Pakistan and propaganda have become synonyms over the years. Since its inception, Pakistan has developed a habit of playing the victim card and, to some level, it has succeeded. After all, fake news travels faster than facts. A supposed dossier prepared by Pakistani authorities is now being widely circulated in several Pakistani Telegram groups and social media circles.
Notably, this dossier is not officially released yet in any international platform by the Pakistani military or the government, possibly to avoid international fact-checks, but reports say the document is being circulated internally to promote a false picture and further Pakistani narrative after India’s successful Operation Sindoor.
The tone and content, however, unmistakably reflect the narrative of Pakistan’s propaganda machinery, which has been working extensively, amplifying denial, pushing counter-accusations, and invoking calls for “neutral investigation” that never apply to its own terror proxies.
The dossier attempted to label the Pahalgam terrorist attack as a “false flag” operation by India. It went on to cite Leftist Indian journalists and “civil society” voices to discredit India’s account, much like the Hamas playbook of hiding behind civilian optics while justifying terror. It also reminds one of the Islamic State Khurasan Province’s media outreach programme, under which it publishes content, including the monthly magazine Voice of Khurasan.
Such dossiers, pamphlets, social media posts and other means of propaganda-filled content are often used by Islamic terrorist organisations as well as their funders, sympathisers or supporters to shift the narrative.
The false flag fantasy and TRF’s open confession
The dossier’s opening claim accused India of orchestrating a “false flag attack” in Pahalgam to serve internal political goals. However, it conveniently omitted the fact that the terrorists specifically targeted Hindu civilians and non-local tourists. The Resistance Front, a well-known proxy of the Pakistan-based terrorist organisation Lashkar-e-Taiba, claimed responsibility for the attack almost immediately.
India launched a military response against the terrorist camps in Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir and Pakistan only after confirmation through real-time intelligence, and the swiftness of the response was based on operational clarity, not theatrics.
Pakistan has an old habit of invoking “false flag” every time it finds itself diplomatically cornered. Be it Mumbai, Pulwama or now Pahalgam. Not to forget, the terrorists who were behind the 26/11 terrorist attack came wearing Hindu religious symbols like Kalawa. It was only because Ajmal Kasab was caught alive, thanks to ASI Tukaram Omble, that it was revealed he was an Islamic terrorist who came from Pakistan. It took Pakistan years to admit he was indeed a Pakistani.
Initially, Islamabad denied Kasab was a Pakistani, however, local media traced his house and even aired statements of his family members. It is only one example of how Pakistan has played innocent, attempted to malign the Hindu community and tried to target India on international platforms while sponsoring terrorism.
Precision strikes on terror hubs cannot be called aggression
Another narrative Pakistan tried to push via the dossier is that India launched “unprovoked aggression”. The claim wilfully ignored the fact that Indian targets were long-identified terror infrastructure hubs in Muridke, Bahawalpur and Muzaffarabad. These are not residential neighbourhoods but safe havens for terror outfits.
In fact, Pakistan tried to present an internationally designated terrorist, Hafiz Abdur Rauf, as an innocent preacher. While doing so, Pakistan’s DG ISPR made a blunder and showed his national ID, which matched the details in the US Treasury Department document declaring him a global terrorist.
Pakistan can call it aggression, but international norms recognise India’s right to pre-emptive self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter, something ironically used by the terror-sponsor Pakistan to target India. Precision strikes on active threats are not aggression. They are a necessity in a region where non-state actors operate freely under state protection.
Third-party probe talk from a habitual evader of FATF scrutiny
Pakistan called for a neutral third-party probe. Though it sounded like a good gesture, it would have sounded more convincing if it had not spent decades dodging global accountability mechanisms. The same Pakistan that was in FATF’s grey list for years and shielded 26/11 masterminds is now crying for transparency. Notably, the training camp of Ajmal Kasab and David Headley, terrorists behind 26/11 attack, was destroyed in Operation Sindoor. India has already shared credible intercepts and drone footage with its allies and showed relevant information during press conferences as well. No probe can be considered neutral if the accused has a proven history of hosting terror masterminds.
Blaming Indian media while ISPR runs CGI simulations
The dossier tried to blame Indian media for spreading “war hysteria”. However, it failed to acknowledge Pakistan’s Inter-Services Public Relations creating fantasy videos of shooting down Rafales and destroying S-400s. Indian media reports were based on intelligence inputs, TRF’s public statements and local ground reports.
On the other hand, Pakistan has not provided a single satellite image with timestamped evidence to back its claims. What it offered instead were flashy infographics, an unverifiable image of damaged mosques and lofty claims of “destroying BrahMos sites” through long-range artillery.
While Indian media presented a clear image of what happened during the India-Pakistan conflict, it is necessary to point out that there is a large section that worked against India. The videos, social media posts and reports by such media outlets, journalists and influencers were used by Pakistani media, DG ISPR and even by the creators of this dossier to target India.
For example, former governor Satyapal Malik, Rahul Pandita, The Wire’s Karan Thapar, Ajay Shukla, Radha Kumar, Siddharth Varadarajan of The Wire, Sankey Upadhyay of The Red Mike and many others presented a picture of the Pahalgam terrorist attack and Operation Sindoor in a way that made India look like the villain. Their coverage, statements, videos and social media posts were extensively used by Pakistan against India.
Glorifying Operation Bunyanum Marsoos while pretending restraint
In perhaps the most theatrical section, the dossier attempted to glorify Pakistan’s so-called “measured response” under Operation Bunyanum Marsoos. According to it, Pakistan’s military struck 26 Indian targets, downed drones, Rafales and MiGs. It also claimed that Pakistan took out BrahMos storages, all while avoiding civilian harm.
The absurdity of these claims is not lost on anyone. This narrative is not an assertion of restraint, it is a desperate attempt to equalise terror strikes on civilians with a military response against terror hubs.
Weaponising civilian optics with unverifiable mosque images
Pakistan’s standard tactic of embedding military assets in civilian zones comes back to bite them when strikes result in collateral damage. The dossier tried to portray damaged mosques and civilian deaths as evidence of India’s aggression. Yet none of the images provided carry timestamps, coordinates, or credible sources. India, meanwhile, has always maintained that it targets only verified terror hubs. The problem lies in Pakistan using religious places as operational bases for jihad. Not to forget, Pakistani officials from government and military attended funerals of terrorists.
Furthermore, when reports came out that ten family members of Jaish-e-Mohammad chief Masood Azhar were killed, an official statement came out vowing revenge.
Framing India as a serial violator to whitewash its own sins
The most ironic and final claim that the dossier made was accusing India of habitual violations of international law. Coming from a country that has long harboured Hafiz Saeed, Masood Azhar and other United Nations-sanctioned terrorists, this is rich.
India operates under global scrutiny and in accordance with international law. It is Pakistan that has repeatedly found itself isolated, whether on the FATF Grey List or in global forums that have had enough of its double games.
Pakistan’s so-called dossier is not a factual document but just a WhatsApp forward. It has been crafted to deflect, deny and defame. It is not for gaining credibility on international platforms but for internal consumption. Pakistan just wants to keep the façade of victimhood alive while denying the blood on its hands. If anything, it proves just how deeply the rot of propaganda runs in Pakistan’s state and semi-state apparatus.
