As India’s Modi drags Pakistan into election campaign, will ties worsen?

Pakistani capital of Islamabad Fawad Chaudhry, who served as Pakistan’s communications minister in the past, claims that he was unaware that a three-word remark on social networking platform X on May 1 would bring his country into a contentious discussion that it had previously avoided up until that point: India’s loud election campaign.

“Rahul on fire…” he commented, uploading a video clip of Rahul Gandhi, a leader of the Indian opposition Congress party, in which he could be heard criticizing Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP). In the film, Rahul Gandhi is seen criticizing the BJP.
Pakistani capital of Islamabad Fawad Chaudhry, who served as Pakistan’s communications minister in the past, claims that he was unaware that a three-word remark on social networking platform X on May 1 would bring his country into a contentious discussion that it had previously avoided up until that point: India’s loud election campaign.

“Rahul on fire…” he commented, uploading a video clip of Rahul Gandhi, a leader of the Indian opposition Congress party, in which he could be heard criticizing Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP). In the film, Rahul Gandhi is seen criticizing the BJP.
Surely you are aware of this. In the present moment, the leaders of Pakistan are yearning for Congress,” Modi stated. “The Pakistani government is very eager to appoint the prince, Gandhi, to the position of Premier. Not to mention the fact that we are well aware that Congress is Pakistan’s disciple. The Pakistan-Congress collaboration has been brought to light in its entirety.

Since then, Pakistan has been used as a battering ram in the speeches of Prime Minister Modi and prominent BJP officials such as Home Minister Amit Shah. This is done in order to both criticize the opposition and demonstrate the government’s forceful response during times of tension with India’s western neighbor.

Modi used a crude, Hindi misogynistic metaphor to suggest that his government will show Pakistan its place after a veteran Congress politician made a reference to Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. Modi’s statement came after Gandhi made the reference. In a speech, Shah stated that India, under the leadership of Modi, has provided a “befitting reply” to the “terrorism” that sprang from Pakistan.
In his statement, Modi accused the opposition INDIA coalition, which is lead by the Congress party, of playing for Pakistan and providing the neighbor a “clean chit” while it has been accused of inciting “terrorism.”

This heightened emphasis on Pakistan stands in stark contrast to the months of campaigning that preceding May, during which ties between the neighbors were almost nonexistent as a topic of discussion during the election.

Chaudhry, whose tweet appeared to be the catalyst for everything, expressed his astonishment. In an interview with Al Jazeera, the lawmaker disclosed, “I was not expecting this kind of reaction, particularly from their Prime Minister Modi.”

The government of Pakistan has also responded to the comments made by Modi and Shah, describing them as a “unhealthy and entrenched obsession with Pakistan.”

In the statement that was released by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on May 14, it was stated that the comments made by Indian politicians demonstrated a “deliberate intent” to exploit hyper-nationalism for the purpose of gaining electoral advantages.

“A reckless and radical mindset is revealed by the arrogance and jingoism that is displayed by representatives of the Indian government. It is further said in the statement that “this mindset calls into question India’s capacity to be a responsible steward of its strategic capability.”

On the other hand, Pakistani influence in Indian elections is not a new phenomenon; in the past, it has even succeeded in becoming the preeminent flavor sometimes.

A nationalist narrative

Since they became independent states in August 1947, with the conclusion of British colonial control in the subcontinent, the two neighboring countries have had a contentious relationship with one another. There have been three major conflicts between the nuclear-armed nations, and they share a disputed border in the Himalayan region of Kashmir, which they both claim in its entirety but only rule in parts.

The election that took place in 2019 saw Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) win a second consecutive term in power. The campaign of the party placed a significant emphasis on Pakistan.

A suicide bomber carried out an attack on a convoy of cars transporting Indian paramilitary personnel in Indian-administered Kashmir on February 14, 2019, resulting in the deaths of forty-six civilian police officers. The terrorist organization Jaish-e-Muhammad, which is located in Pakistan, has claimed responsibility. The attack was denounced by Pakistan, which denied any involvement in the attack. However, India has long accused Pakistan of providing safe haven to terrorist organizations such as Jaish-e-Muhammad.
A few days later, on February 26, Indian fighter jets crossed the Line of Control, which is the de facto border between the two countries in certain areas of Jammu and Kashmir. They then blasted what New Delhi claimed were hideouts of armed rebels who were preparing to target India.

Pakistan retaliated the following day by sending its own fighter jets into area controlled by India. These jets were able to shoot down an Indian aircraft and arrest the pilot, Abhinandan Varthaman, who was ultimately freed two days later.
During the nearly week-long combat that took place between the two days, the two nuclear-armed nations came dangerously close to going to war. This occurred only a few weeks before the election in India that year.

In the years that followed, Pakistan continued to play an important role in the electoral campaign. After a number of independent think tanks and analysts came to the conclusion, based on their studies, that Indian planes had not hit any significant target when they entered Pakistan-controlled territory, opposition parties pressed the government of Modi for evidence of the success it had claimed it had achieved in the mission.

Modi turned those questions on their heads, claiming that they demonstrated that the opposition did not have faith in India’s armed forces and instead believed Pakistan, which had similarly denied that any serious damage had been caused by Indian strikes.

Walter Ladwig, a senior lecturer of international relations at King’s College in London, stated that in comparison to 2019, Islamabad is now a secondary concern for New Delhi, with Beijing becoming the “principal foreign policy challenge.” This is despite the fact that the Indian Prime Minister has once again brought Pakistan into the election campaign.

“It is true that the events of the Balakot attack in 2019 were used in the campaign, but that was a pretty unusual occurrence,” Ladwig said, referring to the town in Pakistan that was struck by Indian jets. “It was a pretty unusual occurrence.” I believe that the invocations of Pakistan in this election are a means of diverting attention away from the fact that India has lost land to China and that the government has been unable to significantly ameliorate the situation or achieve a restoration to the status quo that existed prior to the year 2020.
When Ladwig made this statement, he was referring to the conflicts that took place between India and China in the Himalayan region of Galwan in June of 2020. During these conflicts, more than twenty Indian soldiers were killed, while China only lost four soldiers.

Since that time, numerous independent analysts have pointed to evidence that the People’s Liberation Army has taken over portions of terrain that India had previously held along their contested boundary. The government of India has rejected the notion that it has lost any land to China.