India And The Battle Of Narratives: Strategic Communication In An Age Of Perception Warfare – Analysis

Warfare has been as old as mankind and has always evolved with the accompanying technical, social and political advances. Each generation has witnessed the evolution of a new way of waging war, along with a new language of war and a new understanding of war, from the stone implements of ancient warfare to the precision-guided munitions and satellite communication of today. A major characteristic of this change in the twenty-first century is the deliberate and systematic contestation over the interpretation of the conflict itself. This aspect, which can be summed up in the term ‘narrative warfare’, describes a form of warfare in which the mind is the battlefield, perception the weapon and audiences – domestic, international and transnational – the territory to be seized or protected. 

 The significance of the narrative in statecraft isn’t a recent revelation. Ancient Indian strategic theory, most succinctly put forth in Kautilya’s Arthashastra, recognized the importance of the psychological and informational components of state power along with military and economic means (Rangarajan 1992). Even “Itihaas” texts like Ramayana and Mahabharata have clear demonstrations of narrative warfare. Sun Tzu, a Chinese strategist, said that “Supreme excellence is to seize the enemy’s forces without engaging in battle”(Sun Tzu, trans. Griffith, 1963), which is precisely what narrative warfare aims to do. The narrative construction, spread, contestation, and reception have undergone a qualitative shift in scale, speed and complexity due to the confluence of digital communication technology, social media platforms, news 24/7, algorithmic amplification, and non-state actors in the global information landscape.

Definitions of Narrative Warfare

Narrative warfare, as per Freedman, is defined as the process of systematically developing and implementing a constructed story with a definite frame, symbols, and information aimed at changing perceptions, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of target populations in order to achieve strategic, military or political aims (Freedman, 2006). In her seminal work Counter-Terrorism: Narrative Strategies, Ajit Maan identifies the strategic nature of narrative as something inherent; it can never be neutral as it is always being created with an aim to serve certain interests (Maan, 2015).

Maan goes on to explain that the purpose of a narrative is to convince target populations to identify with a specific narrative, as a means to interpret events, actions, and characters (Maan, 2015). The notion of strategic narrative, according to Miskimmon et al. (2013), is used to denote representations of a sequence of events and identities that are constructed by political agents in order to give order and meaning to the surrounding world, thus shaping the behavior of others both domestically and internationally (Miskimmon et al., 2013). Strategic narratives can be used to legitimate and delegitimize state actions, form alliances, create enmities, and establish national identity and goals as a strategy of interstate competition. To sum up, narrative warfare is not the fight over information control rather over the interpretation of information which also distinguishes it from information warfare.

21^st Century: The Age of Narratives

With the advent of social media and advances in communication technology in the past couple decades, digital battles have arisen at a quick pace. Since narrative warfare is dependent on reach and flow, both of which are fulfilled by present-day communication landscape, the battle of narratives has also taken a sharp turn in this century. “Winning hearts and minds” was a popular slogan used in the Vietnam War, as well as in Iraq and Afghanistan wars, which clearly illustrated how a mere military victory is far from being enough to secure one’s success. The Arab Spring in 2010-2012 demonstrated the potential of digital information to spread quickly on social media and the power of mass protest to change governments. In the case of ISIS, the advanced use of social media in the recruiting, radicalization and terror branding of non-statist actors showed the ability of non-state actors to out-compete traditional military actors through the use of narrative warfare tactics (Berger & Morgan, 2015). The Russian interference in the U.S. Presidential Elections of 2016 and the subsequent ‘annexation’ of the Crimean Peninsula, which was preceded by an extensive narrative campaign justifying the protection of Russian speakers in Crimea as oppressed people, was another case of the evolution of techniques of narrative warfare (Pomerantsev, 2019). 

Hence, both the state and the non-state actors have been meticulously utilising the power of narratives to their desired ends. Thus, 21^st century conflicts are not only fought on the battleground but also in the minds of the people. Recent conflicts like the Russia-Ukraine war, Israel-Hamas War or the short four-day war between India and Pakistan displayed one commonality which was the narrative battlespace being equally active as the military battlefield. In this evolving nature of warfare, a country that quickly acknowledges and adapts to the changing needs of modern-day combat will have an edge over the adversary.

India and the Narrative Architecture

India, as a civilisational state with an oral tradition of knowledge, has long been adept at storytelling with plethora of literature like the Puranas, Ramayana, Mahabharata, etc. It has a substantial narrative capital which rests on three main pillars: cultural and civilisational heritage, democratic identity “being the mother of democracy” and development aspirations as a leader of Global South. In addition to it, the current dispensation has constructed a narrative of India as Vishwa Guru — the world’s teacher — positioning the country as developmentally distinct from the West and as a champion of environmentalism, clean governance, and peaceful co-existence (Srivastava, 2025). This framing is grounded in the multilateral engagement, where India’s engagement is not restricted by any alliance but guided by national interest, projecting itself as a global solution provider (through initiatives like International Solar Alliance (ISA), Vaccine Maitri during Covid 19 and Voice of Global South Summit). 

India’s Indo-Pacific narrative further emphasises inclusivity, freedom of navigation, and cultural connectivity, enhancing its legitimacy as a counterbalance to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (Srivastava, 2025). The network of 32 million Indians living abroad in high-impact positions in industries, academic institutions, technology companies, and politics in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and the Middle East is a considerable but underexploited source of narrative capital for India (Ministry of External Affairs, 2023). Indian diaspora, democratic institutions, television industry, etc. are the carriers of the Indian narrative globally.

