On May 14, 2025, India banned the X handles of Chinese state-run media outlets Xinhua News Agency and Global Times, accusing them of spreading Pakistani propaganda during heightened Indo-Pak tensions following Operation Sindoor. The decision, which also targeted Turkey’s TRT World, aims to curb disinformation after India’s strikes on terrorist sites in Pakistan. This article explores whether banning these handles can promote peace or risks escalating diplomatic and regional conflicts.
In This Article:
The Ban: Targeting Disinformation
India’s Ministry of Electronics and IT blocked the X accounts of Xinhua and Global Times after they posted unverified claims, including a Global Times report, citing Pakistani sources, alleging Pakistan downed three Indian jets during Operation Sindoor on May 7–8, 2025. India’s embassy in Beijing called these claims “baseless,” accusing the outlets of violating journalistic ethics. The Press Information Bureau had flagged similar misinformation, prompting the ban to counter narratives that could inflame Indo-Pak tensions.
Context: A Volatile Information War
Operation Sindoor targeted terror bases in Pakistan and PoK in response to the April 22, 2025, Pahalgam attack, which killed 26 people. Pakistan’s retaliatory drone strikes, allegedly supported by Turkish drones, intensified the conflict. Chinese media, historically critical of India, amplified Pakistan’s stance, with Global Times questioning India’s actions and Xinhua echoing similar sentiments. The ban reflects India’s broader strategy to combat foreign disinformation, seen in its rebuttal of China’s Arunachal Pradesh renaming claims. Globally, nations like Sri Lanka and Australia have restricted social media during crises to prevent unrest, providing a precedent for India’s actions.
Can Bans Promote Peace?
Supporters argue that banning these handles disrupts propaganda that could incite domestic unrest or mislead international perceptions, potentially stabilizing Indo-Pak relations. By limiting state-backed narratives, India aims to reduce the risk of escalatory rhetoric, as evidenced by the US-brokered ceasefire on May 10, 2025. Controlling disinformation may create space for diplomatic dialogue, especially after heightened tensions.
Critics, however, doubt the ban’s effectiveness. A 2019 Ipsos survey showed 71% of global respondents, including 69% in Malaysia, believe social media bans fail due to VPNs and alternative platforms. In Africa, such restrictions have suppressed free speech without resolving conflicts. The ban risks straining India-China relations, already tense over border disputes, and could alienate Pakistan, hindering peace talks.
Long-Term Challenges
The ban underscores the complexity of regulating state-controlled media on global platforms. While India aims to curb disinformation, it faces accusations of censorship, mirroring China’s own social media controls. Propaganda may shift to other channels, as seen with militant groups post-bans. Sustainable peace requires addressing root issues like cross-border terrorism and fostering bilateral trust, beyond silencing social handles. Social media’s role as both a dialogue enabler and a propaganda tool demands balanced regulation over outright bans.
-By Manoj H