­Dawn’s discourses on perpetual Indo-Pakistan enmity

Mukesh Devrari 

Abstract 

This study is a thematic analysis of columns and editorials published in the opinion pages of Dawn during India’s general elections 2019 to find out how Pakistan’s elite media represents India as a perpetual adversary. It finds out that Dawn’s op-ed pages characterize India as a permanent security threat, destabilizing force, propagandist state, and dominating power conspiring with the United States to harm the interests of Pakistan and China. It also reveals that news columns and editorials consistently claim that Indian media indulges in warmongering, rising Hindu nationalism, and non-state actors contribute to the hostility in both nations. Finally, it notes that Dawn’s Op-ed pages describe India with the state lens in geopolitics and global power structure, mostly magnifying the state’s perspective instituted mainly by the security establishment.

 

(Keywords –Indo-Pakistan enmity, Dawn, media representation, media & conflict, thematic analysis)

 

Introduction 

The troubled relations between India and Pakistan are deeply rooted in the turbulent history of British India. Based on the two-nation theory, the Muslim League demanded the creation of Pakistan by dividing India (Bipan, Mridula, Aditya, Panikar, & Sucheta, 1989; Guha, 2007). Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the leader of the Muslim League, claimed that Hindus and Muslims could not co-exist and live together in one nation. He argued,

it is a dream that the Hindus and Muslims can ever evolve a common nationality. Hindus and Muslims belong to two different religious philosophies, social customs and literary traditions. They neither intermarry nor eat together, and indeed they belong to two different civilisations which are based mainly on conflicting ideas and conceptions. (Kermani, 2017)

“The two-nation theory—that Muslims and Hindus in pre-Partition India had separate customs and traditions and therefore could not live together, necessitating the creation of Pakistan—is taken as fact and widely accepted” (Afzal, 2015, p. 13) in Pakistan.

Due to the rising tide of support among the Muslim community for a separate nation, the leaders of the Indian National Congress accepted the demand for the division of India (Dalrymple, 2015) and a plebiscite, with a limited franchise, was conducted in all Muslim majority provinces. But, without exception, all of them chose to go with Pakistan (Haqqani, 2010). 

There is a widespread belief that if plebiscite had been conducted in the princely state of Jammu & Kashmir, its overwhelming Muslim population, particularly in Kashmir valley, would have ensured its inclusion in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to the chagrin of its non-Muslim population. Due to this Pakistan’s ruling elite argues that Jammu and Kashmir is an unresolved issue of partition and the primary reasons for animosities towards India in Pakistan, as reflected in its foreign policy (Ahmed, 2010). As per the Pakistani narrative, the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir is the leading cause of conflict, and as a Muslim majority region, it belongs to Pakistan. On the other hand, India rejects all Pakistani claims and describes Jammu & Kashmir as an inalienable part of India.   

Schofield (2015) argues that “the prospect of the whole state becoming either part of Pakistan or part of India is now an illusion” (p.32) and provides five reasons to resolve it. First, both countries are wasting many resources fighting each other and preparing for eventual armed conflict by compromising on their more urgent developmental needs. Second, the human rights violations in Jammu and Kashmir will come to an end. Thirdly, hatred for each other will reduce in both countries and terror attacks on India will stop. Fourth, possibilities of nuclear war will reduce as Pakistan has not declared ‘no first use policy’, and lastly, the Kashmir dispute will be resolved as it is an unsettled issue of partition of British India. 

Pakistan supports the asymmetric warfare with India and continues to support Islamic terror groups attacking India without the fear of reprisals as nuclear tests by both countries in 1998 have stunted India’s ability to respond militarily. So the Islamic terrorist groups can continue to target India under a Pakistani nuclear umbrella (Riedel, 2008). “Pakistan continues to use force, as well as jihadi terrorism, to achieve its strategic objectives of weakening India and securing political concessions (A. J. Tellis, 2017). It rejects all of India’s objections as propaganda and supports globally proscribed Islamic terror groups (Fair, 2011, 2018).

