Weaponised narratives

As a loyal overseas Pakistani based in Dubai since 1997 who has stood shoulder to shoulder with Pakistan, I write this with clarity of purpose: to fully reject and categorically debunk a recent India Today article, titled 'Pakistan Army Chief’s Baloch Rhetoric Echoes Yahya Khan’s Bangladesh Playbook'.

Let me state at the outset that this article is beyond any journalistic ethics – it is narrative warfare. It attempts to draw dangerously false parallels between two entirely different historical contexts: East Pakistan in 1971 and Balochistan in 2025. And it does so with the strategic intention of sowing doubt, distorting perception and undermining the credibility of Pakistan’s military leadership.

The entire argument hinges on a contrived historical parallel that simply does not stand up to scrutiny. Allow me to clearly spell out the critical differences: one, East Pakistan was separated by over 1,000 miles of hostile Indian territory, creating profound logistical and political isolation. Balochistan, by contrast, is fully integrated and contiguous with Pakistan and protected by a strong military infrastructure.

Two, East Pakistan constituted more than half of Pakistan’s total population and had democratically won the national political mandate in 1970, only to be denied it. Today, Balochistan represents 5–6 per cent of the national population, and is already represented at the centre, enjoying democratic participation within Pakistan’s federal structure.

Three, the resistance in East Pakistan was mass-based and politically mainstream. In contrast, Balochistan’s unrest stems from small, externally backed separatist factions, with no widespread public support. These groups do not represent the Baloch people, whose legitimate rights and development are actively being addressed by the state.

finally, the events of 1971 were marred by personal ambitions, fractured command, institutional disunity and political intrigues. Today’s military leadership is defined by unblemished character, professional excellence, and a singular, nationalistic agenda: to see Pakistan secure, united and economically sovereign.

One of the most striking aspects of the India Today article was its discomfort with COAS General Asim Munir's deliberate and thoughtful invocation of the Two-Nation Theory. In his powerful speech, he stated: “Our religion is different, our customs are different, our traditions are different, our thoughts are different, our ambitions are different – that’s where the foundation of the two-nation theory was laid. We are two nations, we are not one nation.”

This is not a revisionist view. This is the historical truth behind Pakistan’s creation. The ideological clarity embedded in the Two-Nation Theory is the foundation of Pakistan’s identity, its sovereignty, and its right to exist as a homeland for Muslims in South Asia with dignity, honour and on our own terms to defend and promote Pakistan’s supreme national interest.

That India Today was provoked by this statement shows just how effective, timely and necessary it was. In fact, this ideological reassertion was a direct hit on India’s long-standing effort to dilute Pakistan’s national identity – which is why it drew immediate fire from their media.

COAS Gen Asim Munir’s strong message as “being purported with Machiavellian intent” was not a blanket statement on the province of Balochistan or its people. It was a targeted warning to externally-sponsored terrorist elements who have killed innocent Pakistanis, martyred our brave soldiers and attempted to destabilise the state.

His words were aimed precisely where they needed to be. His resolve – to “beat the hell out of these terrorists” – is national duty, and a clear articulation of Pakistan’s red line: no compromise on territorial integrity.

This is in stark contrast to 1971, when genuine political grievances were ignored. Today, Pakistan is actively engaging the Baloch people, investing in their development, and ensuring that they are not abandoned to the narratives of separatists.

Unlike the fragmented civil-military relations of the past, today’s Pakistan is blessed with a cohesive and disciplined military establishment; a leadership with no personal political ambitions; and unprecedented alignment with the civilian government at the national level under the leadership of Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.

This unity is a historic asset. It enables clarity of purpose, strategic decisiveness and national confidence. The reasons for this propaganda campaign are obvious: CPEC has placed Balochistan at the crossroads of global commerce; China’s deepening investment in Gwadar threatens Western and Indian strategic interests; India continues to use media and proxies to fuel unrest and international scepticism; and the US pursues its own strategic objectives, securing maritime routes, safeguarding energy corridors, countering rival powers’ influence and maintaining a foothold in South Asia’s evolving power dynamics.

Whether in Pakistan or abroad, we must be vigilant and discerning. Do not fall for weaponised narratives. They are not neutral journalism but strategic interventions aimed at weakening our unity.

We must challenge false parallels, defend our truth, and support efforts that bring peace, rights and development to all corners of our nation – including Balochistan.

Let us not allow history to be misused, nor let our unity be shaken by distorted narratives. Balochistan is an inseparable part of Pakistan; its future lies not in division, but in dignity, development, and dialogue.

Together, we must protect the truth, preserve our national integrity, and move forward – united, resilient and proud.

The writer is an entrepreneur, social activist and senior global executive.