However, these efforts aren’t enough as India suffers from some structural gaps in the narrative domain due to which India fails to project its story worldwide. Firstly, India does not possess a centralized, institutionalized strategy of managing its narratives which results in the innablity to coordinate its narrative efforts due to fragmentation among several ministries. Secondly, India lacks a credible international media resource capable of competing with international media giants like BBC, Al Jazeera, RT, and CGTN. Third significant gap in India’s narrative architecture concerns its defensive measures against hostile narratives produced by rival nations which was clearly evident during Operation Sindoor where India, despite gaining military successes, failed to dominate the narrative space. 

India also suffers from the fragmentation of its national media environment, creating a fragmented and highly contradictory national narrative. Foreign intelligence services and influence operations often play into the division in India’s national discourse – promoting communal disharmony, secessionism in the border areas, and mistrust in the national institutions – because of India’s relatively liberal media environment (Raman, 2018). Lastly, India faces a dilemma in its relationship with the Indian diaspora as a narrative resource. India has no institutional mechanism that serves the function of Israel’s Hasbara or the Chinese Overseas Chinese Affairs Office in mobilizing its diaspora communities in supporting the state’s national narrative (Chellaney, 2020).

Recommendations for Indian Policymakers

First recommendation pertains to developing a National Comprehensive Narrative Strategy that properly outlines the narrative-building and perception-management framework by defining key operational terms, stating clear objectives, and establishing National Narrative Strategic Council (Pant & Joshi, 2016). Secondly, India needs a robust external broadcasting capability to project its story worldwide in a manner that resonates with the global audience at large. BBC and Al-Jazeera present as good examples to learn from. Thirdly, India needs to develop a proactive digital narrative capability rather than a reactionary approach which costed India during Operation Sindoor too. The Indian narrative capability should be such that it is active round the clock. 

Fourthly, India needs to make a significant effort to protect its audience from foreign manipulation by investing in a national media literacy mission because a narrative is only effective if it is able to persuade the targeted audience. Finland, which created an excellent national program to develop media literacy skills, can be a good example to learn from (Makinen, 2021). Fifthly, India should build a structured Diaspora Engagement Mechanism diaspora members perceive their engagement as a two-way street, then they will prove to be a credible tool for India’s narrative dissemination (Hall, 2019). Lastly, a systematic narrative and strategic communications approach musty be integrated within the military doctrine along with better civil-military synergy. Proper role clarity between the civilian leadership and the military command will help in better management of the narrative space.

Conclusion

Military power still constitutes the primary determinant of national strength and is critical in winning a conflict, however, the evolving nature of warfare demands states to polish their narrative strengths too. The advent of social media has made it all the more compelling since it has acted as a boost to this battle of narratives where information is available in a single click. Modern-day conflicts have highlighted narrative warfare is becoming an increasingly important factor in determining the outcome of international battles of legitimacy and strategic competition.

Countries like UK, with its 77^th Brigade dedicated for narrative management, have acknowledged the change and have adapted accordingly. With a long civilizational tradition of storytelling, India needs to quickly tap into its narrative assets and tread the path to achieve narrative superiority. India’s position as a rising power in the early 21st century will depend not just on the size of its economy or military capabilities but how well it succeeds at telling the right story about itself. It is time to develop and implement a strategic narrative doctrine to make this happen.

References

• Berger, J. M., & Morgan, J. (2015). The ISIS Twitter census: Defining and describing the population of ISIS supporters on Twitter. The Brookings Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World, 20(3), 1–68.
• Chellaney, B. (2020). India’s strategic blind spots in the information war. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 14(2), 33–57.
• Freedman, L. (2006). The transformation of strategic affairs. Adelphi Papers, 46(379), 1–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/05679320600861253
• Hall, I. (2019). Modi and the reinvention of Indian foreign policy. Bristol University Press.
• Maan, A. K. (2015). Counter-terrorism: Narrative strategies. University Press of America.
• Makinen, M. (2021). Media literacy education as a civic competence: The Finnish approach. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 13(2), 56–72. https://doi.org/10.23860/JMLE-2021-13-2-4
• Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India. (2023). Annual report 2022–23. https://www.mea.gov.in
• Miskimmon, A., O’Loughlin, B., & Roselle, L. (2013). Strategic narratives: Communication power and the new world order. Routledge.
• Pant, H. V., & Joshi, Y. (2016). India’s emerging national security architecture: Challenges and prospects. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 10(4), 107–133.
• Pomerantsev, P. (2019). This is not propaganda: Adventures in the war against reality. PublicAffairs.
• Raman, B. (2018). India’s strategic communication: The need for a comprehensive approach. Observer Research Foundation Occasional Paper, 142, 1–28.
• Rangarajan, L. N. (Ed. & Trans.). (1992). Kautilya: The Arthashastra. Penguin Books.
• Srivastava, A. (2025, March). A decadal snapshot of India’s soft power strategies (2014–2024) (ORF Special Report No. 251). Observer Research Foundation. https://www.orfonline.org/research/a-decadal-snapshot-of-india-s-soft-power-strategies-2014-2024
• Tzu, S. (1963). The art of war (S. B. Griffith, Trans.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 5th century BCE)

About the authors:

• Prof. Jagmeet Bawa, Department of South and Central Asian Studies, Central University of Punjab, Bathinda, India.
• Utkarsh Tandon, Post Graduate Student, Department of South and Central Asian Studies, Central University of Punjab, Bathinda, India.