Since the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack, a renewed outlook towards the decades-long India-Pakistan conflict has resulted in nations around the globe taking serious interest in the issue. The banned Pak-based Lashkar-e-Taiba‘s (LeT) offshoot The Resistance Front (RTF) initially appeared to claim responsibility for killing 26 people in Kashmir. Just days later, the terror organisation issued a statement, denying the claim and labelling it an “unauthorised” message amid mounting pressure.
As a follow-up step to avenge Pahalgam, India launched its Operation Sindoor on May 7, targetting major terror infrastructures. Counter-strikes and escalating hostility have continued to define the ever-troubled relations between the neighbouring South Asian countries. Consequently, world leaders have, in some way or another, picked sides, while generally condemning terrorism.
Turkey and China are two such countries that have especially drawn attention by taking a firm stand by Pakistan. Contrarily, US President Donald Trump has doubled down on “mediating” between the nuclear-powered neighbours, pushing for immediate ceasefire. And so, the escalating conflict has remained as one of the top recent focal points of global media coverage. International news houses have largely fallen back on highlighting Trump’s involvement as a third party insisting on diplomatic resolutions. At the same time, India and Pakistan’s volatile position as nuclear powers has further driven the discourse.
Here’s how some media agencies across the United States, United Kingdom and more regions chose to report these issues to the word:
How global media covered India-Pakistan ceasefire
New York Times: A live updates blog run by the American news outlet shared a headline, “Trump announced Cease-Fire” between India and Pakistan. The US-centric approach seeped into another report titled, “Reluctant at First, Trump Officials Intervened in South Asia as Nuclear Fears Grew,” to the extent that the warring nations in question didn’t even make it to the headline in focus.
The Washington Post: While one report published on May 10 described India and Pakistan as “nuclear rivals brought nearer to war in light of Pak striking sites in India, another again insisted on US’ assistance in the matter. An article entitled “The US helped deliver an India-Pakistan ceasefire. But can it hold?” popped up in the WaPo website on may 10.
New York Post: Bringing forth another US-tinted narrative, the NY outlet shared a report titled, “Trump says India, Pakistan agree to ‘full and immediate’ cease-fire after ‘long night of talks’ mediated by US,” on May 10.
NBC News: The leading American news network pushed the same language as the US governement to report, “US-brokered ceasefire between India and Pakistan allegedly violated hours after agreement.”
Rolling Stone: With focus on music, politics and pop culture, the US outlet, though also quoting the New York Times, did not downplay Donald Trump “taking credit for the ceasefire decision. “Trump takes credit for India, Pakistan cease-fire as fighting continues,” reads a May 10 report title.
UK’s Guardian: In one of the Editorial articles featured on the UK-based outlet’s website, The Guardian also foregrounds the weight of two nuclear powers being hostile towards each other. “When two nuclear-armed neighbours clash, we should worry,” reads a report. In addition to highlighting the dialogue maintained by the US, the media house also acknowledges how the “Trump administration has little attention to spare and less diplomatic capacity,” especially since America “does not have an ambassador in New Delhi,” and “its relations with Pakistan are at a low.”
The Guardian maintains an extensive coverage of the Indian-Pakistan conflict. It mentions Beijing’s key responsibility to “press Pakistan to keep a cool head.” On top of that, articles shared shortly after the ceasefire notification speak at length about the prevailing animosity between the neighbours. “If the ceasefire agreed on Saturday has silenced the guns for now, there is little doubt that they will speak again,” notes a May 10 (BST) analysis report by an international security correspondent.
UK’s BBC: In the aftermath of the ceasefire announcement, the British news outlet pushed a report titled, “How backchannels and US mediators pulled India and Pakistan back from the brink.” Therein, BBC blatantly writes how the US president was crucially instrumental to the neighbouring nuclear powers dialing their aggressive stance back. “Before Trump’s ceasefire announcement, India and Pakistan were spiralling towards what many feared could become a full-blown conflict,” the reports reads. The UK outlet continues quoting experts about how “indispensable” US was to this outcome.
Al Jazeera: Headquartered in Qatar’s Doha, Al Jazeera’s reporting was accused of being “biased” in its approach towards covering the India-Pakistan dynamics. As seen in an Instagram video, the outlet shed light on India and Israel’s “close relationship, adding, “India has been accused of using tactics in Kashmir similar to those Israel uses against Palestinians.”
A subsequently posted op-ed on AlJazeera.com, titled “India tried to project strength but ended up showing weakness,” wrote, “The ceasefire announcement by the US president appears to have been perceived by some in India as a sign of the Modi government’s retreat under US pressure while his offer to mediate on Kashmir is being seen as an indication that India’s longstanding rejection of third-party intervention is being undermined.”
It also mentioned, ” Intended to assert strength, India’s response faltered, boosting Pakistan’s regional standing and leaving Modi’s government diplomatically weakened.” The same article added, “India’s image as a regional hegemon frayed. The Indian government clearly overestimated its Rafale jets and underestimated Pakistan’s Chinese-backed ISR systems, which enhanced battlefield precision.” And yet, the report also concludes with a disclaimer, highlighting that the author’s ideas don’t necessarily reflect the news agency’s editorial stance.
TASS: One of the Russian news agency’s reports–titled “India made series of strikes against Pakistan’s air force bases”–posted on May 10 quotes Pakistani outlet Geo TV.
China’s Global Times: With China having joined Pakistan Army in “indirect war” against India, the state media’s Global Times has been accused of peddling fake news. “We would recommend you verify your facts and cross-examine your sources before pushing out this kind of dis-information,” the Embassy of India in Beijing said in a May 7 post on X. The social media message followed A Global Time post citing anonymous Pakistani military sources. “The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) has shot down another Indian fighter jet in response to overnight airstrikes carried out by India at multiple locations in Pakistan,” the outlet wrote on May 6.
Like Global Times, other Chinese media houses like Xinhua news agency and CGTN have also heavily relied on Pakistani media to cover the news surrounding the India-Pak turmoil.