The Indian media has become increasingly a source of disinformation, nationalistic propaganda, and narrative control in general, facilitating the thriving of nationalistic politics at the cost of regional stability. The same pattern that was long observable in the domestic context emerged internationally quite clearly with the recent Pahalgam incident and the much-hyped so-called Operation Sindoor.

These fabrications are not minor errors; they are strategic lies with the potential to spark real-world consequences.

Hours after the attack, Indian media initiated a massive stream against Pakistan without a single evidence in sight. The truth was overlooked in the name of sensation and the laxity of the security was swept under the carpet of nationalism. In the recent past, several countries (Nepal, Iran, Bangladesh, and China) have protested against or blocked Indian media channels because they disseminated fake narratives.

What is more troubling, however, is the way that this media strategy propagates into the international discourse, now, these fake Indian narratives can be heard in some elements of Western policy commentary as well. The recent Foreign Affairs article by Vipin Narang and Pranay Vaddi is an example of the repercussions of blindly internalizing and internationalizing such fake narratives. The authors have claimed that Pakistan is building intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) as an effort to target the U.S., which is not true in the context of strategic evidence.

It appears that the authors are treading in the footsteps of their media stories that even after Palagam had said that Karachi Port was evacuated. One also wonders how such ill-informed narratives make it through the peer review. Was it even verified by the editor or any expert on the subject? These fabrications are not minor errors; they are strategic lies with the potential to spark real-world consequences. The international community should be cautious of constructing security narratives using sources that have time and again failed the basic test of reliability.

Pakistan has a long history of India-specific deterrence doctrine as the basis of its nuclear program. It has never developed, deployed, or even indicated interest in weapons with global strike capabilities. Its strategic calculus has always revolved around ensuring that it has a stable deterrence balance with its much bigger neighbor, India. Framing of Pakistan as a threat to the world and the U.S is not only unfairly defining its doctrine, but it also appears to be a cautious attempt at normalizing the growing military and missiles range capabilities of India, which is already being left unchecked.

Pakistan has never developed, deployed, or indicated interest in weapons with global strike capabilities.

Moreover, these Indian framings of warfare narratives are rarely criticized. Instead, such policy discourse is picked up without often questioning the formulation of Indian strategic discourse promoted by Indian media and political institutions. Not only does this discriminate against more realistic views, but emboldens and encourages New Delhi’s growing assertiveness, military and otherwise.

Shaheen-III is the longest-range missile in Pakistani arsenals, with a potential range of approximately 2,750 km, which can target Indian mainland areas such as far as military bases like the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. Indian missile force, on the contrary, is expanding in range and ambition.

The Agni-V missile is estimated to have a range of 7,000 to 8,000 kilometers and the under-development Agni-VI is estimated to have a range of 9,000 to 16,000 kilometers. Such ranges are much greater than the need to deter Pakistan, or even China, implying strategic aspirations to the far reaches of global power projection. However, this hegemonic growth is hardly questioned.

India is also expanding its military reach in terms of geography. As India continues to gain strategic depth far beyond the historical sweep of the subcontinent with logistical access and military infrastructure appearing in such locations as the island of Agalega, more than 4,500 kilometers beyond Pakistan, New Delhi is gaining strategic depth beyond the scope of its operation in the past.

India is gaining strategic depth far beyond the historical sweep of the subcontinent.

This kind of development is bound to cause alarm in Islamabad, as far as the defense strategists are concerned, they will have to examine new possibilities at the level of deterrence- but not against far-flung states, but against Indian facilities that are being positioned beyond traditional strike range. This is not an act of projection of power but keeping up with the extended reach of India.

Pakistan is not aiming at regional hegemony. Its military developments are directly proportional to Indian developments. Should it increase the missile ranges, it will be purely to make sure that Indian possessions that have moved far beyond the subcontinent are merely within its reach. Even though it has had nuclear weapons for decades, its no-go attitude towards intercontinental ranges speaks louder than any speculation otherwise.

What is required is a more equal international stance, one that puts India and its missile build-up and strategies under the same level of scrutiny it has tended to put Pakistan. The existing gap in perception encourages media manipulation, strategic vagueness and escalation. It puts at risk the normalization that the Indian long-range missile program is benign and that Pakistan’s defense developments are threatening. The facts speak louder, India is increasing its missile ranges, expanding its military force and its media is disseminating harmful narratives and propaganda.

The world has to stop succumbing to the narrative monopoly India has and start posing real questions.

Failure to consider this and instead berating Pakistan over its intent without presenting any concrete evidence is not only intellectually disreputable but strategically perilous. When it comes to global stability and just analysis of policy, the world has to stop succumbing to the narrative monopoly India has and start posing real questions. Propaganda needs to be called out, strategic developments, and nuclear doctrines have to be evaluated based on some principles, not on biased opinion pieces.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.