing India’s claims, instead urging both nations to step back and resume diplomatic channels. Washington’s stance was particularly noteworthy. President Donald Trump, once hailed in India as a staunch ally and a best-friend, has distanced himself from India’s narrative. Trump notably confirmed that Pakistan never sought a ceasefire and has taken a neutral stance, much to the dismay of Indian policymakers. His unexpected decision to step in as a mediator during the recent escalation stunned audiences and drew backlash within India.
Furthermore, Trump has reiterated his earlier offers to mediate the Kashmir dispute-an implicit recognition that the issue is no longer a strictly bilateral matter. This growing internationalization of Kashmir, once a red line for Indian diplomacy, signals a significant collapse in India’s foreign policy objectives and exposes the weakening of its strategic clout, further deepening India’s diplomatic embarrassment. India finds itself increasingly isolated on the global stage. The only country that extended full throated support to India was Israel-a relationship rooted in ideological convergence. That Tel Aviv stood alone speaks volumes about the Modi government’s diminishing international credibility.
A Repeated Aggression Pattern of Aggression
India’s handling of this crisis is not an isolated incident-it is part of a disturbing pattern. From threats to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty, to the atrocities against minorities, to crackdowns on dissent in Indian Illegally occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK), the current Indian regime is seen by many in Pakistan and systematically beyond as dismantling democratic values in favor of majoritarian control.
The human rights situation in Kashmir remains dire. Thousands of enforced disappearances, the use of pellet guns, curfews, and communication blackouts have been documented by international rights bodies such as Amnesty International and the UNHRC. The BJP government’s posture-both militaristic and dismissive-has only worsened matters. Furthermore, allegations of Indian involvement in the targeted assassinations of Sikh leaders abroad and continued support for Baloch insurgent groups (such as BLA) raise further questions about the moral compass of a country that brands itself as the world’s largest democracy.
India’s recent treatment of Rohingya refugees, reportedly pushing them into dangerous waters without protection, and its habitual labeling of all Kashmiri resistance as “terrorism,” reflect an alarming tendency to delegitimize entire populations in pursuit of narrow political gains.
A Rogue state
Despite India’s persistent attempts to malign Pakistan on the global stage by painting it as a sponsor of terrorism, no sovereign state or credible international body has officially designated Pakistan as a terrorist state. In sharp contrast, India’s recent move to unilaterally suspend the Indus Waters Treaty – a binding agreement brokered by the World Bank in 1960 – has exposed its blatant disregard for international law and multilateral commitments.
This act of strategic recklessness underscores India’s transformation into a rogue state that selectively honors international agreements only when convenient. It sets a dangerous precedent and threatens regional peace and environmental stability.
Fake News Factory – Godi Media
The Indian media-particularly the notable “Godi Media”-played a critical role in sustaining the government’s narrative during the crisis. Instead of investigative reporting or balanced analysis, what audiences witnessed was a barrage of speculative war-mongering, headlines, unverified military claims.
Prominent anchors peddled stories of “crushing victory,” “conquering major cities of Pak,” and “total Pakistani isolation,” even as international reports and footage released by Pakistan contradicted these claims. Pakistani authorities, by contrast, publicly released videos showing the impact of their precision strikes, radar footage of engagements, and images of damaged Indian military sites- evidence that India has so far failed to counter with anything substantive. Such distortion of facts not only weakens journalistic integrity in India but also contributes to regional instability. A population misinformed by state aligned media cannot engage in informed democratic processes, nor can it hold its government accountable.
Pakistan’s Measured Confidence
While India resorted to theatrics and narrative manipulation, Pakistan’s military and diplomatic approach remained measured yet effective. According to DG ISPR, Pakistan’s response was delayed not out of fear, but from a position of restraint and responsibility. The eventual retaliation-targeting 26 verified Indian military sites-was precise, proportionate, and, most importantly, documented with transparency. Pakistan has made it clear: it does not desire war but will defend its sovereignty when provoked. The international community has taken note-not just of Pakistan’s tactical readiness, but of its moral high ground in maintaining restraint amid Indian provocations.
Looking Forward
India’s strategy of using crisis to cement political power, stifle opposition, and control narratives might yield short-term gains for the BJP-but it comes at the cost of long-term diplomatic trust, internal stability, and regional peace. As the dust settles on the most intense India-Pakistan standoff in recent memory, the world sees not a triumphant India, but a nation grappling with its own contradictions. A state that preaches bilateralism while internationalizing conflict; that claims moral authority while weaponizing disinformation; and that silences opposition in the name of unity while stoking division for political gain. Pakistan must navigate the post-standoff terrain with strategic foresight and caution. While global sentiment has increasingly questioned India’s credibility, the threat of covert provocations remains real. False flag operations, state-sponsored disinformation, and hybrid warfare tactics-including efforts to destabilize Balochistan through proxies like the BLA-are likely to intensify. India’s ruling establishment, having weaponized crisis for political consolidation, will not hesitate to extend its aggression beyond borders to regain lost narrative ground. In this critical phase, Pakistan must remain united, bolster internal security, and fortify its diplomatic channels. The international community may be awakening to India’s contradictions-but Pakistan’s vigilance will determine how long that clarity lasts.