India, Globally: Disinformation, Kashmir, Peace in an Extraordinary Month of May

The Narendra Modi government frequently posits India as a ‘Vishwaguru’ or world leader. How the world sees India is often lost in this branding exercise.

Outside India, global voices are monitoring and critiquing human rights violations in India and the rise of Hindutva. We present here fortnightly highlights of what a range of actors – from UN experts   and civil society groups to international media and parliamentarians of many countries – are saying about the state of India’s democracy.

Read the monthly roundup for May 1-31, 2025.

May 2025 witnessed an armed conflict between India and Pakistan. On April 22, militants killed 26 civilians in Pahalgam, Kashmir. In response, India launched “Operation Sindoor” on May 7 with air strikes on Pakistan, to which Pakistan subsequently responded with attacks on India. A ceasefire was announced on May 10. This roundup contains many entries, ranging from news, analysis, and calls for peace, involving this conflict and its aftermath.

International Media Reports

The Guardian, UK, May 10

Sammy Gecsoyler reports on a demonstration by the UK’s South Asian community, Indian and Pakistani, in London’s Parliament Square calling for peace and de-escalation of conflict between India and Pakistan. Participants were made up of “diaspora communities with family in the region” especially in Kashmir and border areas. Expressing relief since a ceasefire was announced by the time they gathered, they emphasised the need for a “real roadmap to stability, especially in Kashmir”. United by their belief in a shared history and future, they stressed that “our shared humanity across the India-Pakistan border and in Kashmir should trump all the other considerations of race and religion in the region. If we are to move forward we would have to move forward together.” 

Washington Post, US, May 13

Rana Ayyub writes about the “fierce battle” of government censorship of media and social media that continued after the military ceasefire. The Indian government directed X to block 8,000 accounts, including of foreign news organisations. Beyond X, the government blocked the website of The Wire as well. Prominent Kashmiri journalists were arrested or their social media blocked. Ayyub says that “voices of reason that supplied accurate information were censored” with the effect that there was proliferation of “unverified claims and nationalist posturing”. 

New York Times, US, May 17

Anupreeta Das and Pragati K.B. analyse Indian media’s amplified war propaganda and disinformation campaign during the recent conflict. They point to the “sheer volume of falsehoods, half-truths, memes, misleading video footage and speeches manipulated by artificial intelligence”. Sumitra Badrinathan, an assistant professor of Political Science at American University, highlights that in this conflict, the sources of misinformation included “previously credible journalists and major media news outlets” that “ran straight-up fabricated stories”.

Das and Pragati call this extensive misinformation “the latest blow to what was once a vibrant journalism scene in India”.

Experts say

On May 8, Vaibhav Vats, a writer and journalist, highlighted that this India-Pakistan conflict escalated faster than any before it, perhaps because the two countries governments have become “mirror images of each other”. 

While in the past, “India’s commitment to secularism and democracy stood in sharp contrast to Pakistan’s religious orientation and military dictatorship”, now, both nations are “defined by democratic repression” and “notions of religious supremacy”. They are “fuelling each other’s grievances and extremism”.

The thinking behind attacks like the one on Pahalgam was to “fuel religious discord in India” and it was, in fact, “followed by violent assaults on Muslims all across India”.

The Global Government Affairs team of X responded to the Indian government’s orders “requiring X to block over 8,000 accounts in India, subject to potential penalties including significant fines and imprisonment” by stating that it disagreed with the government’s demands, on May 8. X said that in most cases, the Indian government did not specify which posts from an account have violated India's local laws” and also for many accounts, the government did not provide “any evidence or justification” to block them. X reiterated that “blocking entire accounts is not only unnecessary, it amounts to censorship of existing and future content, and is contrary to the fundamental right of free speech.”  

Dr. Taimur Rahman, Secretary of Pakistan’s Mazdoor Kisan Party and Indian historian Vijay Prashad spoke with Zoe Alexandera of People’s Dispatch, on May 10, in the aftermath of the India-Pakistan conflict. They discussed the ceasefire agreement, the historical roots, and the role of peace and progressive movements at this juncture. Vijay said the attack in Pahalgam “required investigation” and that it was “shameful” that a ceasefire had to be brokered through Washington. On the Indus Water Treaty, Vijay stressed that withdrawing from it “so precipitously was bizarre” and “reckless of India to violate international law”. He called out the Indian media for “building up a popular consent for an attack on Pakistan”. Taimur urged the Indian media to build a better understanding of Pakistan, a country with many “contradictions”, “fault lines”, and “many political forces” or risk falling into “simplistic narratives” as they did, with Indian society becoming “hostage” to this new media. 

Bhim Bhurtel, faculty of Development Economics and Global Political Economy at Nepal Open University, described a “reconfiguration of South Asia’s power dynamics with India’s once-strong hegemony in clear decline”, in an article on May 12. Bhurtel writes that the “Pahalgam episode has exposed India’s growing vulnerabilities”. He pointed out that Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and the Maldives are growing closer to China and other powers. He observes India is being “increasingly cast as a pliable ally, [with] its superpower ambitions subordinated to America’s strategic priorities. This raises troubling questions about India’s ability to chart an independent course in a multipolar world.” 

