When tensions between two countries escalate over a dispute and no resolution seems possible, the situation reaches a point of no return. If such a hostile environment persists, conditions can rapidly shift from normal to highly strained. In such scenarios, it is common for the international community to intervene, aiming to maintain peace, prevent war, and help resolve the conflict. However, if the mediating countries fail in their efforts, the opposing sides often end up engaging in war—resulting in devastation on both ends.
The damage incurred in such conflicts is widespread—human, financial, and economic. Even during the peak of hostilities, global powers and organizations attempt to enforce ceasefires and promote peace and reconciliation. History provides several examples where wars were halted by ceasefires, followed by negotiations that both parties eventually accepted.
One of the most prominent and rapidly spreading elements in such tense situations is propaganda. Propaganda is deliberately disseminated to strengthen one narrative while undermining the opposing viewpoint. The term itself carries inherently negative connotations. It refers to a set of ideas, beliefs, or ideologies intentionally spread to psychologically influence a situation in favor of one side, while demoralizing the other to the point where they abandon or reject their own beliefs. Propaganda commonly employs statements, slogans, images, songs, exhibitions, and sketches. Its goal is often to affect specific audiences emotionally, generating either support or despair, and thereby mobilizing public sentiment.
Propaganda can be both overt and covert, rational or emotional. It often appeals to the emotions, incorporating elements designed to provoke strong feelings. For instance, there has been a long-running anti-military narrative targeting Pakistan's armed forces, wherein attempts are made to portray the Pakistan Army as weak, morally corrupt, or ineffective. The underlying objective of this campaign is to diminish the public’s trust, pride, and emotional attachment to their armed forces, eventually weakening the bond of unity and loyalty between the people and their military. Such conditions can lead a nation towards civil strife.
When Hitler’s Nazi Party came to power in Germany, a deliberate campaign of wartime propaganda was launched to strengthen the country and prepare it for war. The German public was indoctrinated with the belief that Germany was a superior, exceptional nation. The average German citizen came to perceive themselves as inherently superior to all other nations. It was widely propagated that German blood was pure, whereas other races were somehow diluted. To reinforce this notion of strength and supremacy, the military was reorganized on a massive scale.
Under Adolf Hitler’s regime, the German military was presented not merely as a national defense force but as an unstoppable and superior war machine. This portrayal was a deliberate product of Nazi propaganda, aimed at instilling confidence and pride among the German populace while simultaneously intimidating foreign nations. Military parades, visually striking uniforms, sophisticated weaponry, and mass rallies were orchestrated to create the perception that the German army was unmatched in strength and discipline. The propaganda emphasized Germany’s historical glory and military traditions, reinforcing the myth of a resurrected empire destined for dominance.
This aggressive display of military prowess had dire implications for Germany's smaller, neighboring countries. The Nazi regime used propaganda not only to galvanize its own population but also to mask its imperialist intentions. The image of an invincible German military discouraged resistance and encouraged appeasement from other European states. Countries like Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Austria became targets of Hitler's expansionist policies. These nations, due to their smaller size and weaker military capabilities, were unable to effectively resist Germany's aggression and quickly succumbed to Nazi control, either through invasion or political manipulation.
One of the earliest and most symbolic acts of Nazi expansionism was the Anschluss, the annexation of Austria in 1938. Hitler claimed cultural and ethnic unity between Germans and Austrians, asserting that Austria naturally belonged within the German Reich. Through a combination of political pressure, internal Austrian sympathizers, and military intimidation, Germany absorbed Austria without facing significant opposition. This move was both a strategic and ideological victory for Hitler, fulfilling part of his vision of a Greater Germany and further fueling his imperial ambitions in Europe.
Returning to the current propaganda war against Pakistani security forces: across various social media platforms, hostile actors are actively spreading organized and hateful content. These narratives attempt to portray Pakistan’s military history and operations as defeats rather than victories. Fake accounts are often created for this purpose. These profiles may appear to belong to pro-military individuals or use titles that draw public attention. On platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube, content is shared portraying Pakistani forces as inferior to their adversaries.
To strengthen this trend, historical facts are deliberately distorted. Lies are crafted so skillfully that they resemble the truth—lies so believable that audiences accept them without verification. Fabricated stories and accounts are circulated to discredit Pakistan’s military stance in the wars of 1948, 1965, 1971, and 1999, creating the false impression that Pakistan was on the losing side. Even in popular media—such as Bollywood and Hollywood—films have been made that either ignore Pakistan’s successful military operations or depict those victories as failures.
This type of propaganda warfare has had real consequences. A segment of the Pakistani population compares historical and present military achievements with the fabricated narratives circulated online. Rather than verifying such claims through credible sources, these individuals often end up criticizing the state and its institutions, believing it to be their democratic right. Such behavior fosters a negative mindset. However, their criticism is not constructive—it is designed to weaken rather than reform.
To counter such thinking and belief systems, structured information campaigns must be launched to clearly differentiate between truth and falsehood. At the grassroots level, efforts must be made to bridge the gap between the public and Pakistan’s security institutions. The media wing of the Pakistan Army, ISPR, issues press releases when necessary to expose false propaganda. However, it is also the responsibility of all media outlets, social media platform handlers, and controllers to unmask the truth behind hateful and anti-military content. They must bring the real facts to the public—not the kind of lies that are repeated so often that they begin to sound like truth.
