Latest news with #GenAsimMunir
Washington Post
7 days ago
- General
- Washington Post
How misinformation overtook Indian newsrooms amid conflict with Pakistan
NEW DELHI — Shortly after midnight on May 9, an Indian journalist received a WhatsApp message from Prasar Bharati, the state-owned public broadcaster. Pakistan's army chief had been arrested, the message read, and a coup was underway. Within minutes, the journalist posted the information on X and others followed suit. Soon enough, it was splashed across major Indian news networks and went viral on social media. The 'breaking news' was entirely false. There had been no coup in Pakistan. Gen. Asim Munir, far from being behind bars, would soon be elevated to the rank of field marshal. It was the most glaring — but far from the only — example of how misinformation swept through Indian newsrooms last month during several of the most violent nights between the nuclear-armed neighbors in decades. The Washington Post spoke to more than two dozen journalists from some of India's most influential news networks, as well as to current and former Indian officials, about how the country's information ecosystem became inundated with falsehoods — and how it warped the public's understanding of a crucial moment. The journalists spoke on the condition that their names and employers remain anonymous, fearing professional reprisals. Most of the officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information. As the fighting escalated night after night, few Indian officials were put forward to explain what was happening, said Nirupama Rao, India's former foreign secretary. The vacuum was filled on television newscasts by 'hypernationalism' and 'abnormal triumphalism,' Rao said, creating what she called a 'parallel reality.' Times Now Navbharat reported that Indian forces had entered Pakistan; TV9 Bharatvarsh told viewers that Pakistan's prime minister had surrendered; Bharat Samachar said he was hiding in a bunker. All of them, along with some of the country's largest channels — including Zee News, ABP News and NDTV — repeatedly proclaimed that major Pakistani cities had been destroyed. To support the false claims, networks aired unrelated visuals from conflicts in Gaza and Sudan, from a plane crash in Philadelphia — and even scenes from video games. Zee News, NDTV, ABP News, Bharat Samachar, TV9 Bharatvarsh, Times Now and Prasar Bharati did not respond to requests for comment. 'It's the most dangerous version of what a section of TV news channels have been doing for a decade, completely unchecked,' said Manisha Pande, media critic and managing editor of Newslaundry, an independent news outlet. 'At this point, they're like Frankenstein's monsters — completely out of control.' India has one of the most expansive and linguistically diverse media landscapes in the world. Nine hundred television channels attract millions of viewers each evening across Indian towns and cities; newspapers still have a wide reach in rural areas. Over many decades, the country's independent press has played a critical role in exposing government corruption and holding power to account. In the past decade, however, particularly in television news, that independence has been eroded. Some of India's largest channels now routinely echo government talking points, analysts say — out of ideological alignment with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party, or as a result of pressure from the state, which has prosecuted journalists under terrorism, sedition and defamation laws, as well as by using regulatory threats and tax probes to silence critical voices. Pande also attributes the shift to opportunism. 'For most of these anchors, aligning with power is a calculated career move,' she said. Journalists in these newsrooms were dismayed by the lack of fact-checking during the conflict. 'Journalism has just become anything that lands on your WhatsApp from whoever,' said one journalist with a leading English-language news channel. 'You realize the cost of that at times like this.' Just before midnight on May 8, in a WhatsApp message exchange seen by The Post, a journalist with a major Hindi-language network messaged colleagues: 'Indian navy can carry out an attack imminently,' citing unnamed sources. Another staffer responded simply, 'Karachi,' but gave no details on sourcing. Within minutes, the channel was falsely reporting that the Indian navy had struck the port in Karachi, Pakistan's largest city. 'The channels were taken over by bad fiction writers,' a network employee said. A journalist in a different newsroom said their channel ran the story after confirmation from the Indian navy and air force. India's military did not respond to a request for comment. Others admitted to airing the story based on claims from social media influencers closely aligned with the ruling party, or posts from open-source intelligence accounts. Sweta Singh, a popular anchor on India Today, declared on air that 'Karachi is seeing its worst nightmare after 1971,' referring to the most devastating war between the two countries. 'It completely finishes Pakistan,' she added. Singh did not respond to requests for comment. Around 8 a.m. on May 9, the Karachi Port Trust posted on X that no attack had occurred. But some Hindi newspapers had already published the news on their front pages. As erroneous reports ricocheted across Indian channels, retired military officials gave them credence in freewheeling panel discussions. Breaking-news banners were accompanied by the swoosh of illustrated fighter jets. At one point, the government issued a public advisory urging broadcasters to refrain from using air raid sirens in their graphics, warning it could desensitize the public to real emergencies. Across the border, Pakistani media pushed its own falsehoods — that India had bombed Afghanistan and that Pakistan had destroyed India's army brigade headquarters. Some of the false claims came directly from Pakistani military spokesperson Lt. Gen. Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry during live news conferences; in one, Chaudhry showed a clip from an Indian news conference that had been misleadingly edited to remove a phrase, giving the false impression that India hadn't accused Pakistan of hitting civilian infrastructure. 'We stand by the information shared and press releases issued based on verified intelligence and digital evidence available to us,' the media wing of the Pakistani army said in a statement to The Post. Competition drove much of the chaos in India. On NDTV, the country's most-watched news channel according to the Reuters Institute at Oxford University, a hot mic caught a reporter in the field venting his frustration to the control room: 'First you keep saying, 'Give an update, give an update,' and then later you say, 'Why did you give something fake?'' During a talk show on the Hindi news channel Aaj Tak, a young man in the audience asked about 'the embarrassment we have faced from the international community when our news channels were spreading unverified information.' The reporter swung the microphone away before he could finish the question. A head of public relations for TV Today, which runs Aaj Tak and India Today, did not respond to requests for comment. 'I felt depressed at the state of affairs,' an anchor at a leading English-language news channel told The Post. 'It's time to introspect.' As strikes between the countries intensified each night, Indian officials, led by Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri, would generally wait until morning to brief the press. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's first public remarks on the conflict came two days after the May 10 ceasefire; Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar shared only a one-line post on X during the clashes. The vacuum was filled by television anchors. 'We've lost the information war to these characters,' said a former Indian navy admiral. But one senior Indian national security official said the misinformation played to India's advantage. If lower-level government sources deliberately spread false claims, it was to 'take advantage of the information space' and create 'as much confusion as possible because they know the enemy is watching,' the official said. 'Sometimes the collateral is your own audience, but that is how it is,' the official added. 'That is how war has evolved.' The problem, said Rao, the former foreign secretary, is that 'television channels were using a megaphone. We need to use a microphone with a voice that is obviously viewed as credible.' The frenzy of falsehoods has led to private soul-searching in many newsrooms, journalists said, but few public apologies. In a rare admission on Aaj Tak, an anchor said in Hindi that 'despite our vigilance,' there had been 'incomplete' reporting. 'For this, we seek your forgiveness,' she said. Other journalists have doubled down. Sushant Sinha, an anchor for Times Now Navbharat who declared on air that Indian tanks had entered Pakistan, posted an eight-minute monologue defending his coverage. 'Every channel did make at least one mistake, but not one of our mistakes was against this country,' he said. Niha Masih in New Delhi and Rick Noak in Bangkok contributed to this report.
The Guardian
12-05-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
How India and Pakistan conflict turned from brink of war to ceasefire in days
Indian surface-to-air missiles were already soaring towards Pakistan's most significant military bases when the first call came from the US. It was 4am in Islambabad and Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state and recently appointed US national security advisor, was on the line to the man everyone knew was calling the shots in Pakistan: army chief Gen Asim Munir. It was the beginning of eight hours of negotiations, mediated by the US, that finally secured a fragile ceasefire between India and Pakistan at midday on Saturday, according to two Pakistan security and intelligence officials who spoke to the Guardian. The agreement was first publicly announced by Donald Trump on his Truth Social platform, although Pakistan said the US president never personally made any calls to their side during the negotiations. When India first launched missiles at Pakistan early on Wednesday, as retribution for a militant attack in Indian-administered Kashmir in April that killed 26 people, the US showed little interest in getting involved. The US had already said India had 'the right to defend itself' after the Kashmir attack, and India framed its strikes on Pakistan as solely hitting 'terrorist camps' that threatened its national security, rather than any civilian or military targets. Asked in the Oval office that day about the escalating tensions between India and Pakistan, Trump said dismissively: 'they've been fighting for a long time. I just hope it ends very quickly'. Speaking on Thursday, his vice-president, JD Vance, said simply it was 'none of our business'. But by late Friday night, as both sides escalated the conflict, it was made clear to the Trump administration that leaving the two nuclear armed countries to their own devices posed a danger not just to the region but to the world – and that the only third party mediator acceptable to both sides was the US, as it has historically been over decades. In particular, the US began to fear the escalation towards a nuclear threat was becoming a very real possibility. This threat was seen to escalate further after India launched strikes at three critical Pakistani air bases, including Nur Khan air base in the city of Rawalpindi, in the early hours of Saturday – an attack said to be an attempt to pre-empt an imminent strike by Pakistan. The base is not far from where Pakistan keeps its nuclear arsenal, and the army chief and the prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, were so concerned that the PM called for a meeting of the National Command Authority (NCA), the body in control of Pakistan's nuclear capabilities. Pakistan later denied ever calling the meeting. 