During a press conference on April 29, the Director General of the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) of the Pakistan Army, Lieutenant General Ahmed Sharif Choudhary, introduced a new term: “state-sponsored cross-border terrorism” in reference to India. This phrase is the latest addition to a long history of information warfare strategies employed by the ISPR, which aims to create false equivalences and divert attention from Pakistan’s own extensive record of sponsoring terrorism. Previous narratives, such as #IIOJK, #Fitna_al_Khawarij, and #DigitalTerrorists, were also designed to distract both domestic and international audiences from the internal crises and external conflicts faced by the Pakistani state.
Despite his outward confidence, Lt Gen Choudhary’s claims did not resonate. His allegations fell flat because the international community increasingly views the Indian Army (IA) as a professional and apolitical organization, strictly adhering to the constitutional framework of the Republic of India. Unlike their counterparts in the Pakistan Army (PA) and its intelligence agency, the ISI, who have historically employed jihadist proxies for foreign policy purposes, Indian Army officers and Junior Commissioned Officers (JCOs) do not train, guide, or incite terrorists.
Pakistan Army: A Legacy of Political Subversion and Regional Destabilization
Since its inception, the Pakistan Army has functioned not just as a military institution but as a parallel power centre—intervening in political affairs, suppressing dissent, and enabling regional destabilization. Its track record includes:
- Political interference: From the 1971 political intimidation of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman that led to the creation of Bangladesh to the current marginalization of Imran Khan and his supporters in the PTI, the PA has manipulated Pakistan’s democratic processes through coups, hybrid governance models, and electoral engineering.
- Judicial and media suppression: Journalists like Ashraf Sharif and Imran Riaz Khan have faced abductions or worse. The imposition of digital firewalls and censorship reveals the state’s fear of internal truth-telling.
- Internal repression: The Islamabad massacre of November 2024, suppression of Baloch and Pashtun voices, and routine abuses in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KPK) reflect a pattern of using military power against Pakistan’s citizens.
Terrorism as state policy: The PA has a long history of sponsoring terrorism across borders:
- The 1947-48 tribal invasions of Kashmir, Operation Gibraltar (1965), and support to North-Eastern insurgents.
- Proxy terror in J&K since the 1990s, including support to JKLF, Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM).
- High-profile attacks like the 1993 Mumbai blasts, 2008 26/11 attacks, Pathankot (2016), Pulwama (2019), and the recent Pahalgam massacre (2025)—where credible intelligence has named a serving SSG commando, Musa, as involved.
- Evidence and denial: India has shared irrefutable evidence—such as that relating to Tahawwur Rana, SSG operative Saifullah in Basantgarh, and multiple terror modules—but Pakistan has consistently refused accountability.
- Regional interference: Pakistan’s disruptive role in Afghanistan—including the activities of Colonel Imam (Tariq Mehmood) and support for ISKP against the Taliban—is well documented and further undermines its credibility as a stabilizing force.
Why the Press Conference Now?
The ISPR’s press briefing appears to serve multiple objectives:
- Propaganda Equalization: By falsely accusing the Indian Army of acts that the PA is itself guilty of, Pakistan seeks to level the moral field and justify its reactions. It also aims to restore morale within a fatigued and fractured PA.
- Internal Consolidation: With Gen Munir’s leadership under scrutiny, the press conference attempts to rally domestic support and shift attention away from governance failures and internal dissent.
- International Narrative Management: Facing mounting evidence of direct military involvement in terror attacks, the ISPR aims to sow confusion in global opinion and delay diplomatic censure.
Contrasting Ethos: IA vs. PA
The Indian Army remains a national institution, with representation across the country’s regions, operating under civilian oversight and upholding the Constitution. In contrast, the Pakistan Army is often seen as a Punjabi-dominated force with disproportionate political and economic control, alienating provinces like Balochistan, Sindh, and KPK.
While the PA is dealing with internal dissent, desertions, and factional discontent, the IA continues to demonstrate high cohesion, public trust, and operational excellence—qualities that reaffirm its legitimacy not only at home but on the international stage.
A Failing Narrative
The ISPR’s attempt to vilify the Indian Army is a textbook case of psychological projection. As Pakistan’s deep state grapples with growing domestic unrest and international isolation, its reliance on misinformation, hybrid warfare, and proxy terrorism only deepens its strategic failure.
India, by contrast, retains the initiative—militarily, diplomatically, and morally. The world is watching, and the contrasts are more apparent than ever.
Team BharatShakti