The ruling parties in India generally favour mending fences with Pakistan, but no political party can afford to cater to the territorial ambitions of Pakistan’s ruling elite. As per the Pakistani narrative, the normalisation of bilateral relations is not possible until the resolution of Jammu & Kashmir by applying the same principles applied to the division of India in 1947. Pakistan is not ready to blink on its stated positions despite its limited economic & military capabilities. India is also not prepared to provide any territorial concessions.  

It is generally believed that Pakistani security forces are hostile to the civilian overtures towards the normalisation of relationship with India. And in Pakistan, “the army, for all practical purposes, has been and remains in charge. It has steadily increased its power since the first military coup in 1958. The military has a veto over most critical decisions affecting both foreign and security policies” (Ashley J. Tellis et al., 2009). It defines itself as the protector of Pakistan’s ideology. The ideology of Pakistan is Islam (Shuja, 2007). “The Pakistan Army’s conflict with India preserves its domestic political and economic predominance, and its efforts at protecting the “ideology of Pakistan” end up sustaining the perilous notion of a permanent Muslim resistance toward a “Hindu India”(A. J. Tellis, 2017). On the other hand, the security institutions are under the firm control of the elected civilian government. 

After the election of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in 2013, both countries favourably engaged with each other, but the Pakistani military restricted the ability of Pakistani PM to move ahead in improvising relations with India. He was compelled to take a hard line on bilateral disputes (Ahmad & Ebert, 2015). The security establishment in Pakistan constantly harps on its fear of India. The fear of India shaped Pakistan's foreign policy since 1947 (Yasmeen, 1994).

Research Question

1.     How Dawn’s op-ed pages represent perpetual Indo-Pakistan enmity? 

Hypothesis 

1.     Dominant print media, including Dawn in Pakistan, views India with the state lens in the context of regional geopolitics and global power structure.

2.     The perspective of the ruling (military and intelligence) regime is reflected in the opinion of the elite English language press in Pakistan. 

Literature review

Media in Pakistan can be broadly divided into two categories: English-language media and vernacular media. There are hundreds of Urdu newspapers and eight major English newspapers in Pakistan (Rais, 2016). About ten per cent of the population in Pakistan can read English-language newspapers, giving the Urdu-language press a far wider reach. Urdu press is considered more radical and continues to push hawkish perspectives on India, likely shaping the views of a large portion of the population (Shah, 2010). 

Media in South Asia are not different from their western counterparts on foreign policy issues, as United States media have exaggerated or sometimes marginalised the coverage of various issues to support the government’s point of view or helped organise public opinion in favour of the government’s policies (Saleem, 2007, p. 153). Similarly, mainstream media in India and Pakistan rarely question the state's foreign policy priorities.  

The Pakistani newspapers The Dawn, Express Tribune, News International and others questioned India’s narrative on the Pulwama suicide bombing in Jammu and Kashmir by outlining the official Pakistani position. They argued that the ruling political party in India tried to exploit the situation for political benefits during the elections (Kumar Singh & Amin, 2019). The Pakistani newspaper The Nation also takes a strongly critical position on India while discussing the issues in Jammu & Kashmir (Adnan, Islam, & Khan, 2019). Previous studies have suggested that media in Pakistan tend to focus on the Kashmir dispute and the emergence of right-wing political outfits in India. However, they also cover electoral processes and the nature of democracy in India (Rais, 2016).

Another content analysis of Dawn and India’s largest selling English newspaper Times of India suggested that both the newspapers had supported peace efforts. And Dawn gave more coverage to reports promoting peace initiatives. However, it also claimed that state’s approach towards bilateral relations had directly impacted the orientation of newspapers in both countries towards each other (Batool, Yasin, & Khurshid, 2015). 

