A detailed report has accused Western newsrooms of systematically underreporting state violence in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), Balochistan, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, arguing that editorial priorities in major global capitals have consistently mirrored the foreign policy interests of their respective governments rather than the ground realities faced by civilians. The report, published by Firstpost, was released on 1 August and draws attention to what it describes as a deliberate information blackout around Pakistani security forces' actions in PoK.

Killings in PoK and the Silence That Followed

According to the report, demonstrators in towns such as Rawalakot, Mirpur, and Kotli in PoK have been killed by Pakistani security forces in the run-up to what were described as 'elections' in the region. In a particularly alarming detail, the report states that paramilitary personnel have allegedly been removing bodies from hospitals in an apparent attempt to conceal what it terms a 'massacre'. The victims, the report notes, have received virtually no international solidarity.

'For the past few days, we have all been witness to the horrific images and video clips on social media emerging from places such as Rawalakot, Mirpur and Kotli in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, where, in the run-up to the elections, a profound constitutional and humanitarian crisis is unfolding behind a wall of state-imposed censorship while the world offers a resigned shrug,' the report stated.

Western Media Accused of Selective Coverage

The report reserves sharp criticism for prominent Western newsrooms, alleging that their coverage of state-sponsored killings in the Himalayan region has been 'insipid, perfunctory and even devious.' It specifically contrasts what it describes as 'breathless, wall-to-wall coverage' of NEET-related youth protests in India with near-total silence on civilian casualties at the hands of Pakistani security forces.

'Some of the world's most notable newsrooms have shown little concern for the dozens and dozens of civilians who have fallen to the bullets of Pakistani security forces,' the report added. This selective attention, it argues, is not accidental but structurally embedded in how Western policy and media ecosystems treat Pakistan — primarily as a nuclear-armed rival of India rather than as a state with a documented pattern of internal coercion.

Pakistan as a 'Rentier State': The Geopolitical Calculus

The report attributes the international blind eye to Pakistan's enduring strategic utility to the West. It notes that Pakistan's designation as a major non-NATO ally has long suited the strategic calculus of the United States and its partners, who have reportedly preferred that Islamabad remain a 'highly centralised garrison state' rather than a fully functioning democracy.

'As a classic rentier state, Pakistan's military and ruling elite derive institutional dominance and financial sustenance not from internal resources, taxation or industrial productivity, but from external rents generated by leasing its strategic geography and security apparatus to foreign patrons,' the report stated. This arrangement, it argues, has allowed Islamabad to suppress dissent in Balochistan, Waziristan, and PoK with minimal international pushback.

Policy Institutes in Washington, London, and Brussels Under Scrutiny

Beyond newsrooms, the report singles out policy institutes in Washington, London, Paris, Berlin, and Brussels for consistently turning a blind eye to what it characterises as Islamabad's pattern of internal coercion. It attributes this to Pakistan's hedging strategy and its readiness to serve as a strategic asset for the highest bidder in global power contests.

The report argues that each time Pakistan's security apparatus has deployed state violence to suppress domestic dissent — from Balochistan and Waziristan to Islamabad and PoK — Western media and policymakers have largely prioritised the military establishment's strategic utility over democratic accountability. Pakistan's domestic repression, the report contends, has long been treated as an acceptable 'structural cost' of broader geopolitical interests.

What This Means for the Broader Narrative

The report's findings arrive at a moment of heightened scrutiny over how global media covers conflict in South Asia. Critics argue that the asymmetry in coverage — extensive on India, muted on Pakistan's internal violence — distorts international understanding of the region's human rights landscape. Whether Western newsrooms and policy circles recalibrate their approach to PoK and Balochistan in light of such analyses remains to be seen.