In Pakistan, military tensions with India tend to reignite nationalistic pride. These moments often see a renewed wave of unity, propelled by shared sentiment, media narratives, and a collective commitment to national defence. In such times, a remarkable shift occurs: any prior focus on internal challenges is often superseded by strong displays of patriotism and unwavering support for the armed forces.
The past few days have been nothing short of a whirlwind — counterattacks between both countries, drones buzzing overhead, and explosions echoing through the air. On Wednesday, 7 May 2025, India launched an attack that escalated tensions to new heights, pushing the region closer to full-blown conflict. By late Friday night, the situation seemed on the brink of further escalation. An intense eight hours of negotiation followed, mediated by the United States (US), which ultimately led to a fragile ceasefire agreement by midday on Saturday. President Trump later confirmed the deal, announcing it on his X account.
In Pakistan, conflict with India often alters the national sentiment, not through diplomatic solutions or resolutions, but through the powerful emotion of defending the nation. In times of conflict, the media’s role becomes crucial, shaping narratives that define public perception. In Pakistan, both state-run and private media outlets serve as tools for rallying national sentiment. After India’s midnight strikes, the government lifted its ban on X, ending restrictions imposed since the February 2024 elections. The move turned X and other platforms into national arenas of communication, enabling both government messaging and public engagement. Television programs, social media, and informal channels flooded the public with a unified message: national pride and defence of sovereignty.
In Pakistan, conflict with India often alters the national sentiment, not through diplomatic solutions or resolutions, but through the powerful emotion of defending the nation.
For India, online propaganda and false information escalated nationalistic sentiment. For instance, on 9 May 2025, major Indian channels aired blatant falsehoods — DNA’s X account claimed “India attacks Pakistani Capital Islamabad,” Zee News insisted Pakistan’s capital had fallen, and Aaj Tak simulated a live strike on Karachi Port from their studio. Such orchestrated media messaging not only stirs emotion but also silences dissent, creating an atmosphere where questioning the state’s actions is seen as unpatriotic.
As airstrikes echoed across the border, the streets of Pakistan told their own story. Youth draped in national flags poured into public squares and neighbourhoods, blasting patriotic songs from loudspeakers and car stereos. What began as fear soon turned into fervour — rallies sprang up in major cities, with people chanting slogans in support of the armed forces. In some areas, locals reportedly used personal firearms to shoot down Indian drones hovering over their homes. In one widely shared image, a local was seen firing an unidentified flying object alongside a soldier.
On 10 May 2025, people in Islamabad took part in an anti-India protest, waving Pakistan’s national flags. Even previous critics of the government joined in, swept up in the patriotic wave. After a ceasefire was announced, people came out to welcome military convoys, showering them with flowers and chanting slogans. Soon after, the nation observed Youm-i-Tashakur (Day of Gratitude), as called for by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. The police in Islamabad organised a flag march in solidarity with the armed forces. National pride surged, transcending political divides and turning emotion into visible, collective action.
While patriotic chants filled the streets, the digital space became an equally powerful arena. Social media platforms like X, Instagram, and Facebook turned into frontlines where narratives were shaped, contested, and amplified. Hashtags surged, videos went viral, and timelines filled with images of victory, defiance, and national unity. In response to Indian claims, Pakistani users flooded platforms with memes, counter-narratives, and assertive messaging — rejecting external pressure and reinforcing national resolve. During a media briefing, the Director-General of Inter-Services Public Relations (DGISPR) praised Pakistani youth for their active role on the digital front. He commended the way they led the cyber response and referred to them as “information and cyber warriors” of the conflict. After the ceasefire, political leaders and citizens praised the Pakistan Army. The government later declared 10 May as Bunyan-un-Marsoos Day, marking it a moment of national pride and recognition for the armed forces.
This conflict has made one thing unmistakably clear: the court of public sentiment can decide a war’s fate. In democracies, wars do not just play out on the battlefield, but in the minds of citizens. A well-crafted narrative can bolster public confidence in the armed forces; a mishandled one can erode trust. History has shown this time and again. During the 1968 Tet Offensive in Vietnam, graphic television footage of urban fighting and civilian casualties undercut support for the US military effort, turning public mood decisively against the war.
In today’s media-saturated environment, where news cycles move fast and emotions run high, shaping the narrative has become as crucial as winning the war itself. We saw the same dynamic play out in Pakistan: viral images of drones, street rallies, and civilians firing back stoked national pride and resilience, just as much as any frontline victory.
War should never be glorified, no matter how compelling the narrative may seem. While media coverage and viral moments can stir national pride, they often obscure the harsh realities of conflict. The real danger lies in turning war into a spectacle that briefly unites but ultimately leaves behind deep scars. In the case of India and Pakistan, history continues to show that every escalation comes at a high human and economic cost. True strength lies not in how a nation fights, but in how it prevents the next confrontation. The focus must shift from celebrating conflict to valuing peace. Only then can lasting reconciliation begin and a more stable future take shape.
