A game of narratives The Statesman 27 May 2025
Article Read Time
A game of narratives The Statesman 27 May 2025
Wars will always be fought on the battlefield however acceptance of victory by the national public as also internationally would be determined based on narratives in the media, especially when there is no loss or gain of territory, as was the case in Operation Sindoor. India had no intention of launching a ground offensive to capture territory.
It had only sought to send a message on its tolerance limits for terrorist strikes, over which it would respond. The message was sent and received by those that matter in Pakistan, and definitely not the common Pakistani, who has been brainwashed by his media.
Well played out narratives in media networks result in acceptance by the global public on which side emerged stronger on conflict termination. On the narrative front, Pakistan, backed by China as also its paid handles in the west, won this battle.
Pakistan’s media channels, controlled by their DGISPR (Director General Inter Services Public Relations) pushed a narrative determined by them, while Indian media houses attempted to play to the gallery, on occasions, even going ridiculously overboard. Their theatrics did far more damage than good especially with their ludicrous announcements.
Indian official media briefing was based on truth and facts, while Pakistan conveyed fake narratives to convince the world of its success. Pakistan’s heads of DGISPR gave rambling stories of victory with no evidence, reiterating their damaging strikes and resultant losses to India, even when there was none. Geolocations based on their narratives yielded zilch, yet was played up convincingly across the world.
On social media, Chinese and Pak media handles joined hands to project exaggerated Indian losses while claiming a Pak victory in the initial stages of the conflict. In addition, Pakistan journalists, embedded with multiple global media houses published articles adding to their narratives. The impact was evident when they, as also western strategic analysts, even on Indian TV channels, reiterated Pakistan’s boasts as true.
The Pak narrative was that their air defences, based on Chinese equipment, was invincible. It was so successfully projected that many believed that cheap Chinese copies of Russian fighters and air defence systems had succeeded in thwarting Indian strikes led by modern French and Russian fighters. They also conveyed that Turkish and Chinese UAVs caused significant damage to Indian defence installations. Nothing could be further from the truth.
India, on the contrary, adopted a cautious approach, with the foreign secretary, Vikram Misri, leading two women officers in conveying the impact of Indian strikes in the initial phases of Operation Sindoor. The reports were factual, devoid of theatrics, nor were questions taken. This left many to doubt Indian claims since the Pak narrative, backed by fake or AI altered images, were ruling media networks.
India was not playing to the gallery but sharing reality. Possibly, the intent could have been to let Pakistan’s fake narrative build before puncturing it. If so, this was an error. By the time India changed its briefing pattern by bringing in the Director General of Military Operations (DGMOs) of the three services, many were already convinced of Pakistan’s narrative.
Hence, even questions raised during the Indian DGMOs briefings by own media personalities were largely not on its achievements and damages across the border, but to confirm Pakistan’s claims on Indian material losses.
Indian military personnel only highlighted destruction of those targets whose evidence they possessed, not on assumptions and whenever they were in doubt, they refused to comment. This should have been accepted but then sadly, India is filled with doubting Thomases.
Pakistan’s politicians and media personalities joined their fake narrative bandwagon, with no politician, irrespective of party affiliation, contradicting their military spokesperson. In India, it was the reverse. Government ministers stayed away from the media while operations were ongoing, only coming to fore after ceasefire was declared and military briefings came to an end.
Even when they emerged, they commenced threatening Pakistan, keeping forthcoming elections in mind, rather than explaining to the public on what was the national strategy and how it was achieved.
Simultaneously, members of the opposition and anti-government media personalities played the Pakistan narrative questioning Indian material losses, even if they did not exist. They ignored the armed forces mention that no nation declares its material losses. Even Pakistan has not admitted to its losses, aware that they were significantly higher. While the intent was to let the government down on claiming success of Operation Sindoor in forthcoming elections, they inadvertently played into Pakistan’s hands.
To justify their success in Operation Bunyanum Marsoos, Pakistan media networks quoted statements made by Indian politicians and media personalities. Even the dossier released by Pakistan on the Pahalgam attack and subsequent operations, had quotes and social media comments from Indian politicians and media personalities.
Hence, many western media houses and known strategists backed the Pakistan view that India, while it did strike its desired targets, suffered major losses. What Pakistan gained was that the world re-accepted the fact that Kashmir is disputed and a potential flashpoint.
Both nations also played different narratives on what led to the ceasefire. Pakistan thanked US President Donald Trump for pushing India to accept the same, while India insisted that it was accepted post talks between the two DGMOs. The Indian narrative once again faltered because its opposition politicians, questioned the role of Trump.
Was Trump just seeking credit where not due by continuously claiming credit for the ceasefire or was it intentionally designed by the pro-Pak lobby in his administration or simply to thwart outright Indian victory claims, thereby bailing out Pakistan for another day, is unknown.
The Indian narrative finally began gaining ground post movement of delegations of parliamentarians to different parts of the globe. Their messages of Indian intent, thought process behind keeping the IWT in abeyance as also response to terrorism are now being projected. This should have been done by government ministers as also Indian ambassadors and high commissioners as soon as operations commenced.
Historically, India has achieved a first. It has brought a nuclear-powered neighbour, backed by Chinese and Turkish military power, to its knees in just four days, while Israel continues in its attempts to subdue Gaza. It has proved that Chinese and Turkish military products cannot survive a major conflict. This should have been globally appreciated and accepted but was lost solely because we never had a narrative nor were our ministries and diplomats working in tandem nor did our opposition politicians and media houses behave maturely.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army