The governments do not directly control media in India and Pakistan. The media can take an adversarial position on certain issues. However, overall they tend to show an ideological symmetry with their respective governments, particularly in foreign policy matters. Nationalism and religious identity play a crucial role in shaping the world view of Pakistani journalists (Pintak & Nazir, 2013). Traditionally Pakistan’s military and political elite emphasises Islam above all else and positions Pakistan as completely different from India. Even the school textbooks in Pakistan preach hatred for India and Hindus, intolerance of minorities while sympathising with militant groups (Afzal, 2015, p. 2). 

This study focuses on how English-language newspaper Dawn depicts India as an adversary, partly because it offers an insight into understanding the moderate sections of the Pakistani ruling elite’s views about India. In Pakistan, The News and Dawn are the two largest circulating newspapers. The News ranks first in English newspapers and fifth nationally, with 120,000 papers in circulation. Dawn is second in the English-language category and sixth in the nation, with a circulation of 109,000 (Shah, 2010). However, Dawn has a better online presence. As per Alexa records on 20 June 2019, Dawn has 4.36 million monthly unique visitors, 2.11 million daily and 56.8 million monthly page views. It has a global rank of 1058 as per the global internet traffic and engagement over the past 90 days. 

Dawn is considered a liberal newspaper and is “known for its progressive content” (Fair & Hamza, 2016, p. 582). It has been targeted many times for advocating modernisation and democratic ideals and for advocating civilian rule (Bearak, 2000). It has faced intimidation, harassment of its journalists, a ban on hawkers distributing the newspaper in military cantonments in every city in the country, cable operators told to take its News channel off-air (Rashid, 2018) by the military establishment. 

Paradoxically, it can also be considered a powerful voice of the Pakistani ruling elite as most of the contributors of its columns are public intellectuals, former high-ranking bureaucrats, foreign office officials, and well-connected journalists.

Dawn begun as a weekly newspaper in 1941 and transformed into a daily in 1942 was the main avenue through which Mohammad Ali Jinnah (1876–1948) and the All-India Muslim League, advocated the creation of Pakistan. It was also used to establish the figure of Jinnah as the charismatic leader of the Muslims of South Asia. (Long, 2009, p. 407) 

This study investigates and analyses articles published in the opinion pages of Dawn between 10 March 2019 to 23 May 2019, including columns and editorials, but not letters to the editor and news from the past section. Dawn publishes two opinion pages in its middle. Generally, the first opinion page carries two columns and three editorial pieces. The following opinion page carries letters to the editor, news from past editions of Dawn and two small columns on current issues. 

Methodology 

 

This study uses a thematic analysis approach to study the opinion pages of Dawn and outlines the dominant discourses about the Indo-Pakistan enmity. Thematic Analysis is considered a method for identifying, analysing and reporting patterns within data. It involves searching across a data set to find repeated patterns of meaning (Braun & Clarke, 2006). This study has conducted the paragraph-wise coding of editorial and columns carrying the word ‘India’ in the NVivo software. It is a part of a larger study about the representation of India in Dawn during India’s general elections in 2019. The word discourse has been used in the findings section repeatedly in the literal sense. The coded texts unravel the weaved discourse by carefully examining the texts. The word coded texts, narrative and discourse in the analysis section refer to the same. Therefore, these terms have been used interchangeably as well.  

 

Findings 

 

‘India and Pakistan are perpetual adversaries’ emerged as one of the major themes in Dawn’s opinion pages during India’s general elections. Total 96 paragraphs from 44 articles have been coded in this theme. Its subthemes are 1) India wants to destabilise Pakistan, 2) Non-state actors obstruct peace, 3) Pakistani military opposes normalisations of relations with India, 4) Symmetry in the policy of the Congress and the BJP against Pakistan, 5) Rise of the Hindutva threat, 6) India poses a direct military threat to Pakistan, 7) Hostilities with India affect Pakistan’s developmental goals, 8) India indulges in propaganda, 9) Media is jingoistic in India, 10) India and Pakistan are geopolitical adversaries. 

