How to tell Pakistan’s story

Pakistan reached a high-water mark in communication during the May 6–10 India-Pakistan war and in the aftermath. It ascended to a new reputational altitude not only because of its decisive aerial, cyber and land performance during the war, but also because of the way it told its story to the world. The downed Rafales became front-page headlines, and Pakistan’s narrative struck a chord across global audiences.

We should also be thankful to India, for it inadvertently conceded failure. This was evident when India sent its parliamentary delegations to world capitals to present its version of the war and terrorism, with the goal of countering Pakistan’s “misinformation at the international level”.

This act alone sent a loud signal that India’s carefully fabricated narrative about the Pahalgam attack, its lack of evidence against Pakistan, and its supposed ‘successes’ during the war had failed to convince the world. Indian parliamentarians were forced to travel personally to explain and clarify India’s position. Their efforts fell flat. Not only did they fail to achieve their objectives, but they also made the US and President Trump more unfriendly towards India.

India’s delegations gave the impression of a state pushed against the wall. Their posture was far from that of a humble communicator. Instead, they resembled a drillmaster berating global capitals for not praising them, shoving down instructions rather than engaging in dialogue.

Pakistan scored its first major success when international media and diplomatic actors began questioning India about its security lapse before the attack. They sought hard evidence of Pakistan’s alleged involvement. The real windfall followed when Indian media, tipped and fed by government sources and the BJP’s disinformation engines, began broadcasting fabricated stories of Indian military conquests. Claims of capturing Islamabad, Lahore and Karachi and of Pakistan’s surrender spread across Indian channels. Fact-checking disappeared. Credibility collapsed.

On June 4, ‘The Washington Post’ ran a story exposing the systematic use of fake news by top Indian television networks, which had inundated the country’s information ecosystem with deliberate falsehoods. Meanwhile, Indian Prime Minister Modi and his cabinet hid behind these lies, relying on aggressive anchors and loud panels to push their agenda. They believed such deception was ‘legit’ in the fog of war. But India had too much to hide. Reuters and Bloomberg’s real-time fact-checking debunked India’s stories. This marked the climax of a pattern – a media landscape acting as an echo chamber for the BJP’s anti-Pakistan, anti-Muslim and anti-Kashmir rhetoric.

By contrast, Pakistani media stuck to facts. Except for a single report on India bombing Afghan territory – promptly withdrawn – there were no systemic distortions. Pakistani media persons were strident and patriotic, but not misleading. There was no vilification of Hinduism or the Indian army in general – only of Hindutva and the Modi-led aggression. Pakistani media’s accounts were endorsed by reputable international media, validating Pakistan’s position.

This was a real reputational breakthrough. To appreciate it, one must recall Pakistan’s image before Pahalgam. Although perceptions were improving, helped by a more conciliatory US tone and signs of macroeconomic recovery, the shadow of the war on terror still stalked the country’s reputation. Pakistan was seen as a security-centric state, not an economic partner or strategic peer.

This changed overnight. The world saw the composure and precision with which Pakistan defended itself against a larger, aggressive neighbour. Pakistan's strategic capabilities and restraint became clear. Barron’s and investment entities began advising clients to re-evaluate Pakistan’s economic potential. The country began to be seen not as a threat, but as a destination.

A sharpened, sustained communication strategy must now follow this success. India is attempting to rewrite the history of the war through propaganda. This effort is not working but is being supported by embedded assets and Indophiles in influential networks. These actors argue that India introduced a valid counterterrorism doctrine, enabling it to strike deep inside Pakistan, below the nuclear threshold, without proof.

Pakistan needs a precise communication strategy that dismantles these myths, highlights the weaponisation of terrorism against it, and exposes India’s hostile acts, including its unlawful suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty. This is not just about India; it's about Pakistan’s own story. Our communication must reflect Pakistan’s aspirations, sacrifices, potential, and the talent of its people.

We must show how engagement with Pakistan is in the global interest. In the days following the war, influential media outlets around the world published constructive stories on Pakistan. We must ensure this momentum doesn’t peter out. In communication, timing is crucial – and now is the time to place Pakistan firmly on the global agenda, with neither bravado nor self-doubt.

Our communication should not focus only on Western capitals. We must expand our outreach to the media in Islamic countries, ASEAN states, Japan, and South Korea. China, with its 69 media groups and over 2,500 news outlets, shapes global narratives. But we must not follow a cookie-cutter approach. Each region has its own information ecosystem and cultural lens. Messages must be contextual and tailored.

Television is no longer the dominant medium. Few young people consume news through TV or newspapers. Our investment must shift to cyberspace: social media, video content, email campaigns, blog posts and platforms like WhatsApp, YouTube and Vimeo. Messages should be short, sharp, and impactful – not ponderously erudite or didactic.

A multi-phased communication strategy is needed – one for the present, centred on the war, and one for the long term, focused on nation branding. This strategy must be shaped by professionals familiar with the terrain of digital media, and delivered by communicators with proven competence. Communication quacks will do more harm than good.

The thread running through all this must be a deep conviction: that the time has come for Pakistan to become one of the strongest nations in the world, militarily, economically, and morally. And that its people – resilient and brilliant – will make this a reality.

The writer is a former ambassador of Pakistan to the US, UN and China. He is also the former president of Azad Jammu and Kashmir.