The security environment is changing as human intelligence improves. These advances have led to a post-truth political environment where psychological conflict is more common than physical. During this time, propaganda and narratives shape security, military policy, and geopolitics. Psychological warfare has dominated Indo-Pak hostilities historically, in the present, and in the 2025 escalation. Increasingly, PsyOps are being used to mobilise, manipulate, and develop statecraft tactics to destroy opponents in the post-truth political period.

Psychological warfare is vital for post-truth politics since it may take numerous forms.

Psychological warfare, or PsyOps, uses propaganda and political, economic, or military activities to deter the opponent. Psychological warfare has evolved with fighting since antiquity. He utilised PsyOps against the Greeks, Philip II of Macedon against Athens, and Cyrus the Great against Babylon. PsyOps was an important training method for armies in the 20th century, particularly for the U.S. in Korea and Vietnam and the German and Allied troops in World War II.

PsyOps is now a concentrated manifestation and essential part of all-time and space-struggle forms. Psychological warfare is vital for post-truth politics since it may take numerous forms. Using psychological methods, the truth is purposefully obliterated. This creates psychological unease and a security environment where the enemy’s public opinion cannot distinguish between truth and lies.

Since the British Raj partitioned the subcontinent, the now-nuclear powers have waged a post-truth psychological war fuelled by hate, antagonism, and violence. The first Kashmir conflict began in October 1947, soon after the lines were set, and lasted nearly a year until a ceasefire in January 1949. Indian and Pakistani PsyOps and psychological warfare began in Kashmir, where religious emotions, political disenfranchisement, and regional dynamics influenced popular opinion and supported the insurgency. Radio’s government-controlled propaganda helped fuel and feed the war by influencing views to gain support, quell insurgency, and demoralize opponents.

In 1965, India and Pakistan fought again for Jammu & Kashmir. This time, the US and USSR fought a battle that would shape future superpower relations. The Security Council passed Resolution 211 on September 20 to terminate the war. India and Pakistan signed the ceasefire on September 21 and 22 (Office of the Historian, U.S. Department of State). Unlike the first Indo-Pak war, the 1965 fight used radio broadcasts, newspapers, press photography, and poetry to alter public image and national identity beyond propaganda, showcasing post-truth narratives and PsyOps. Non-military people advanced PsyOps throughout this battle by inciting popular sentiment. Ahmad Nadeem Qasmi and Faiz Ahmed Faiz contributed with patriotism. The conflict occurred before a period when emotive appeals were prized above facts and major truths.

India effectively used its massive media sources to control the war narrative and news cycle.

The 1971 Indo-Pak War, Bangladesh’s freedom, and Pakistan’s collapse are instances of hostile, polarising psychological operations, according to Naseer. All three parties—India, East Pakistan (Bangladesh), and Pakistan—used post-truth politics and Psyops to exploit the enemy’s weaknesses, mobilise the public, and promote patriotism. Radio and airwaves were utilized by the Indian and Bangladeshi governments-in-exile to raise public morale. India used the well-defined fault lines between East and West Pakistan by generating and disseminating polarising propaganda under the guise of humanitarian aid. India widened the trust gap and created political division, which was the last straw that separated Pakistan into numerous nations.

Islamabad invaded Kargil in February 1999 with Operation Badr. In response, New Delhi launched Vijay, a military effort to repress the invaders. The attack and reply started the “first Indo-Pak televised war,” the Kargil fight. The struggle was heavily covered by Indian media, ushering in a new era of warfare when television, like radio, conveyed propaganda. India effectively used its massive media sources to control the war narrative and news cycle, gaining global support and trapping Pakistan in false views.

In the “digital age,” the internet has become a strong tool for psychological operations, or “PsyOps,” which worsen Indo-Pak tensions without using violence. The 2016 Uri incident and surgical strikes showed how the internet supports military goals. India and Pakistan used hashtags, tweets, and bots to influence public opinion, build narratives, and inspire revenge.

