In the aftermath of the brutal Pahalgam terrorist attack that claimed 26 innocent lives, largely Hindu tourists, a familiar yet disturbing pattern has emerged once again. The terror attack was carried out by The Resistance Force, a terrorist group affiliated with the Pakistan-based Islamic terrorist organisation Jaish-e-Mohammad. In the days following the attack, several opposition party leaders, including Congress Party President Mallikarjun Kharge, questioned the government and armed forces.
Pakistan is a rogue establishment. It not only exports terrorists to India, but also runs manipulative campaigns to exploit so-called internal dissent to create a global narrative against India. Pakistan used videos and statements of opposition party leaders and anti-BJP influencers to float a narrative that the PM Modi-led government of India was responsible for the Pahalgam terrorist attack.
What transpired following the terrorist attack in terms of setting a narrative is a textbook example of how this insidious strategy works and why it demands urgent attention from the Government of India and responsible citizens.
Pakistan’s brazen misuse of Indian internal criticisms
On 9 May, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) IT Cell Chief Amit Malviya sounded an alarm on social media as he shared a video of how the Pakistan Army used carefully selected video clips of political leaders and influencers from India to deflect global condemnation. Pakistan, in its attempt to set a narrative against India, tried to malign the Indian government.
The video shared by Malviya was a clip from the Pakistani Army’s press conference where DG ISPR Lt Gen Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry showcased videos of Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge, propagandist and YouTuber Dhruv Rathee, propagandist and influencer Neha Singh Rathore, farmer leader Rakesh Tikait, and some statements made by members of the general public, other political leaders, and pained family members of the victims.
While some of the statements were made in the heat of the moment, other statements, like those of Kharge, Tikait, Rathore, and Rathee, were meticulously designed to plant seeds of doubt among their followers. Pakistan, being Pakistan, selectively used these clips and repurposed them to depict India as a divided, unstable country that cannot manage its own internal security.
Notably, this was not a random attempt. Pakistan has frequently relied on opposition narratives from within India to boost its anti-India narrative in international forums. From Barkha Dutt to Karan Thapar, from Dhruv Rathee to Rahul Gandhi and Satyapal Malik, each one of these individuals has made anti-establishment statements on several occasions, which gave Pakistan a chance to use them as an ‘anti-India sentiment among Indian public’ on the international stage.
It is a sinister ploy where Indian voices criticising their own government are weaponised to shield Pakistan’s role in sponsoring terrorism against India.
The Pahalgam attack and security lapses
On 22nd April in Pahalgam’s Baisaran Valley, terrorists systematically targeted unarmed tourists. It was a chilling reminder of the dangers lurking across the border. Notably, in a premeditated act, the terrorists segregated and killed the victims after ensuring they were Hindus. The hatred fostered in the terror factories of Pakistan was exposed to the world.
After the attack, investigations revealed that the Baisaran area had been reopened for tourists without mandatory clearance or information being passed to the security agencies. Furthermore, the Government of India admitted there was an intelligence lapse. However, instead of standing with the victims and the government, the opposition and an array of influencers and journalists decided to attack the government with a false narrative.
Domestic voices that fuelled the fire
Many Indian opposition leaders and influencers openly criticised the Modi government. Dhruv Rathee, who is known for his propaganda-filled anti-establishment videos, claimed that it was not an intelligence failure. He claimed that the intelligence inputs were there but no preventive action was taken.
Neha Singh Rathore took it a step further by insinuating that all major terror attacks in India seem to happen under BJP rule, conveniently forgetting the horrific 26/11 Mumbai attacks under the UPA regime. Mallikarjun Kharge, meanwhile, outright blamed the incident on intelligence failure, and Tikait echoed similar sentiments.
During the press conference on Operation Sindoor (the codename given by the Government of India to the operation against Pakistan to avenge the Pahalgam terrorist attack), Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said, “We have also seen in some of the remarks that have been shown on television that the Pakistani army spokesman seems to take great joy at the fact that the Indian public should criticise the Government of India with regard to various issues. It may be a surprise to Pakistan to see citizens criticising their own government. That is the hallmark of an open and functioning democracy. Pakistan’s unfamiliarity with that should not be surprising.”
In a democratic setup, criticism is welcome and essential. The sentiment has been echoed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on several occasions. In March this year, during podcast with Lex Fridman, PM Modi called criticism “the soul of democracy”. He emphasizes the need for well-researched, fact-based critique over baseless allegations. A strong democracy, he says, flourishes when criticism is deep, informed, and fearless.”
However, timing and context matter immensely. These statements made by the opposition leaders and so-called influencers do not seek answers. They were made public at a time when the country was grappling with grief and the security forces were actively pursuing the terrorist state, Pakistan.
Pakistan seized the opportunity to play clips of mourning family members and common citizens questioning the government. In one instance, they showcased a video of a man asking why the army was not present when “lakhs of army personnel” are stationed in Kashmir. This again pointed back to the Baisaran lapse. Questioning the government must be welcomed, but the timing has to be better.
The urgent need for political maturity and policy action
India remains under constant threat from Pakistan-based terror networks. The government must act swiftly to tighten internal coordination between local bodies and security forces. There is a need for reforms in communication, clearance protocols, and intelligence sharing to avoid any lapses in the future.
At the same time, it is essential that the political class, journalists, and social influencers realise that there is weight to their words, even if the majority of the public knows that what they utter is pure propaganda. Public figures must, for once, think about India and not their own vendetta. They must maintain a balance between legitimate critique and providing ammunition to hostile states. Pakistan’s use of such statements shows how propaganda dressed as dissent can become a weapon in the hands of a hostile state.
Similar challenges have emerged globally. In the United States and Europe, adversarial states have amplified internal political divisions to sow distrust. India must prepare to combat this modern hybrid warfare without compromising its democratic values.
Conclusion
Pakistan continues to exploit a well-established strategy of using statements from India’s opposition leaders and critical voices for its propaganda narratives. Such actions by the neighbour must be called out and countered with firm statecraft and national unity. None of these influencers, political leaders, or journalists has the audacity to come forward and criticise Pakistan for using their voices for its propaganda, which can be seen as if they are comfortable being used for an enemy nation’s anti-India narrative. Why? Just because they do not like Prime Minister Narendra Modi or do not want BJP to rule the country?
The government must put an end to administrative lapses and work towards a strategy that counters both the external terror threat and internal misinformation. The country needs strong democratic institutions but also a mature discourse that does not compromise national interest in the pursuit of political point-scoring. Only then can India effectively stand strong in the face of repeated provocations and manufactured narratives from across the border.
