Strategic Narratives: Analyzing the May 2025 India-Pakistan Crisis

Pakistan and India have shared a turbulent history of disputes and conflicts since gaining independence. The core of these issues centers around Kashmir, a contested territory claimed by both states. Over the decades, both nations have remained locked in a persistent struggle to maintain a balance of power and mutual assured deterrence in South Asia. The recent escalation in tensions between India and Pakistan from May 6 to May 10, 2025, rekindled their longstanding rivalry. More importantly, it exposed several critical narratives and perceptions propagated by the Indian administration in New Delhi—domestically, internationally, and to the common citizens on both sides of the border.

India has made significant investments in its military forces, building one of the largest military infrastructures in the world and positioning itself as a regional counterweight to China. Its defense and strategic partnerships with global powers—such as the United States, France, Russia, and Israel—have bolstered its image as a formidable military power, or at least shaped a perception to that effect. However, the recent conflict revealed enduring challenges: operational deficiencies, intelligence failures, and a notable lack of strategic clarity. The gap between military procurement and operational readiness remains substantial. Despite claims of modernization and a push for indigenous defense production, India’s military capabilities have yet to fully align with its geopolitical ambitions. Moreover, the clarity of decision-making and preparedness for emergency situations were both evidently lacking during the recent standoff.

In contrast, Pakistan—despite its relative disadvantage in terms of military hardware—handled the situation with notable efficiency and decisiveness. Islamabad’s response effectively countered Indian aggression, preserving deterrence and the regional balance of power.

The standoff also saw a surge in misinformation, spread rapidly by fringe elements on social media and amplified by mainstream Indian media outlets. These platforms circulated unverified claims and manipulated news, reflecting a disturbing erosion of journalistic standards. What was once considered fringe nationalism has now been absorbed into the mainstream media narrative. This disinformation ecosystem, often aligned with government messaging, may serve short-term political goals but severely undermines India’s long-term credibility. The stark contrast between the information circulated in Indian media and that reported by international outlets further damaged India’s global image. In an interconnected world, such fabrications not only compromise diplomatic credibility but also hinder strategic communication.

India aspires to be seen as a rising global power—an influential actor in multilateral forums and a champion of the Global South. Its expanding international exposure and economic engagements with major powers have shaped a hegemonic mindset, often leading to antagonistic posturing toward Pakistan. It frequently accuses Pakistan of sponsoring regional instability and terrorism, expecting the international community to endorse its narrative. However, the international reaction to the May crisis revealed a different picture. The muted and cautious responses from major powers, who mostly called for restraint rather than voicing support for India, indicated a shift in perception. Key regional actors remained largely aloof. Despite India’s extensive diplomatic efforts, it failed to garner strong international backing during this critical juncture. This highlighted a gap between India’s projected diplomatic stature and its actual geopolitical influence. The incident served as a reminder that global interests, while often dictated by strategic alliances, still retain space for moral judgment and balanced diplomacy.

India’s belief in its military and economic superiority has long driven a dismissive attitude toward Pakistan. Over the past decade, Indian leadership has frequently claimed that Pakistan is no longer its main rival—an assertion that paradoxically framed India as the aggressor. The recent military confrontation suggested a shift from a strategy of deterrence to one of managed supremacy, seemingly designed to test Pakistan’s aerial defense and broader strategic capabilities. These moves pointed toward an attempt by India to redefine norms in the realm of nuclear posturing—posing a direct challenge to Pakistan’s military and political leadership. As a result, Islamabad was thrust into a strategic dilemma, fundamentally affecting the dynamics of regional security and international relations.

Faced with this strategic dilemma, Pakistan responded with a measured, timely, and effective counter. Islamabad not only safeguarded its national security interests but also thwarted India’s broader strategic aims. India’s failure to achieve its primary objectives during the escalation underscored the limitations of its approach and affirmed Pakistan’s capability to maintain deterrence and regional stability. India failed to achieve most of its objectives behind the recent escalation, while Pakistan successfully upheld the regional balance of power and deterrence. This decisive response will have clear and long-term implications for bilateral relations between the two states. Pakistan’s calibrated response served to preserve the status quo of deterrence, while simultaneously challenging India’s ambitions of regional dominance. The episode also raised critical questions about strategic communication, the role of media in international conflicts, and the real-world limits of diplomatic influence in a multipolar world.

The author is a researcher, columnist, and the founder of Political Frontline. He holds a master degree in International Relations and has a wide experience of writing in various news forums on issues related to diplomacy, conflict and political economy. He tweets on @BarkatViews2