Silent Shadows: Evaluating RAW and ISI in the Covert Conflict Between India and Pakistan

 Silent Shadows: Evaluating RAW and ISI in the Covert Conflict Between India and Pakistan

Evaluating RAW And ISI

When we speak of conflicts between nations, tanks and missiles often dominate the conversation. But beneath the surface of declared wars and diplomatic negotiations exists another battlefield one shrouded in secrecy, silence, and subterfuge. This is the shadowy world of intelligence, where two agencies India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) have long operated at the intersection of strategy and suspicion.

Both agencies have become synonymous with their respective nation’s strategic posture. RAW, India's premier foreign intelligence agency, and ISI, Pakistan’s most powerful and secretive intelligence body, are not merely state institutions; they are extensions of national security doctrines. Their operations, rarely acknowledged but widely speculated upon, often shape public perception, political narratives, and even geopolitical realities in South Asia.

Origins Born of Conflict

To understand the current dynamics between RAW and ISI, one must begin with their historical roots. The ISI was established in 1948, a year after Pakistan's birth, to bridge intelligence gaps between the country’s army, navy, and air force. Over the years, it transformed into a deeply embedded arm of Pakistan's military establishment. Its early successes during wars with India cemented its role as not just a military aide, but a political influencer.

RAW, on the other hand, came into being in 1968. India’s defeat in the Sino-Indian war of 1962 and the intelligence failures during the 1965 Indo-Pak war led to the realization that India needed a foreign intelligence agency independent of internal policing. Since then, RAW has focused on external threats, particularly those emanating from Pakistan and China.

While both agencies were born in response to perceived threats, they quickly began to mirror each other in mission and method operating in the shadows, often crossing ethical lines to achieve strategic ends.

The Afghanistan Chessboard: Proxy Strategies

The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 turned the region into a geopolitical hotspot. The ISI emerged as a central player, funneling CIA and Saudi funds to the Mujahideen, and building deep networks within Afghan militias. This period greatly enhanced ISI’s regional reach and operational experience.

RAW, although not as openly active during this period, carefully observed the shifting allegiances. It developed channels to counter ISI influence and began building its own intelligence footprint in Afghanistan. After the fall of the Taliban in 2001, India intensified its diplomatic and developmental presence in Afghanistan an effort ISI viewed as strategic encirclement.

The ISI responded with covert operations aimed at limiting Indian influence. Attacks on Indian consulates and embassy personnel in Afghanistan have often been traced back, unofficially, to Pakistani-backed groups. In turn, RAW has been accused mostly by Pakistan of supporting separatist movements inside Pakistan, particularly in Balochistan.

Though never admitted openly by either side, Afghanistan became a silent warzone, a place where RAW and ISI tested tactics, technologies, and tolerance.

Balochistan and Kashmir: Mutual Accusations and Hidden Hands

The most sensitive points of contention remain Balochistan and Kashmir. Pakistan has consistently accused India of using RAW to fund and arm separatists in Balochistan. The arrest of Kulbhushan Jadhav in 2016 claimed by Pakistan to be a serving Indian naval officer working for RAW brought these accusations into the spotlight. India, however, maintained that Jadhav was a retired officer and had been kidnapped from Iran.

India, in turn, has pointed to ISI’s long-standing support for terror groups operating in Jammu and Kashmir. Organizations like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), which have orchestrated attacks such as the 2001 Indian Parliament attack and the 2008 Mumbai attacks, are believed to have ISI patronage. Pakistan denies state involvement but rarely acts decisively against these groups.

Both sides have created plausible deniability through proxies. Whether it’s separatist rebels in Balochistan or militant groups in Kashmir, these proxies serve as tools for low-intensity conflict, keeping the enemy off-balance without triggering full-scale war.

The Evolution of Tradecraft: Surveillance, Cyberwarfare, and Disinformation

While espionage in the past relied heavily on human intelligence (HUMINT), the landscape today is rapidly changing. Technological sophistication is now the frontline. Cyber-espionage, signal interception, and disinformation campaigns have replaced traditional cloak-and-dagger routines.

The ISI is believed to run vast cyber-influence campaigns targeting Indian audiences with misinformation, often amplifying narratives around communal tensions and governmental failures. Similarly, RAW has upgraded its cyber capabilities, reportedly conducting surveillance operations across social media and communication networks in Pakistan.

Both agencies have also invested in electronic intelligence (ELINT) and satellite surveillance. RAW, with assistance from India’s space agency ISRO, has enhanced its surveillance over cross-border terrorist camps and military installations. The ISI, leveraging its close ties with China, has benefited from technical intelligence support, potentially accessing advanced surveillance infrastructure.

The digital battleground also involves manipulating public opinion. Fake news, forged documents, and deepfakes are now emerging tools of psychological warfare. In this new age of warfare, the line between truth and propaganda has never been more blurred and both RAW and ISI are active players.

Operations Beyond Borders

While most attention focuses on their actions within the subcontinent, both RAW and ISI operate well beyond. ISI’s connections in the Middle East especially with Gulf-based Islamic networks give it a wide strategic reach. RAW, meanwhile, maintains close cooperation with Western agencies like the CIA, Mossad, and MI6, especially in counter-terrorism.

RAW has reportedly played a significant role in foiling terror plots abroad, including potential attacks against Indian embassies and diaspora communities. Meanwhile, the ISI has historically supported elements in the Taliban and has been involved in managing insurgencies that affect Western interests, creating complex entanglements.

Both agencies are increasingly involved in information exchange, proxy recruitment, and counter-surveillance in places like the UK, Canada, and the US where large South Asian communities reside. These communities often become arenas of influence operations and soft-power contests.

Failures and Oversight: Intelligence in a Democracy vs Military-State Model

One major contrast between RAW and ISI lies in their structural accountability. RAW, as part of a democratic framework, is answerable at least in principle to elected governments. Although it enjoys significant operational secrecy, political leadership and parliamentary committees can scrutinize its actions. Its failures such as during the Kargil War or the IC-814 hijacking have led to internal reviews and systemic reforms.