Both sides’ media fostered nationalist and pro-government views during the Pulwama-Balakot crisis in Islamabad and New Delhi, three years after the Uri attacks. Defence and political experts dominated social media and television during prime time on February 14, inciting anger and retribution, particularly in India. In its first response, Pakistan denied any involvement in the Pulwama catastrophe. Pakistani media supported the government’s claim that India spread false information while being less confrontational in the first news cycle.

The 2025 Indo-Pak flashpoint was a geopolitical narrative battlefield waged using post-truth manipulation, psychological techniques, and narrative canons. New Delhi and India escalated and retaliated using digital means to influence public opinion and global image. Disinformation, organised social media, deepfakes, and meme attacks increased during this crisis. After the Pahalgam incident, India launched “Operation Sindoor” and diplomatic outreach to demonise Pakistan as a terrorist state. Pakistan initiated Operation Bunyan ul Marsoos to promote strategic stability and highlight India’s human rights abuses, presenting itself as a victim of India’s harsh hegemony.

Narrative engineering is used to affect public opinion in cases like Pakistan-India antagonism.

According to Dominique Moïsi’s “The Geopolitics of Emotion”, emotions like fear, guilt, and hope are increasingly impacting geopolitics above objectivity, truth, factual information, and rationality. Moisi’s Geopolitics of Emotions theory best describes post-truth politics and PsyOps. The thesis outlines how hate of nuclear powers and emotionalism based on historical grievances have driven Indo-Pak tensions from the start. Islamabad and New Delhi use post-truth politics by brainwashing the populace with feelings and constructed narratives that blind them to facts and realities. New Delhi promotes Hindutva, whereas Islamabad emphasises Islam. India and Pakistan employ religious texts to influence the populace into fear and shame, which encourages media and social media proliferation.

India and Pakistan use post-truth politics to run their governments, particularly in wartime. Ajit Doval says, “Wars are becoming ineffective in achieving political and military objectives and are also highly expensive and are gradually becoming unaffordable.” He suggests that the fourth generation of tactics should include non-weapon attacks. Narrative engineering is used to affect public opinion in cases like Pakistan-India antagonism by spreading history, culture, religion, and philosophy. The purpose of this propaganda is to influence and distort everything to achieve state objectives

India employed Sun Tzu’s war rule attack by stratagem, post-truth politics, against Pakistan. Unconventional warfare methods, including cyber threats, artificial intelligence, and propaganda mechanisms, are central to contemporary Indian strategic thought. Sun Tzu believes that military strategy is to destroy the enemy by direct fighting, but by prioritising knowledge, cunning, and strategic preparation. India, a rival, has used Pakistan’s internal shortcomings to depict it as a terrorist haven. India spreads misinformation and negative narratives about Pakistan via propaganda and disinformation.

The former chief of Pakistan’s CIA station said, “India was motivated to highlight divergence between the USA’s and Pakistan’s interests” during the war on terror. After 9/11, they actively promoted this distinction. India stressed that Pakistan had done nothing to stop al-Qaeda before 911. They also implied a link between Pakistan’s support for Kashmir militancy, its inability to fight al-Qaeda, and its support for al-Qaeda. Pakistan was targeted by Indian propaganda

Media, the fourth pillar of the state, may influence public opinion and politics. Both nuclear-armed nations have used it to further their post-truth objectives against PsyOps. Pakistan lost a war before learning the power of media, and India exploited this weakness in 1999 by aggressively publicising the fight and selling its tale. However, both countries’ media have traditionally depicted a common past, which has fueled nationalist passions and crisis framing. This emotionalism has always tainted journalism with nationalism.

PsyOps has become more important in defeating the enemy without fighting.

In the age of post-truth politics, where lies, fact distortion, and emotionalism are so powerful that truth, objectivity, and authenticity are obscured, slowed down, ignored, and unnoticed. Jonathan Swift said, “Falsehood flies and truth comes limping after it.” PsyOps has become more important in defeating the enemy without fighting. Indo-Pak relations. Driven by resentment, animosity, and security concerns reflect this narrative via historical war, present issues, and the 2025 flashpoint.

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.