'At this point, the fear for everyone was a nuclear war between two arch rivals,' said one Pakistan security official – something Trump referenced on Monday when he boasted on his Truth Social social media network that he had prevented a 'bad nuclear war' between the two countries. Trump had tasked Rubio with talking down the Pakistan side, while Vance was the one dealing directly with India and its prime minister, Narendra Modi. Rubio made repeated calls not only to Munir, the army chief, but also Pakistan's national security advisor Asim Malik and Sharif. According to officials, the message from Rubio was simple: this needs to stop. Interventions were also made by Saudi Arabia, Iran and the UAE, and the UK also applied pressure through diplomatic backchannels. 'We welcomed the US intervention,' said one Pakistan official. 'We don't want war but if it is imposed upon us, then we have no choice to respond with aggression, as we did.' India has since maintained that their fight was 'only with terrorists' and that it was 'a shame that the Pakistan military chose to intervene'. By 2:30pm on Saturday, the heads of both Pakistan and India's military operations spoke on the phone for the first time since hostilities broke out. Initially they agreed for the ceasefire to begin at 4pm, but after reports of cross-border firing and drones along the disputed border in Kashmir, known as the line of control, it was pushed back. As well as an end to all aggressions, the ceasefire included an agreement for future truce talks to take place between the two countries, likely in one of the Gulf states such as the UAE, according to officials. Anwaar ul Haq Kakar, the former prime minister of Pakistan who has been privy to high level discussions, said the talks would primarily focus on securing the ceasefire and discussions on India's ongoing suspension of the Indus river treaty, which governs critical water flow into Pakistan. 'Immediately Kashmir issue might not be discussed – but after some confidence building measures, the issue of Kashmir will be on the table,' said Kakar. While Pakistan openly discussed the US role in brokering peace, Sharif publicly thanking Trump for his involvement, India made no mention at all of any outside influence in the agreement – instead later claiming it was Pakistan who had first approached them for a ceasefire. Indian officials did not respond to requests by the Guardian to discuss the ceasefire negotiations. However analysts said India's refusal to discuss any US-role in a ceasefire was indicative of the Modi government's non-alignment foreign policy and its bullish rejection of outside interference in India's affairs. On Sunday, Trump – who seemed to have discovered a newfound interest in the subcontinent – tweeted that he was willing to work with India 'to see if, after a 'thousand years,' a solution can be arrived at concerning Kashmir'. India and Pakistan's dispute over Kashmir dates back not thousands of years, but instead to 1947, after the partition of India and the formation of Pakistan. The two countries have since fought three wars over the region, which remains divided between both. Indian-administered Kashmir is home to a decades-long violent insurgency, said to be backed and funded by Pakistan, and is one of the most militarised zones in the world. India has historically rejected third-party mediation on Kashmir, viewing it as a sovereign issue, and remains highly sensitive to any discussion over it at an international level.
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Pakistan PM promises to ‘avenge each drop of blood' after Indian airstrikes kill 31
Pakistan has warned that it will 'avenge' the death of 31 people killed in overnight missile attacks by the Indian air force, raising fears of an escalating conflict between the two nuclear-armed countries. In a late night address to the nation late on Wednesday, Pakistan's prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, said: 'We make this pledge, that we will avenge each drop of the blood of these martyrs.' His comments came after Pakistan's government accused India of 'igniting an inferno' with strikes on nine sites in Pakistan-administered Kashmir and the Pakistani province of Punjab and authorised its military to take 'corresponding' retaliatory action against India. India said the strikes were a direct retaliation for an attack in Indian-administered Kashmir late last month, in which militants killed 25 Hindu tourists and their guide. India had accused Pakistan of direct involvement in the attacks, through Islamist militant organisations it has long been accused of backing. In an interview with the Guardian in Islamabad, Pakistan's deputy prime minister, Ishaq Dar – who is also the foreign minister – said the country would go to 'any extent' to defend its dignity. 'We reserve the right to authorise the armed forces to take any proper actions in response – and those will be measured, proportionate and responsible,' said Dar. He refused to be drawn into a timeline on any reprisal attacks but said the plans would be led by the country's army chief Gen Asim Munir, who would consult with the coalition government. 'What measures we can take when and where – I think it's too premature to be discussed at this stage,' said Dar. 'There is no minimum or maximum response time.' Dar was adamant that until now, Pakistan had exercised 'patience and maximum restraint' in the face of India's accusations and attacks. 'Yes, there is a huge economic loss attached to any full-fledged war. But when the question [is] of sovereignty, integrity of the country, territorial integrity, dignity of the nation, then there is no price,' he said. Dar also expressed his frustration at the international community, which has so far been reluctant to get involved in the latest dispute between India and Pakistan, beyond urging restraint. Calls by Pakistan for assistance in carrying out an independent investigation into the Kashmir attacks had gone unanswered, he said. Under previous presidents, the US was highly proactive in helping to de-escalate conflicts between India and Pakistan, often averting all-out war. However, Dar noted that the Trump administration had been reluctant to take on the same mediation role. 