Fareed Zakaria, international television journalist, in an interview on May 13, commented on the efficacy of India’s attacks on Pakistan. He shared his view that Pakistan’s military “thrives on tension” with India. Comparing with America’s history of fighting terrorism in Afghanistan and Iraq, Zakaria says “jihadi groups exist for this conflict”, they retaliate when attacked and he asks “where do you go with that”? He said India has “the most to lose with this cycle of violence” as it “needs peace and prosperity to lift hundreds and millions of people out of poverty”.

Zakaria was surprised that India has been silent “on various American initiatives that impact on India and have not been well-received”, such as the handcuffing of Indian immigrants and tariffs. Zakaria suggested that it would be “appropriate” for India to “articulate its point of view”, like Canada has done. 

Tom Andrews, UN Special Rapporteur (UN SR) on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, responded with alarm, in a press release dated May 15, to “credible reports” that 40 Rohingya refugees living in Delhi were forced into the Andaman Sea from an Indian navy ship. Calling this “an affront to human decency” and violative of international law, the UN SR has launched an inquiry into these “unconscionable, unacceptable acts”. The 40 were blindfolded, flown to Andaman and Nicobar and transferred to an Indian naval ship. They were given life jackets and forced to swim to an island in Myanmar. The press release says they survived, but their condition and whereabouts were not known. The UN SR urges the Indian government to “refrain from inhumane and life-threatening treatment of Rohingya refugees”. 

Sushant Singh, lecturer at Yale University, wrote that the ceasefire between India and Pakistan “represents not a resolution but a perilous and temporary pause in their long-standing hostilities”, in an article dated May 15. With both countries “locked in incompatible narratives” of victory, and possessing advanced technological weapons, Singh underscored that it is a “scenario in which future conflicts between India and Pakistan will likely start at higher levels of escalation”. China has won out as a “beneficiary” of the conflict. Singh stressed that the ceasefire has “done little to address the underlying grievances between India and Pakistan or establish new guardrails”. 

Singh also highlighted the dangers of a growing militarisation and politicisation of cricket through the Indian Premier League (IPL), on May 30. He observed these trends in the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI) plan to dedicate the IPL’s closing ceremony to Operation Sindoor with invites to military chiefs and the BCCI donating financially to the armed forces. Singh warned that this “risks transforming cricket from a unifying force into a divisive political tool”. He pointed out this can be “directly attributed to the BJP’s deepening influence” over cricket administration, “aligning Indian cricket with the BJP’s ultra-nationalist agenda”. He reiterated that “by wrapping military tributes in the spectacle of cricket entertainment”, this has the effect of “normalising warfare”, detracting from the “sobering realities of death and devastation”.

Fahad Shah, Kashmiri journalist and writer and founder editor of The Kashmir Walla, stressed that it is Kashmir that bears the brunt of “bullets and bombs” amidst the India-Pakistan conflict since 1947, in an article dated May 20. Shah documents the “human cost” for those living in the Indian border districts of Uri, Rajouri, Poonch and Akhnoor. Villages and towns were empty as people left for safety. Those left behind said they “felt trapped” in a battle between two nuclear-armed powers with “trauma” forever etched. Nayeer Begum from Uri recalls, “The government should have planned where people will go during shelling”. Poonch suffered the most deaths and damage, shelling killed “at least” 21 civilians in India’s border areas. 

Legal scholars, Rehan Abeyratne and Surbhi Karwa wrote in the International Journal of Constitutional Law on May 25, that the “broad powers” vested in the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) “might have been used to constrain democratic decline” in India. Abeyratne and Karwa find that successive CJIs have “misused their discretion to accelerate” Narendra Modi’s “illiberal agenda”. Consequently, the institution of the Supreme Court has been left “damaged and vulnerable to capture by the government”. 

Civil society and Indian diaspora groups 

The India Hate Lab, a project of the Center for the Study of Organized Hate, documented that 64 “anti-Muslim hate speech events” were held over 10 days following the Pahalgam attack, in a blog post dated May 2. The events were organised by Hindu nationalist groups across 9 states, and Jammu and Kashmir. Speakers called for violence, expulsion from localities, and economic boycott of Muslims, referring to the community as “green snakes,” “piglets” and “keede” (insects). Most events were posted online. They were accompanied by a spike in hate crimes targeting Kashmiris in particular, and Muslims more broadly, demonstrating “the dangerous connection between online hate ecosystems and offline violence.”

The Anti-Caste Discrimination Alliance (UK) shared that the Black Members UNISON conference passed a motion (Motion 9) on May 11 to 'Ban Caste Discrimination', calling on members to advocate for caste to be codified as a “protected characteristic” under the UK’s Equality Act, among other measures. ACDA hails this as “a massive step towards fighting caste discrimination in the UK”. 