 

Two of the subthemes have been configured by including smaller ideas in them. The subthemes of ‘media in India is jingoistic’ are 1) Media in India indulges in warmongering 2) Modi regime has stifled media freedom in India 3) Media spin-doctors the debate to suit nationalist narratives in both countries. Whereas the geopolitical adversaries consist of 1) India-US alliance against Pakistan and China, 2) The threat of nuclear or full-fledged war, 3) The global community is favourable to India and 4) India wants to dominate Pakistan. 

Figure 1 Word cloud of coded paragraphs

The word cloud has been created by using all paragraphs coded under this theme. The words that appeared more frequently in the coded text are visible in figure 1 includes nuclear, military, Modi, BJP, Congress, strikes, war, conflict, election, China, America, crisis, confrontation, peace, escalation, Afghanistan and Kashmir, among others. The display emphasises the frequency of words, not necessarily their importance, as word clouds do not provide the context. However, they can be an adjunct tool to support the thematic analysis, providing richer and penetrating analysis. 

 

The coded texts build a narrative painting India as an eternal threat, and as having launched a generational war against Pakistan – that it plans to further divide the country by supporting separatist groups, that it is preparing to intervene militarily to dismember Pakistan and is involved in fermenting violence, militancy and espionage. The narrative further claims that India’s strategic perspective on Pakistan has remained the same irrespective of the political party in power. It views India as wanting to undo Pakistan as it played a crucial role in the separation of Bangladesh in 1971. It now encourages Baloch separatism in Baluchistan and Pashtun separatism in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The latter was formerly known as North-West Frontier Agency (NWFP).  

 

The texts coded under the ‘Indian media is fiercely jingoistic’ subtheme described the role of the Indian media as highly problematic and built a narrative that media in India indulge in warmongering and propagates the hawkish line on Pakistan by fully supporting the ruling nationalist party BJP. It further argues that Indian media unquestionably accept the government’s narrative on the Balakot bombings while underlining that governments in both countries can spin-doctor any incident to push their propaganda.  

 

In Dawn’s op-ed page narrative, the role of China, the United States and the international community was placed within the dynamics of the Indo-Pakistan tussle, with China viewed highly positively and the United States viewed with deep scepticism and distrust. The United States and China were judged by the parameters of Pakistan’s policy priorities, and the interests of China and Pakistan were seen to be perfectly aligned. 

 

While discussing ways of dealing with India, the overall narrative argued that nuclear deterrence would ensure that hostilities would not cross beyond a certain threshold, as the international community would intervene to de-escalate tensions in the region. It further avers that if India escalated conflict, Pakistan would use nuclear weapons.

India may feel more emboldened after the Pulwama strikes to respond aggressively to any future militant attacks that it perceives to have originated in Pakistan, complacent that Pakistan will not deploy its nuclear arsenal. The focus on countering Pakistan also raises broader questions about India’s security priorities, and casts doubt on its position that it can accept a status quo with Pakistan or that it is more concerned about Chinese threats. – 06 May 2019, Modi’s threat, Huma Yusuf. 

Indian attempts to describe Pakistani postures as a nuclear bluff were described as a dangerous miscalculation. Atomic weapons are mentions repeatedly and casually in op-ed page analysis.  

 

During India’s general elections, the suicide bombing in the Pulwama district of Jammu and Kashmir led to the escalation in bilateral tensions. India claimed to have attacked the terrorist training camp in Balakot, deep inside the Pakistani territory. However, India’s claims were dismissed unanimously. Moreover, Pakistan’s release of the captured Indian Mig21-Bison pilot within 48 hours was described as a peace gesture, with one author stressing that Pakistan did India favour by not asking it to “rub its nose” on the ground before releasing the pilot. 

 

The coded texts claimed that India had deployed all tools to destabilise Pakistan. As different authors write the columns and editorials in Dawn, they express multiple perspectives. Though, overall coded texts displayed hawkish and conservative leanings. Few also expressed more accommodative and conciliatory viewpoints about India. While discussing the troubles faced by Pakistan, Indian efforts to mobilise the international community and the UN actions against terrorism were described as an attempt to isolate, destabilise and harm Pakistan. The actions which are likely to read elsewhere as humanitarian efforts are read through a strategic lens of impact on Pakistan.