'Yes, in the past US presidents have played an active role. But each administration has its own style of working,' he said. He added: 'It is also the responsibility of the global community because any consequences and negative economic impacts of any such war will not be limited to India-Pakistan. It will cross international boundaries eventually.' After India's airstrikes on Wednesday, which killed 31 people, including several children, and injured dozens more, it jubilantly claimed victory over Pakistan. The Indian army said the strikes had targeted terrorists and terrorist training camps for two Islamist militant groups, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, which have long been accused of freely operating out of Pakistan and have been implicated in some of India's deadliest terror attacks. 'We killed only those who killed our innocents,' said India's defence minister, Rajnath Singh, while the home affairs minister, Amit Shah, said the government was 'resolved to give a befitting response to any attack on India and its people'. Related: Modi's deadly bombing strike on Pakistan goes to the heart of India's great dilemma | Chietigj Bajpaee The Indian army described the missile strikes as 'not escalatory, proportionate and responsible'. Pakistan said that the 'unprovoked and unjustified attacks martyred innocent men, women and children', and denied the existence of any terrorist camps or infrastructure in the areas struck by India. This was reiterated by Dar, who said there were 'no terrorist outfits' in the areas struck by India. For the first time since the India-Pakistan war in 1971, Indian missiles struck inside Punjab, Pakistan's most politically and militarily important province, killing at least 16 people there. At a meeting of the national security council on Wednesday, Sharif's government gave Pakistan's military authorisation to take action to defend the country's sovereignty 'at a time, place, and manner of its choosing'. Related: India and Pakistan can ill afford war, but who will talk them down? | Hannah Ellis-Petersen At a session of parliament on Wednesday, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, co-chair of the Pakistan People's party, which rules as part of the coalition government, reaffirmed the country's right to defend itself and said that Pakistan's answer to India's attacks 'has yet to come'. 'Pakistan has the right to respond to this attack however it wants,' he said. Kashmir, in the foothills of the Himalayas, has been disputed since the partition of India and the formation of Pakistan in 1947. Both India and Pakistan claim it in full, but each administers a section of the territory, separated by one of the world's most heavily militarised borders: the 'line of control' based on a ceasefire border established after the 1947-48 war. China administers another part in the east. India and Pakistan have gone to war three times over Kashmir, most recently in 1999. There were indicators that India had also suffered losses in Wednesday's attacks, which were carried out by military aircraft and drones from within India's own airspace. Pakistan claimed that about 80 Indian jets had taken part in the strikes, and said it had 'exercised restraint' by shooting down just five. The Indian government remained tight-lipped about all aircraft reportedly shot down, but debris of at least three planes was reported in areas across Indian-administered Kashmir and India's Punjab state. In the Indian-Kashmir village of Wuyan, Adnan Ahmad, 25, reported hearing a loud crash at about 1.40am. 'When I rushed to window I saw an aircraft in flames falling down,' he said. 'There was another aircraft moving above the falling aircraft. The aircraft landed near a school building, hitting trees. There were multiple explosions from the fallen wreckage for around an hour.' Related: India-Pakistan crisis: what we know so far From the early hours of the morning, there was heavy firing between Indian and Pakistani forces across the line of control. According to officials in Indian-administered Kashmir, at least 12 civilians on the Indian side had been killed since Wednesday morning. Pakistan reported that at least five people had been killed from shelling on their side of the line. Parvez Khan, the chief medical officer of Poonch, one of the border areas that suffered the worst damage in the cross-border shelling, said 42 people were being treated for injuries. 'Two of my relatives were seriously wounded when a mortar shell hit their home this morning,' said Safeer Abdullah, a Poonch resident who expressed anger over rising India-Pakistan tensions. 'We've endured this violence for generations; our ancestors suffered, and now we do too. Every hour here feels like it could be our last. The shelling has been so intense that no one within 150km of the border can sleep or eat properly.' As the firing continued throughout the day, thousands of residents living near the line of control on the Indian side of the border were forced to evacuate to safer areas. They described living in terror amid what they called a 'rain of artillery fire' that damaged homes, a Sikh temple, agricultural fields and vehicles. Another resident, Abdullah Khan, said he had been confined to a basement with six of his family members since the overnight attack. 'Mortar shells have been landing around us since last night. While many have managed to flee to safer areas, we haven't found an opportunity to escape,' he said. On Wednesday, the US, UK, China, Iran and UAE all called for a swift de-escalation of the conflict. The British prime minister, Keir Starmer, said the UK was 'engaging urgently with both countries … encouraging dialogue, de-escalation and the protection of civilians'. Donald Trump called for India and Pakistan to halt their fighting, saying: 'I want to see them stop. We get along with both countries very well, good relationships with both, and I want to see it stop.'