International Solidarity for Academic Freedom in India, India Justice Project (Germany), Foundation the London Story (Netherlands), London Mining Network (UK), and the Indian Alliance Paris, jointly held an online briefing on May 6 to call attention to the “accelerating crisis of state repression” in the Bastar region of Chhattisgarh. Several international speakers had important messages in solidarity with Indian activists. Binota Moy Dhamai, member of the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, said indigenous peoples’ rights protected in international law are being “systematically violated in Bastar”. Ana Celestial, environmental campaigner from the Philippines expressed, “The Bastar struggle is not just local—it’s on the front line of environmental justice, Indigenous sovereignty, and human rights everywhere”. Tarcila Rivera-Zea, founder and President of CHIRAPAQ (Centro de Culturas Indígenas del Perú) called for “strengthening global alliances of Indigenous women and grassroots communities.” The briefing included a call for action demanding “an immediate end to state violence with demilitarisation of Bastar”, among other needed actions. 

Stop JCB bulldozer genocide campaigners, a coalition of organisations based in the UK, came together on May 18 to disrupt the British bulldozer manufacturer JCB’s 80th anniversary celebrations at its headquarters in Rocester. The activists protested to expose “JCB’s complicity in ethnic cleansing and genocide”. Campaign member Mukti Shah said that the fact that JCB continues to operate to “ethnically cleanse Palestinians” on behest of Israel, and that “they have also failed to make use of the technology they already have to prevent horrific human rights violations in India and Kashmir, despite an Indian Supreme Court ruling, is utterly shameful”. 

In response to the arrest of Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad on May 18 by the Haryana Police, allegedly for ‘sedition’ through social media posts, Amnesty International demanded Indian authorities “immediately terminate the unwarranted investigation” and release him, in a statement on May 19. Aakar Patel, chair of the board at Amnesty International India, said, “the Haryana police must stop treating Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad like a criminal simply for expressing an opinion. The shameful arrest of the Professor for a social media post seeking support for justice for victims of lynching and ‘bulldozer injustice’ in the country is a violation of his rights to freedom of expression and liberty”. 

Hindus for Human Rights held an online vigil for peace and justice in Kashmir on May 19. Video messages were shared by a wide range of well-wishers, including politicians, religious leaders, activists, artists, writers, academics, and others from Kashmir, India and Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Burma, Guatemala, Palestine, the US, and the UK.  

International Solidarity for Academic Freedom in India (InSAF India) and a total of 149 organisations and individuals released an international statement to condemn and highlight the “escalating State violence on Adivasi communities in Bastar, Chhattisgarh”, on May 21. The statement details that since January 2024, there have been an estimated 180 extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests and reports of torture and sexual violence in a “systemic and severe repression of the Adivasi communities” of Bastar. This is described as a “complete negation of universally recognized human rights by the Government of India”. The signatories were individuals and organizations from across the world including Europe, Palestine, USA, Canada, Asia, Latin America and Africa, including diaspora groups as well as groups working on issues of land, labour, mining, health, human rights, education, indigenous people’s rights, environment, sexuality and climate justice.

On May 22, International Solidarity with Academic Freedom in India (InSAF India) in collaboration with London Mining Network held the first of their 12-part series “Deadline or Death Sentence: State Violence and Indigenous (Adivasi) People’s Resistance in India”. In the first session focused on understanding the current level of state violence, Soni Sori (human rights defender) provided a ground-level account of the impact and resistance to the intensified militarisation in Bastar. Telugu poet and editor N. Venugopal provided a historically informed analysis of the possibility of peace talks between the Indian state and the Communist Party of India (Maoist).

Kumar Nerlakanti and K Singh of India Labour Solidarity (UK) critique the recently signed Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between India and the UK for being “a missed chance for justice”, in a piece dated May 28. The UK “could have made human rights a red line” by highlighting “protections for workers, for press freedom, for Adivasi land” as well as the crises in Kashmir and Manipur. Silence remains on “attacks on workers, farmers, Adivasis, oppressed castes and minorities in India” and equally on “how divisive politics of region are spilling out into the streets of the UK” (as seen in Leicester).  The Indian government has also remained silent on “harmful consequences” for Indian migrants on proposed changes to the UK’s immigration policies. 

Foundation the London Story recently released a brief report that examines how social media has become a new frontline in “modern warfare” based on the May 2025 India-Pakistan conflict. The report identifies three patterns of “digital warfare” - “polarization, mobilization and escalation”. Some of its key findings include that Indian Muslims were framed as “traitors and proxy enemies”, equating citizens to an “external enemy”; that “online hysteria undermined diplomacy”; and that digital spaces were “instrumental” to build public support for military action. 

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) ranks India 151 out of 180 in its World Press Freedom Index 2025. India remains in the “very serious” category with “concentration of media ownership in the hands of political magnates [which] threatens media plurality”. RSF states that India’s media has descended into an “unofficial state of emergency” under Narendra Modi since 2014. According to RSF, two or three journalists are killed “due to their work” every year in India. Journalists covering “environmental topics or news in Kashmir” are particularly vulnerable to harassment and/or detention. 

Read the previous roundup here. 

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.