There used to be times when the people of any state would know about the start of a military conflict if they were not in the war zone; through relatives in the war zone or through the next day’s newspapers; or the blaring of sirens in anticipation of an air raid from enemy bombers.
Today the technological strides made in the domain of information technology has had its direct bearing on how the news travels from one point to the other. No longer the next day’s newspaper, not the blaring of the sirens. Now even the dog fight jets do not swoop low to treetop level to be visible to the common man; now much of the combat is taking place “beyond visual range” or BVR and kills have to be registered or confirmed digitally; much above our proverbial heads.
Consequently, the information war between the warring states has graduated from wartime handouts to the war being fought through social media. That war tactic is both psychological in nature and has its strategic value. Practically war does not start between the two states; rather it returns from the brink, either due to the compromise of the element of surprise or because the intent was never a full-fledged war, rather it was only for a warning; a metaphor for de-escalation and not escalation. Likewise it can be argued that now the wars do not start as per the Pakistan Studies curriculum at 0600 hours on 6 September 1965 or at 1700 hours on 3 December 1971; rather a common citizen, if he or she has access to social media like Twitter, can feel it in ‘real time’.
Keeping the preamble in mind many conflicts in the recent months and years have followed the patterns noted, especially where the two states had matching hardware like India and Pakistan; or each state had its high point like IDF infiltration into Iran and its air force; while Iran was balancing it out with its missile development.
Taking a pointed look at the seven-month long attrition between India and Pakistan since May 2025, we will observe that the actual war did not took place for more than five or six days, if drone strikes prior to May 7’s early-hours strike on jihadi sites are included; however, the fear of war as well as inflicting as much damage economically through longer flying routes was in a way a form of war.
The May conflict was preceded by NOTAMS successively issued by either the Indian Air Force, the Pakistani Air Force or the respective Navies; in a few instances the ground forces. According to the data available, the IAF strikes on May 7, stretching from Bahawalpur to Kotli were undertaken when a NOTAM from the IAF was already in force restricting air traffic in the area in Rajasthan close to the India-Pakistan border and adjacent to various IAF bases like Jaisalmer or Bikaner. The timings as available with Saymon Twitter account were 1530 May 7 to 2130 May 8 which in Pakistani time conversion stood at 2030 May 7 to 0230 May 9. The IAF strikes took place before the formal start of the NOTAM.
Consequently, the citizen is forced to detach himself from the ‘alert position’ and thinks what concerns him is his bread and butter. Consequently, the regional conflicts are now more of a theoretical war gaming than actually happening. While there might not be smoke clouds rising above the major cities, the state of mind does distract the states and the populaces, towards issues of trivial importance.
Here it is important to note that the NOTAM or ‘note to the airman’ is a warning for the civilian aircraft to stay away from the region earmarked in the NOTAM for civilian life safety. The Ukrainian airline crash near Tehran on January 8, 2020 was in fact treated as an instance where the IRGC or IRIAF did not issued a timely NOTAM when they were all set to fire missiles at USAF Ein Al Assad AFB in retaliation to IGRC chief Maj Gen Qasem Soleimani’s assassination in Baghdad airport. It may be noted that the case was decided against the Ukrainian carrier recently in March 2025 by a Canadian court.
The NOTAM issuance by the respective countries’ civil aviation authorities in close consultation with the defence forces, especially the air forces, has taken the form of an undeclared war between the two neighboring states since then.
After the slowing down of hostilities between India and Pakistan after May 2025 after the reported intervention by the US administration and most importantly the US President; the two states seem to have mastered the art of threats and counter threats through the issuance of NOTAMs without going to all-out war to raise what can be called the ‘American eyebrows’.
After the much trumpeted visit of Indian PM Modi to the Indian aircraft carrier, IS Vikrant, in October; where the seamen and women sang an overtly militant song ‘Sindoor’ in the presence of the country’s PM, the announcement of tri-services war games close to the Sir Creek in the soft belly area of Sindh which borders the Indian state of Rajasthan, sent alarm bells to all concerned that another so-called anti-terror strike on the pattern of May 7 was round the corner. That state of affairs, punctuated with inflammatory statements from political and military officials in New Delhi, was enough to raise the geo political temperatures; promoting Pakistan Air Force as well as Pakistan Navy to stand alert.
The Indian NOTAM for exercises close to the Pakistani exclusive economic zone or EEZ, sometimes Indian Navy firing range or in other instances inclusion of all the three services, played its psychological warfare role. There were times when Pakistan too had issued NOTAMS not to undertake any offensive action, but to send a subtle signal that the level of alert across the border was at an all-time high.
There might have been many precise moments not reported on either side by the print or electronic media when it was basically a return from the brink, when hostilities might have erupted. For the international media looking from a distance, it was only a noise of war gaming and spyware and not an actual conflict. However, for the people of the two nations; it created a war euphoria used as desired by the political and non-political actors. Another dividend for the regional players was that they actually did not trigger a conflict to attract international intervention but stopped short of speaking out their mind to the adversary.
Not digressing more into the role of the abovementioned ‘actors’, today war scenarios are punctuated more by psychological sabre rattling. While for the concerned militaries, these warnings and NOTAMs are the way to send across subtle signals, the impact on the common man is growing cynicism. An aware citizen is forced to think over what state of affairs he or she is into.
Consequently, the citizen is forced to detach himself from the ‘alert position’ and thinks what concerns him is his bread and butter. Consequently, the regional conflicts are now more of a theoretical war gaming than actually happening. While there might not be smoke clouds rising above the major cities, the state of mind does distract the states and the populaces, towards issues of trivial importance.