 

The narrative that emerges in Dawn’s opinion pages portrays both the countries as regional and geopolitical rivals with contrary interests. The tone and tenor of PM Narendra Modi’s political campaign during the general elections was also termed anti-Pakistan and contributing factor to the increasing animosities between both countries. The coded texts manifest the bilateral rivalry and enmity at multiple levels, and always with one’s loss represented as the other’s gain and vice versa.   

 

The coded texts also reflect insecurities in Pakistan: that India is a direct military threat, that foments trouble in the restive regions and uses Afghanistan as its base, that it indulges in warmongering and has a highly nationalistic media. The overall narrative holds India responsible for troubles in bilateral relations and suggest that India is also working in tandem with global powers to undermine the core interests of Pakistan. Thus, It represents Pakistan as a nation in danger and India as an existential threat. 

 

The repeated reference of the nuclear weapons was made as deterrence against aggressive Indian designs to undo Pakistan.  

The unfortunate reality is that Pakistan has been categorised as an adversary by the US‘ establishment’, due to: America’s ‘strategic partnership’ with India against China and ‘radical Islamic terrorism’; the blame assigned to Pakistan for the US military failure in Afghanistan; Pakistan’s nuclear weapons capability and the considerable influence in Washington of the Indian-American expatriate community, the Israeli lobby and Christian ‘fundamentalists’ – Peace is difficult, 14 April 2019, Munir Akram

The paragraph above cites Pakistan’s nuclear capability as one of the reasons why the United States treats Pakistan as an adversary. It suggests, too, that an Israeli lobby, along with Indian ex-pats and Christian fundamentalists in the United States, is working to ensure that Pakistan is viewed as an adversary of the United States. India was generally positioned as a geopolitical adversary and a United States ally working against the interests of Pakistan and China. 

The coded texts also suggest that India wants to dominate Pakistan. One article specifically argued that even if a dialogue starts between the countries, India is unlikely to compromise on its stated position on Kashmir, and until it happens, the bilateral disputes cannot be resolved. It further interprets the continued territorial status quo in Jammu and Kashmir as the continued dominance of India in the region. It argues that Pakistan rejects India’s dominance in South Asia and considers this development against its core interests.

The overall narrative emphasises that India’s position on bilateral disputes is responsible for perpetual bilateral animosities, not the other way around. It discussed the world by keeping Pakistan at the centre while ignoring that there are far more enormous geopolitical and economic stakes that drive the decision of India, the United States and China in the region. 

The coded texts also suggested that China’s rise and domination are more suitable for peace in the region. It praises the global initiatives launched by the Chinese government and advises India to accept the Belt and Road Initiative, rather than imagining itself as a rival to China, while claiming that the rise of PM Narendra Modi and the nationalist forces in India are likely to intensify geopolitical competition involving India, China and Pakistan. 

The coded texts also link the hostility between India and Pakistan with the ideology of the ruling political party in India. The narrative follows a circular loop. It starts with describing PM Modi and the BJP as communal. Then it claims that Modi has failed to deliver on his promise of economic progress during his first tenure 2014-19, and now to hide his failures, he is using nationalistic rhetoric to succeed in general elections. 

 

Rising Hindu nationalism was described as hostile to Pakistan and to Muslim minorities in India in the coded texts. The uncompromising stand of India over bilateral disputes was seen as the source of hostilities and problems in the region while arguing that the ill-treatment of Muslims in Kashmir is likely to worsen under the rule of the Hindu nationalist party and will further harm bilateral relations with Pakistan. This argument was made to lay a moral claim on the territory and its majority Muslim community.  

 

The coded texts also claim that countries in South Asia are using non-state actors to hurt each other due to geopolitical and geo-economic reasons. The terrorist attacks and insurgency affect the economic prosperity and potential growth of the targeted country. It is interesting to note that Pakistan has only four neighbours: Afghanistan, India, Iran and China. Except for China, all other neighbours blame Pakistan for supporting and exporting Jihadi groups (Ganguly & Howenstein, 2009; Rehman, 2014; Stern, 2000).

