Terrorism, narratives and Indo-Pak tension

At the recent SCO Defence Ministers' Meeting in Bishkek, Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh said, "We must not forget that terrorism has no nationality and no theology."

This sounds like a universally accepted principle. No one disputes that terrorism should not be linked to any religion or nation. It is a formulation that fits within global consensus and international counterterrorism discourse.

But the significance of this statement does not lie only in what was said. It lies in what followed, and how quickly the broader message shifted in India's domestic and political environment.

Soon after the speech, the narrative around it was reframed in India's media and political debate. The emphasis moved away from universality and towards a sharper focus on Pakistan as an "epicentre of terrorism". This shift once again reflects a pattern that has become increasingly visible in recent years: the coexistence of two parallel narratives - one diplomatic and universal for international consumption; and another more targeted and politically charged for domestic audiences.

Over the last decade, the Indo-Pak relations have steadily narrowed into a security-centric framework. Instead of being treated as a complex bilateral relationship shaped by history, geography, trade potential and shared cultural realities, it is now largely defined through the prism of terrorism and conflict. This reduction has had a long-term impact on how both countries perceive each other, and more importantly, on the shrinking space for dialogue.

Under the Modi government, India's approach towards Pakistan has become more assertive in tone and more securitised in framing.

Also, it is important to recognise that India's position is shaped by its own experiences of cross-border militancy and repeated security incidents. These experiences are not imaginary; they have had real and lasting consequences. However, the problem arises when the entire relationship is reduced to a single dimension, leaving no room for engagement beyond confrontation.

Pakistan, on its part, has often argued that this framing is part of a broader effort to isolate it diplomatically. India's repeated emphasis on terrorism has contributed to a global perception that often overlooks the complexity of Pakistan's internal security challenges as well as its counterterrorism efforts.

What makes the situation more difficult is the role of domestic politics and media. In India, public discourse on Pakistan is highly sensitive and often emotionally charged. Over time, a strong narrative environment has developed in which hardline positions are rewarded, while balanced statements are frequently questioned or corrected. Rajnath's own speech is a clear example of this dynamic, where an initially universal statement is quickly followed by a more country-specific framing under political and media pressure.

This creates a cycle where even diplomatic language struggles to remain stable. The result is confusion, mistrust, and a shrinking space for moderation.

In this environment, incidents of tension - whether real or perceived - quickly escalate into larger crises, such as operation Sindoor. It reflects how rapidly narratives can shift from controlled signalling to heightened confrontation. Each side responds to the other, and over time, these responses build into a cycle of suspicion.

Yet, beneath this cycle lies a simple but often ignored reality: South Asia cannot sustain permanent hostility.

The challenge, therefore, is not only about counterterrorism, but also about narrative discipline. When terrorism is discussed only through the lens of one country, it limits diplomatic possibilities. When political systems reward only hardline positions, it reduces space for engagement. And when media ecosystems amplify only confrontation, public perception becomes locked into permanent distrust.

Peace in this region does not require complete agreement. It requires managed disagreement and sustained communication – an element missing in the long turbulent Indo-Pak ties.