In managing the post-Pahalgam fallout, Islamabad’s new media posture reflects deeper institutional learning about the power of perception in modern geopolitics.

In the aftermath of the tragic attack in Pahalgam that claimed the lives of 26 tourists, the expected pattern of accusations and media hysteria unfolded swiftly across India’s political and media landscape. Yet, what stood out this time was not the chaos in New Delhi, but the clarity and coherence from Islamabad.

Observers noted a rare shift: Pakistan, rather than playing catch-up, was now setting the tone in the global media narrative. That in itself marked a significant and deliberate departure from the past.

Pakistan’s media strategy in previous crises was often fragmented, defensive, and reactive. From the devastating Mumbai attacks in 2008 to Pulwama in 2019, its communication apparatus struggled with credibility gaps, inconsistent messaging, and delayed engagement. But this time, the shift was visible and effective.

From the outset, Pakistan adopted a media posture that was refreshing, raw, and transparent. Top officials, including Ishaq Dar, the Foreign Minister, and Information Minister Attaullah Tarar, engaged with the global press in a manner rarely seen from South Asian leadership during such crises. They appeared in rapid succession across major international networks — CNN, BBC, Sky News, Al Arabiya, and TRT World — calmly and firmly reiterating Pakistan’s position: condemnation of the attack, denial of involvement, and a call for third-party investigation.

The strategic placement of Pakistani ministers across Western and MENA media was no coincidence. From Sky News to CNN, TRT World to Al Arabiya, the government ensured its voice was heard across multiple geopolitical spheres. These weren’t isolated interviews, they were part of a coordinated campaign to project diplomatic maturity, openness, and narrative consistency. Each minister delivered the same line: Pakistan wants transparency and accountability, not escalation.

A particularly powerful moment came when Defence Minister Khawaja Asif appeared on Sky News, where he firmly rejected Indian allegations and reiterated Pakistan’s commitment to counterterrorism. When pressed, he remained calm and factual — a tone reinforced when politician and former Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari later defended him on the same channel, applauding the civilian-military synergy and dismissing Indian media attempts to twist Pakistan’s message. Their performances showed a rare blend of political coordination and media discipline.

On social media, Pakistan’s edge became even more visible. Hashtags such as #PakistanSpeaksPeace, #TruthForKashmir, and #WhoBenefits trended globally, driven not by state bots, but by diplomats, influencers, and civil society voices who amplified a clear message: Pakistan wants peace, India wants scapegoats.

Analysts from institutions like the Carnegie Endowment and media voices such as Peter Oborne and Mehdi Hasan amplified these narratives. More importantly, real-time data backed it up: Meltwater trend analysis and GDELT’s global media sentiment tracker recorded a clear uptick in neutral-to-positive framing of Pakistan in international outlets, especially across Europe and the Middle East.

Defining the win

But what does it really mean to “win the information war”?

It’s not about collecting headlines or declaring victory—it’s about shifting perception. In this case, Pakistan’s success lies in how global media coverage evolved. Initial reports, which traditionally might have echoed India’s talking points, took on a more cautious tone. International diplomatic voices such as the United Nations, the European Union, and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation all called for restraint without endorsing India’s position.

On social media, the dominant narratives mirrored Pakistan’s framing more often than India’s, with hashtags like #PakistanSpeaksPeace trending internationally.

Meanwhile, data from platforms like Meltwater and insight tool CrowdTangle revealed that Pakistan-led content generated higher engagement than many traditional Indian outlets.

In a region where perception often precedes policy, these shifts in tone and visibility carry weight.

A more balanced comparison

To be clear, India’s media landscape is diverse, and not all outlets fanned the flames. While Republic TV and Times Now pushed immediate retaliation narratives, platforms like NDTV and The Hindu urged restraint and emphasised the need for evidence. Editorials in Scroll.in and The Wire also questioned the government’s rush to assign blame without investigation.

Still, the difference in institutional behaviour was stark. While New Delhi restricted access to Kashmir and shut down communications, Islamabad invited international correspondents, held a closed-door roundtable, and provided background briefings. One European journalist described it as “a new era of media access in Islamabad.”

Why the shift—and why now?

This sudden pivot in Pakistan’s media maturity wasn’t accidental. Multiple officials have hinted at an internal restructuring of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s office and the Foreign Ministry’s communications arms. Others point to external diplomatic pressure—from Gulf allies and international organisations—pushing Islamabad toward credibility over confrontation.

Also at play is a deeper institutional realisation: that in an era of real-time information, perception equals power. For Pakistan, too long on the defensive, this moment was a chance to demonstrate coherence and competence.

None of this suggests that Pakistan has suddenly become immune to criticism. But this time, the alignment between state messaging, international media access, and digital diplomacy was unusually tight, and it showed.

Pakistani outlets like Geo, ARY, and Dawn supported the message without resorting to nationalistic hype. Instead of heated debates and blame, they focused on calls for investigation, diplomacy, and restraint.

These gains are fragile. One contradiction, an inflammatory statement, or a lapse in transparency could reverse the momentum. But for now, Pakistan has proven that it can speak with one voice, in a global language, and be taken seriously.

That isn’t just a media win. It’s a diplomatic one.