The articles in op-ed pages of Dawn also dealt with India’s role in Afghanistan. They underlined the Pakistani establishment’s desire to provide the Taliban with a legitimate role in governing Afghanistan after the departure of US troops. They dismissed the US-backed Afghan government as a puppet that is unlikely to survive the Taliban offensive without US security cover. 

The overall narrative questioned the Indian presence in Afghanistan as it could use its presence in Afghanistan to destabilise troubled regions of Pakistan, mostly by supporting an insurgency in Baluchistan and Pashtun dominated areas. One of the articles also highlights that India opposes US withdrawal and providing a political role to Taliban in governing Afghanistan.

Equally little needs to be said about India’s dislike for the shape of the current peace bid in Afghanistan. Any viable peace deal will legitimise the Taliban’s role in Afghanistan. To add to India’s worries, if the sun begins to set on US troop presence as part of the deal, India would lose the hard security umbrella that enabled it to successfully expand its development footprint in Afghanistan post-9/11. It makes little sense for India to support either. - Moeed Yusuf, Afghan Peace, 07 May 2019 

In other words, Indians in Afghanistan would be targeted by the Taliban after the departure of the US forces, and no one would be able to protect them. India and Pakistan are perceived as adversaries in Afghanistan, and their perceived interests are considered poles apart in Dawn’s narrative.

In an example that demonstrates the centrality of India in the Pakistani imagination, one of the articles argues that Pakistan can have good relations with Iran despite the objections of Saudi Arabia, which has a cordial relationship with India. It is a distant link but illustrates how even minor points are made in relation to India. 

Dawn’s writers also claim that the Indian media are aggravating the situation by indulging in warmongering and supporting the policies of the right-wing government. 

armchair ‘generals’ on prime-time talk shows egged on their respective establishments towards war; the Indian media was particularly vitriolic in its shrill anti-Pakistan pronouncements. – Editorial, Fake news and war hysteria, 11 March 2019

It is important to note that one of the columnists questioned Pakistan’s continued support for Islamic terrorist groups operating in Kashmir while arguing that rather than serving any strategic depth to Pakistan, the country was being isolated internationally due to the cross-border attacks on India by Islamic terror organisations. 

A conciliatory perspective toward India is rare, whereas the hawkish perspective dominates the coded text. When there is a more conciliatory approach, it follows a pattern where the larger narrative first states and emphasises Pakistan’s stated position on Kashmir and its legitimacy, and then it mentions curbing support to Islamic militant groups attacking India, as the existing practice involves many risks. 

The possibility of nuclear war was underlined in coded texts if India decided to retaliate militarily against militant organisations based in Pakistan. One article went to the extent of claiming that the Kashmir dispute posed an existential threat to the life on the planet as tens of millions of people would likely to perish directly in a nuclear war. And nuclear winter would hit the earth, also resulting in global economic collapse. 

As Pakistan is compelled to extend material support to the Kashmiri freedom movement, war with India will become almost inevitable. Every war game of a Pakistan-India conflict indicates the high probability of its escalation to the nuclear level. Recent studies have concluded that a nuclear exchange in South Asia will kill over 100 million people, devastate the entire region and trigger a ‘small nuclear winter’ and global economic collapse. – Genocide, war or peace? - Munir Akram, 17 March, 2019

 

Two further elements were also present in this theme. First, “no new normal” should be established regarding the Indian reaction to the Pulwama suicide attack. And it must not become a routine for India to target militant groups inside Pakistan’s territory after every terror attack. Secondly, India must not believe that its Balakot strike succeeded, as it would erode the stability of mutual deterrence.  

One article specifically commented on the struggle between the security establishment and former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on the issue of dealing with India. It suggested that the security establishment targeted politicians who were willing to normalise bilateral relations with India. 

