The Half-Front War
CDS General Vipin Rawat once said in an interview that we are fighting a 2.5 front war. One against an enemy country and other against internal forces within the country itself that do not support our own nation
This incident is a classic example of a “Half Front war.”
The Delhi car blast carried out by a group of doctors exposes a dangerous new dimension of internal threat — a half front war. Unlike conventional enemies across borders, this war is waged from within, by educated minds who turn their intellect toward destruction. When those sworn to save lives weaponize knowledge to harm, the moral foundation of society trembles. This is not just terrorism; it is betrayal from within — by individuals who once commanded trust and respect.
In the coming days, the judiciary will face the grave challenge of ensuring justice while upholding the rule of law. Legal battles and clever defense arguments will attempt to portray these perpetrators as victims of ideology or circumstance. Yet, the nation must remain firm — compassion must not dilute accountability. The court’s verdict will set the tone for how India confronts this insidious half front war from its own educated elite.
“We must thank our security forces who were able to resolve the big blast. Instead of learning a lesson from the small blast, otherwise a 3000 kgs explosive material could have done larger destruction than anyone can imagine.“
Narrative War in Indian Politics: A Threat to National Responsibility
In today’s hyper-connected world, political battles are no longer restricted to policies, governance, or ideology. They increasingly take the shape of narrative wars—carefully crafted stories amplified through speeches, social media, partisan platforms, and international forums. These narratives often aim to influence public perception instantly, even at the cost of national security, institutional trust, and India’s global image. Political discourse has shifted from constructive debate to competitive storytelling, where facts are secondary and optics dominate.
A concerning trend is the casual manner in which sensitive national security matters are being politicized. For instance, questions raised about how many Indian fighter jets were lost or deployed during sensitive operations like Operation Sindoor (Balakot era narrative battles) create confusion and provide ammunition to hostile foreign actors. Instead of presenting a united front on matters involving the armed forces, political leaders sometimes indulge in speculative comments, half-truths, or unverified claims. This weakens the morale of security agencies and distorts public understanding of critical defence issues.
Economy-related narratives also demonstrate this pattern. When former U.S. President Donald Trump casually declared that India’s economy was “at the bottom,” certain domestic political groups echoed the same line without verifying global economic indicators or growth data. Instead of countering ill-informed statements, some leaders internalised and spread them as political ammunition. Such behaviour may temporarily help in domestic point-scoring but ultimately damages India’s economic reputation abroad, affecting investor confidence and global partnerships.
Another deeply troubling dimension is the involvement of senior opposition leaders who, during their overseas visits, make sweeping allegations about the country’s institutions, economy, or democracy—often without concrete evidence. Statements made on foreign soil, amplified by global media, are quickly weaponised by rival nations and interest groups to portray India negatively. Constructive criticism is necessary in a democracy, but internationalising domestic politics for political mileage harms the nation’s dignity and strategic interests.
These issues reflect a larger political culture where narrative-building is prioritised over nation-building. Social media ecosystems accelerate this trend by rewarding sensationalism, emotional claims, and partisan rhetoric. Once a narrative is launched—true or false—it spreads rapidly, shaping public opinion long before facts can catch up. Political supporters, influencers, and aligned media further reinforce these narratives, turning them into echo chambers.
The narrative war also dilutes the seriousness of public debate. Leaders often avoid data-driven, policy-focused discussions because emotional narratives fetch quicker attention. This leads to an oversimplification of complex issues—whether it is the economy, defence, foreign policy, or social harmony. The long-term result is a misinformed electorate and a weakened democratic culture where noise overshadows nuance.
A mature democracy demands that political parties compete fiercely yet responsibly. National security, diplomatic reputation, and constitutional institutions must never become bargaining chips in the marketplace of narratives. Disagreement is healthy, criticism is vital, but distortion is dangerous. India’s political class must recognise that narrative wars may provide short-term electoral gains, but they inflict long-term harm on the nation’s credibility and cohesion.
Ultimately, political narratives should elevate the national interest—not erode it.
