The Bollywood movies have been used as one of the most potent tools of defamation against Pakistan in a world where soft power is far more effective in shaping a global narrative. What passes off as popular culture, high-paced spy films, nationalistic action movies, and action films, is in fact a persistent effort to label Pakistan as the global terrorist state of the 21st century. This is not incidental but a calculated, recurring, and even highly interwoven cinematic assault connected to the Kashmir issue. Indian filmmakers reinforce Indian foreign policy by repeatedly depicting Pakistan as a funder of terrorism, which enables New Delhi to legitimize its policies in the occupied valley. India focused on the absconding international criticism of its human-rights violations, and socialized people within the country, and has specifically focused on moulding its public opinion to perceive Pakistan as an adversary and threat.
The outcome is the intentional spread of hate that contaminates bilateral relations and hurts the image of Pakistan way outside South Asia. Against a backdrop of the Himalayas, where decades of suffering and struggle are hidden beneath the charm of the Kashmir Valley, another war is unfolding on the silver screens of India. In Bollywood, it has become a propaganda machine that is unrelenting as it pumps out film after film slandering Pakistan as the sponsor of terrorism, with the Kashmir conflict twisted and deformed to extinguish Kashmiri hopes of self-rule. It is not a faint piece of storytelling, but a blood libel that is carefully constructed to establish Pakistan as a rogue nation. However, in the midst of this onslaught of hatred, the indomitable nature of the Kashmiri nation comes through a silent, rebellious triumph of their entitlement to justice, self-respect, and freedom from the infidels’ occupation.
The most recent example is Dhurandhar (2025). It has sparked outrage for depicting Karachi’s Lyari as a hub of gangs and mafias that supply lethal weapons to ISI-sponsored jihadi groups. This portrayal reflects a recurring trend in Bollywood’s spy-thriller genre. Not surprisingly, the film is Jio Studio`s production, owned by Mukesh Ambani, who is a beneficiary of Modi`s globetrotting.
Another instance is URI: The Surgical Strike (2019). It romanticizes Cross-LoC attacks in the aftermath of the Uri incident, which labels Pakistan as the one terror source in Kashmir, with no mention of the UN resolutions on the occupied valley and violations of human rights there. This involves the blinding of civilians by using pellet guns, curfews without end, and arbitrary arrests. The revenge missions in Pakistan depicted in Phantom (2015), as well as in other films such as Baby (2015), Naam Shabana (2017), and Raazi (2018), feature the ISI as the perennial villain, while Pakistanis are stereotyped as fanatics.
This misrepresentation is further outrageously heightened by Kashmir-specific movies. Hyped by the Indian leadership. For example, The Kashmir Files (2022) highlights the 1990s Kashmiri Pandits exodus and depicts the Kashmiri Muslims as a uniform block of bloodthirsty barbarians, lusting after Hindu women, betraying their neighbours, and committing atrocities without shades of grey. It was denounced by critics across the world as Islamophobic propaganda, which overemphasized events, omitted Muslim suffering in the conflict, and provoked anti-Muslim hate, and theatre audiences were shouting derogatory phrases. An international jury head termed it as vulgar propaganda and charged it with inciting communal violence.
As of Article 370 (2024), it glorified the 2019 repeal of the special status of Kashmir as a heroic victory, portraying the region as anarchic when it had autonomy and peaceful when it had been abrogated, despite actual consequences such as communication blockages, mass arrests, and unrest. It holds Kashmiri politicians in derision as corrupt, militants in derision as Pakistani puppets, and stone-pelters in derision as paid. The critics termed it a thinly disguised piece of propaganda in favour of the ruling party. Although even earlier movies, such as Haider (2014), a Hamlet adaptation set in the 1990s insurgency, provide some sort of nuance, they all still set the conflict within an Indian context and silenced Kashmiri voices. The older ones, such as Mission Kashmir (2000) and Roja (1992), set the atmosphere in which the landscape is idealized, and militancy is depicted as alien.
Indian films summon Pulwama, Uri, or fantasy infiltrations to present Kashmiris as not a nation that needs freedom, but as misled chess pieces or terrorists. Ignoring the fact of documented human-rights violations and the UN-sanctioned self-determination.
According to the recorded data, Pakistan has lost an estimated 80,000 human lives in the war against terrorism and crippling militant cells. The ideological irony is unbelievable: India boasts that it is victimized, but it was spreading divisions with the help of blockbusters, justifying crackdowns in Kashmir and isolating Pakistan. The foreign and cultural repercussion is also harsh. Following the Uri and Pulwama attacks, India banned Pakistani artists from working in the Bollywood industry, effectively terminating a short phase of people-to-people interaction in the form of cinema and music. Pakistan reacted by banning Indian films. There has been a consistent withdrawal from cricket series between the two countries, trade between them has stagnated, and channels of dialogue have been forced to freeze. Within such a setting, movies that depict the entire Pakistani nation as devils are worrisome, for that will only ignite hatred and violence.
Therefore, the international community must realize why only one of the two Asian rivals feels the need to spread hate speech against the other, produce propaganda films, and use anti-Pakistan slogans to win elections, while the other shows restraint. As long as Indian cinema continues to perpetuate this unhealthy trend, it will remain complicit in fostering cross-border hostility. Most importantly, entertainment should serve as a bridge between societies, not as a vehicle for cultural hatred or the promotion of communal violence.
Be the first to comment