Pakistan’s real hidden rulers can and have often removed assertive civilian rulers covertly via dubious cases. That Nawaz had disputes with these forces on ties with India and jihadists is known, fans say. - Political prisoner, Dr Niaz Murtaza, 09 April 2019

As the above paragraph suggests, the followers of former PM of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif believe that he was targeted by the military establishment because he was opposed to supporting militant outfits against India and preferred the normalisation of relations. The use of the words ‘fans say’ is also notable. The author distanced himself from the stated position, although he was arguing against the treatment meted out to former PM Nawaz Sharif by the nexus of judiciary and military establishment. 

 

The narrative in the opinion pages of Dawn represents India and Pakistan as geopolitical adversaries, who belong to two different camps led by China and the United States. Afghanistan was also described as Pakistan’s backyard and theatre of conflict for both nations. At the same time, India is represented as a threat that is fomenting troubles in restive regions of Pakistan. India’s mainstream media, the ruling party, Prime Minister Modi, previous ruling governments, even Indians settled in the United States were described as antagonistic to the interests of Pakistan in the coded text.   

                                                                                                                                    

Conclusion 

 

This study contributes to the ongoing debates about the complexity of bilateral disputes and specifically examines the discourses in Dawn. The approach in Dawn’s opinion pages could be described as a collaborative facilitative frame (Hanitzsch & Vos, 2018), meaning Dawn works as a mouthpiece, collaborator and facilitator of the ruling establishment’s views at least in relation to its commentary on India. The op-ed page narrative describes India as a fascist state oppressing its Muslim population. India’s ideological and geopolitical positioning substantiates two existing concerns about the nature of the discourses that emerge in the opinion pages of Dawn. First, the discourse functions within the overall ideological framework of the state for dealing with perceived external challenges. Second, the conciliatory approaches also exist within the precincts set up by the dominant discourse. The narrative sparsely argues for changing the means and mainly focuses on the same objectives. In other words, few of the articles underline the dangers of using proxy warfare against India while magnifying the overall state rhetoric. 

This study suggests that the primary focus of Dawn’s op-ed pages during India’s general elections was Jammu and Kashmir and the ruling party's ideology in India. It would be fair to conclude that the issues directly concerned with Pakistan’s long-term national goals or identity issues were discussed with alacrity, and all the other aspects of Indian society concerning general elections were neglected. The overall narrative is mainly concerned with dissimilarities and disagreements. Overall, it represented India as a geopolitical adversary working against the interests of Pakistan even in its relationships with other countries, which are understood in terms of their impact on Pakistan. India was described as a western ally conspiring against Pakistan and China. The narrative in Dawn also viewed cooperation between India and Afghanistan as detrimental to the interests of Pakistan and favoured legitimising Taliban leadership in Afghanistan, which has close links to the security establishment in Pakistan, after the departure of United States security forces (Riedel, 2008).      

Disclosure statement 

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.                                                               

References 

 

Adnan, M., Islam, S., & Khan, A. W. (2019). Media and Foreign Policy Relationships: The Case Study of Pakistan-India Relations in The Nation and The Hindu. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences (PJSS), 39(1). 

Afzal, M. (2015). Education and Attitudes in Pakistan. Retrieved from Washington, DC: https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/SR367-Education-and-Attitudes-in-Pakistan.pdf

Ahmad, I., & Ebert, H. (2015). Breaking the Equilibrium? New Leaders and Old Structures in the India-Pakistan Rivalry. Asian Affairs: An American Review, 42(1), 46-75. doi:10.1080/00927678.2015.999518

Ahmed, N. (2010). Military and the Foreign Policy of Pakistan. South Asian Survey, 17(2), 313-330. doi:10.1177/097152311201700208

Batool, S., Yasin, Z., & Khurshid, T. (2015). Comparative Study of Peace Process between Pakistan and India in The News, Daily Dawn, and The Times of India: A Case study of'Aman Ki Asha. Journal of Political Studies, 22(2), 511. 

Bearak, B. (2000, 2000 Oct 01). Pakistan Newspaper Inspection Is Seen as Effort at Intimidation. New York Times (1923-Current file), p. 14. 

