In the evolving landscape of international relations, traditional instruments of statecraft, military power, economic leverage, and diplomatic manoeuvring have been augmented by a potent, intangible force: Disinformation. This phenomenon, characterised by the deliberate dissemination of false or misleading information to shape perceptions, influence decisions, and sow discord, represents a novel vector of disruption in foreign policy. Far from mere propaganda, contemporary disinformation campaigns leverage digital platforms, AI-generated content, and coordinated networks to achieve strategic objectives with deniability and at minimal cost. Academic discourse in international relations theory, drawing from concepts like hybrid warfare and cognitive security, increasingly frames this as a gray zone tactic that blurs the lines between peace and conflict, eroding trust in institutions and complicating bilateral and multilateral engagements.
A stark illustration emerged recently in India-US trade relations. On July 13, 2026, Reuters reported that India had rejected a quick trade deal with the US, citing unnamed sources who suggested New Delhi was holding out for better terms amid confidence from other partners. Union commerce minister Piyush Goyal swiftly rebutted the claim on X, describing it as “completely false, baseless and misleading.” He highlighted his “fantastic meetings” with US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer in June, reaffirming commitments to a balanced, commercially meaningful agreement benefiting stakeholders in both nations. US ambassador to India Sergio Gor echoed this, posting: “Fake news alert! No one has rejected anything. Both sides had very constructive meetings… Reuters-you can do better!” Commerce secretary Rajesh Agrawal added that negotiations were progressing well without major challenges.
This episode underscores how a single report, amplified by global media and social platforms, can inject friction into vital partnerships. Even if corrected rapidly, the initial narrative risks shaping public and elite perceptions, potentially complicating negotiations or fuelling domestic political pressures.
Another recent case involving India highlights the transnational amplification of falsehoods. Viral narratives claimed that Indian tankers were forced to pay Iran in Chinese yuan for transit fees amid regional tensions in the Strait of Hormuz, framed as a national humiliation signalling India’s weakness and drift into China’s financial orbit due to sanctions. The story gained rapid traction on X, Chinese platforms, Al Arabiya, Reuters echoes, and finance sites in Taiwan and Hong Kong. India’s ministry of external affairs fact check unit labelled it baseless fake news and part of a coordinated smear campaign. The Iranian embassy in India also rejected related stories. Reuters later clarified that some Indian refiners used yuan via ICICI Shanghai under a temporary US waiver, a limited commercial practice seen elsewhere, including in Russia trade, not a humiliating transit fee. Ground reality involved no forced payments; India secured safe passage through naval coordination and diversified mechanisms. Chinese-aligned platforms reportedly seeded the spin, with social media accelerating the framing before official pushback.
The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has systematically employed disinformation against India, both in direct conflicts and proxy scenarios. During the 2020 Galwan Valley clash, China engaged in informatised warfare, spreading claims that downplayed its casualties, asserted the incident occurred on its territory, and disseminated misleading videos or images. Indian and international reports documented fake content portraying exaggerated Chinese victories or Indian setbacks, contributing to information fog that delayed de-escalation and influenced global narratives. China censored domestic reports of its losses while accusing India of misinformation.
In conflicts where China is not a direct party, such as Operation Sindoor, Beijing masterminded disinformation to undermine Indian capabilities. The Indian embassy in Beijing, took to Twitter to expose the falsehoods peddled by Chinese State-controlled media. A US government report also exposed Chinese use of fake accounts and AI-generated clips to peddle falsehoods about Rafale jet performance, aiming to hinder French sales and promote its own J-35 jets. This extended beyond the India-Pakistan theatre, trying to target India’s defence partnerships and military credibility.
Recent misinformation on Arunachal Pradesh exemplifies ongoing hybrid pressures. Viral videos falsely claimed Chinese PLA troops had advanced 60 km into Indian territory, circulating on social media to spread panic and undermine confidence in the Indian Army. The Army’s fact-check unit and PIB fact check debunked these as old, unrelated footage (some from Thai TikTok), unrelated to the border. Such claims aim to fuel anti-government narratives and test India’s resolve in sensitive regions. Indian forces have consistently thrashed these narratives with timely clarifications, emphasising routine exercises or manipulated content.
India has responded with legislative and institutional measures. Initiatives include the PIB fact check unit, strengthened IT Rules for intermediary liability, and efforts under the ministry of electronics and information technology to combat fake news. Proposals for digital literacy, platform accountability, and rapid response mechanisms feature in ongoing policy discussions. Further steps could involve dedicated cognitive security agencies, enhanced public-private partnerships for AI-driven detection, and mandatory transparency in algorithmic amplification. Investing in media literacy education and resilient communication infrastructures is also crucial.
Taiwan offers instructive models for countering PRC disinformation. Facing relentless cognitive warfare, Taiwan has implemented a whole-of-society approach: Banning select Chinese platforms, enacting the Anti-Infiltration Act to curb foreign interference in elections and funding, establishing a Disinformation Coordination Team for identification-debunking-combat-punishment, and promoting widespread media literacy. Civil society NGOs use AI for real-time monitoring, while government teams provide rapid fact-checks. These measures have built public resilience without fully sacrificing openness, demonstrating that proactive, multi-layered defences can mitigate authoritarian information operations.
Disinformation disrupts foreign policy by eroding alliances, amplifying domestic divisions, and creating pretexts for escalation. For India, navigating a complex neighbourhood and global rivalries demands treating information as a strategic domain. By refining legal frameworks, fostering societal vigilance, and collaborating with like-minded democracies, India can safeguard its narrative sovereignty. In an era where battles are won or lost in the information space before physical theatres, proactive mastery of this domain is not optional but imperative for credible foreign policy.
(The views expressed are personal)
This article is authored by Sriparna Pathak, professor, China Studies and International Relations, Jindal School of International Affairs, OP Jindal Global University, Sonipat.
