In the wake of India’s recent Operation Sindoor, which exposed significant vulnerabilities in Pakistan’s defence apparatus, Pakistan Army Chief General Asim Munir has intensified his accusations against India, alleging that New Delhi is orchestrating terrorist activities inside Pakistan. This narrative was reaffirmed at the 71st Corps Commanders’ Conference in Rawalpindi, where Munir and the military top brass sought to project unity amid mounting internal security challenges and public scrutiny.

Munir accused India of employing “nefarious activities through proxies,” specifically referencing the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) as “Fitna al-Khawarij” and Baloch militants as “Fitna al-Hindustan.” 

These claims, however, are widely dismissed by Indian officials and independent observers, who point out that the TTP is a Pakistani offshoot of the Afghan Taliban, while Baloch insurgents have longstanding grievances with the Pakistani state. Critics argue that such allegations serve as a convenient diversion from Pakistan’s persistent internal violence and the military’s inability to curb homegrown extremism.

The recent spike in violence—highlighted by the abduction and killing of nine passengers by Baloch militants—was again attributed to Indian interference by Pakistani authorities, despite a lack of concrete evidence. This pattern of externalizing blame has become a hallmark of the Pakistan Army’s response to domestic security failures.

Operation Sindoor, launched by India on May 7 in retaliation for the Pahalgam terror attack that killed 26 people, saw precision strikes on terror camps and military targets in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir. While Pakistan’s official narrative downplays these strikes, independent reports indicate that the operation dealt a significant blow to Pakistan’s military prestige and exposed gaps in its defence preparedness.

Instead of addressing these military setbacks, Munir has focused on diplomatic engagements, touting visits to the US, Iran, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE as evidence of Pakistan’s proactive foreign policy. However, analysts note that while Iran and Turkey have traditionally supported Pakistan, Gulf states maintain strong ties with India and refrain from taking sides on the Kashmir issue, and the US remains sceptical of Pakistan’s anti-terror credentials.

Munir also revived the familiar Kashmir narrative, asserting that what India calls “terrorism” is, in his view, a “legitimate struggle as per international conventions.” He reiterated Pakistan’s commitment to providing “political, diplomatic, and moral support” to Kashmiris, framing the conflict as a matter of self-determination under UN Security Council resolutions. This rhetoric, however, is seen by many as an attempt to deflect attention from Pakistan’s internal challenges and to maintain the army’s traditional posture of resistance against India.

Despite repeated promises of retaliation and warnings against future Indian actions, Munir emphasised Pakistan’s “restraint and maturity” in the face of what he called “unprovoked aggression.” He cautioned that any assumption of Pakistani constraints in the event of further violations would be a “dangerous misreading of strategic fundamentals”.

Ultimately, the Pakistan Army’s leadership appears more comfortable blaming India for its woes than confronting the root causes of domestic instability. Each new terror incident is attributed to Indian machinations, while military embarrassments like Operation Sindoor are glossed over. The real victims of this ongoing blame game are ordinary Pakistanis, who continue to bear the brunt of deteriorating security and a leadership unwilling to acknowledge uncomfortable truths.

Agencies