Bipan, C., Mridula, M., Aditya, M., Panikar, K., & Sucheta, M. (1989). India's Struggle for Independence 1857-1947. In: Penguin Books.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Dalrymple, W. (2015, 22 June). The Great Divide. The New Yorker. Retrieved from https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/06/29/the-great-divide-books-dalrymple

Fair, C. (2011). Lashkar-e-Tayiba and the Pakistani State. Survival, 53(4), 29-52. doi:10.1080/00396338.2011.603561

Fair, C. (2018). In Their Own Words: Understanding Lashkar-e-Tayyaba: Oxford University Press.

Fair, C., & Hamza, A. (2016). From elite consumption to popular opinion: framing of the US drone program in Pakistani newspapers. Small Wars & Insurgencies, 27(4), 578-607. doi:10.1080/09592318.2016.1189491

Ganguly, S., & Howenstein, N. (2009). India-Pakistan Rivalry in Afghanistan. Journal of International Affairs, 63(1), 127-140. 

Guha, R. (2007). India after Gandhi: the history of the world's largest democracy (1st ed.). New York: Ecco.

Hanitzsch, T., & Vos, T. P. (2018). Journalism beyond democracy: A new look into journalistic roles in political and everyday life. Journalism, 19(2), 146-164. doi:10.1177/1464884916673386

Haqqani, H. (2010). Pakistan: Between mosque and military: Carnegie Endowment.

Kermani, S. (2017). How Jinnah's ideology shapes Pakistan's identity. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40961603

Kumar Singh, A., & Amin, W. (2019). Pulwama Crisis as Seen Through Indian and Pakistani Mainstream Media. Asian Politics & Policy, 11(3), 509-513. 

Long, R. D. (2009). Dawn and the creation of Pakistan. Media History, 15(4), 407-421. 

Pintak, L., & Nazir, S. J. (2013). Pakistani journalism: at the crossroads of Muslim identity, national priorities and journalistic culture. Media, Culture & Society, 35(5), 640-665. doi:10.1177/0163443713483654

Rais, R. B. (2016). The Media and Foreign Policy Discourses in Pakistan. In P. Singh (Ed.), THE ROLE OF MEDIA IN PROMOTING REGIONAL UNDERSTANDING IN SOUTH ASIA (pp. 31-43). Retrieved from https://idsa.in/book/role-of-media-promoting-regional-understanding-south-asia

Rashid, A. (2018, 4 July). The assault on Pakistan media ahead of vote. Dawn. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-44693968

Rehman, Z. U. (2014). The Baluch Insurgency: Linking Iran to Pakistan. NOREF Report, 33. 

Riedel, B. (2008). Pakistan and Terror: The Eye of the Storm. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 618(1), 31-45. doi:10.1177/0002716208316746

Saleem, N. (2007). US media framing of foreign countries image: An analytical perspective. Canadian Journal of Media Studies, 2(1), 130-162. 

Schofield, V. (2015). WHY KASHMIR IS STILL IMPORTANT. Asian Affairs, 46(1), 18-31. doi:10.1080/03068374.2014.994961

Shah, H. (2010). The inside pages: An analysis of the Pakistani Press. South Asia Monitor, 148, 1-5. 

Shuja, S. (2007). Pakistan: Islam, radicalism and the army International Journal on World Peace, 24(2), 25-35. 

Stern, J. (2000). Pakistan's jihad culture. Foreign Aff., 79, 115. 

Tellis, A. J. (2017). Are India-Pakistan Peace Talks Worth a Damn? Retrieved from https://carnegieendowment.org/2017/09/20/are-india-pakistan-peace-talks-worth-damn-pub-73145

Tellis, A. J., Cohen, S., Fair, C., Ganguly, S., Gregory, S., & Shah, A. (2009). What’s The Problem With Pakistan. Foreign Affairs, 9-24. 

Yasmeen, S. (1994). Pakistan's cautious foreign policy. Survival, 36(2), 115-133. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00396339408442740