Anti-Pakistan sentiment (also called Pakophobia or Pakistanophobia) refers to hatred, fear, hostility or irrational fixation toward Pakistan, Pakistanis and Pakistani culture and may manifest as racism, discrimination, or violence against Pakistanis on the basis of their national origin. In a political context, it usually refers to a pronounced dislike of Pakistan's actions or existence as a sovereign state. Additionally, hostility toward Pakistanis may also be motivated by other types of xenophobic sentiment, such as Islamophobia or broad racism targeting South Asian people as a whole.
Negative attitudes towards Pakistan have existed since the beginning of the Pakistan Movement, which advocated the establishment of a separate state for Muslims in parts of erstwhile British India. The idea of Pakistan, as put forth by the All-India Muslim League, was denounced by much of the Indian independence movement, in which many activists opposed partitioning India. The creation of Pakistan occurred through the partition of India in August 1947, resulting in widespread communal violence between Muslims and non-Muslims that displaced 20 million people along religious lines, which laid the foundation for the ongoing India–Pakistan conflict. Beyond India, regional anti-Pakistan sentiment has existed in Afghanistan and Bangladesh, where it is primarily rooted in the Durand Line dispute since 1949 and the Bangladesh genocide in 1971, respectively.
India Results of 2017 BBC World Service poll.Views of Pakistan's influence by countrySorted by Pos-NegCountry polled Positive Negative Neutral Pos-Neg -80 -76 -57 -56 -55 -54 -54 -53 -50 -46 -45 -43 -34 -30 -19 +1 +3 +16 Ideological
Indian nationalists led by Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru wanted to make what was then British-ruled India, as well as the 562 princely states under British paramountcy, into a single secular, democratic state.Hardgrave, Robert. "India: The Dilemmas of Diversity", Journal of Democracy, pp. 54–65 The All India Azad Muslim Conference, which represented nationalist Muslims, gathered in Delhi in April 1940 to voice its support for an independent and united India. The colonial authorities, however, sidelined this nationalist Muslim organization and came to see Jinnah, who advocated separatism, as the sole representative of Indian Muslims. This was viewed with dismay by many Indian nationalists, who viewed Jinnah's ideology as damaging and unnecessarily divisive.
Congress and secular critiques In an interview with Leonard Mosley, Nehru said that he and his fellow Congressmen were "tired" after the independence movement, so weren't ready to further drag on the matter for years with Jinnah's Muslim League, and that, anyway, they "expected that partition would be temporary, that Pakistan would come back to us."Sankar Ghose, Jawaharlal Nehru, a Biography, Allied Publishers (1993), pp. 160–161 Gandhi also thought that the Partition would be undone.Raj Pruthi, Paradox of Partition: Partition of India and the British strategy, Sumit Enterprises (2008), p. 443 The All India Congress Committee, in a resolution adopted on 14 June 1947, openly stated that "geography and the mountains and the seas fashioned India as she is, and no human agency can change that shape or come in the way of its final destiny… at when present passions have subsided, India's problems will be viewed in their proper perspective and the false doctrine of two nations will be discredited and discarded by all."Graham Chapman, The Geopolitics of South Asia: From Early Empires to the Nuclear Age, Ashgate Publishing (2012), p. 326
V.P. Menon, who had an important role in the transfer of power in 1947, quotes another major Congress politician, Abul Kalam Azad, who said that "the division is only of the map of the country and not in the hearts of the people, and I am sure it is going to be a short-lived partition."V.P. Menon, The Transfer of Power in India, Orient Blackswan (1998), p. 385 Acharya Kripalani, President of the Congress Party during the days of Partition, stated that making India "a strong, happy, democratic and socialist state" would ensure that "such an India can win back the seceding children to its lap... for the freedom we have achieved cannot be complete without the unity of India."G. C. Kendadamath, J.B. Kripalani, a study of his political ideas, Ganga Kaveri Pub. House (1992), p. 59 Yet another leader of the Congress, Sarojini Naidu, said that she did not consider India's flag to be India's because "India is divided" and that "this is merely a temporary geographical separation. There is no spirit of separation in the heart of India."Constituent Assembly Debates: Official Report, Volume 4, Lok Sabha secretariat, 14 July 1947, p. 761
Giving a more general assessment, Paul Brass says that "many speakers in the Constituent Assembly expressed the belief that the unity of India would be ultimately restored."Paul R. Brass, The Politics of India Since Independence, Cambridge University Press (1994), p. 10
Hindu nationalist critiques
Hindu nationalists in India support the idea of Akhand Bharat, 'undivided India', and consider the partition of India an illegitimate act. Already in early June 1947 the All India Committee of the Hindu Mahasabha issued a resolution, where it stated that "[t]his Committee deeply deplores that the Indian National Congress, after having given solemn assurance to the Hindu electorates that it stood by the unity of India and would oppose the disintegration of India, has betrayed the country by agreeing to the partition of India without a referendum. The Committee declares that Hindus are not bound by this commitment of Congress. It reiterates that India is one and indivisible and that there will never be peace unless and until the separated areas are brought back into the Indian Union and made integral parts thereof."Ted Svensson, Production of Postcolonial India and Pakistan: Meanings of Partition, Routledge (2013), pp. 110–111
As per journalist Eric Margolis, "to Hindu nationalists, even the continued existence of Pakistan constitutes a threat to the Indian union, as well as a painful affront to their sense of national importance and a galling reminder of their hated historical enemy, the Muslim Mogul Empire."Eric Margolis, War at the Top of the World: The Struggle for Afghanistan, Kashmir and Tibet, Routledge (2001), p. 98 The Bharatiya Jana Sangh (BJS), a direct precedent of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the current ruling party which came out of its split, during the 50s and 60s, considered "the ultimate aim of Indian foreign policy in the region to be the reassimilation of Pakistan into an undivided India ('Bharath')."K.R. Dark, Religion and International Relations, Springer (2000), p. 151 During the demolition of the Babri Masjid, Hindu nationalist elements who participated to its destruction were heard with the slogan "Babur ki santan, jao Pakistan ya Qabristan! (Descendants of Babur, go to Pakistan or the graveyard!)", thus considering Pakistan, as a modern-State, a continuation of what they consider to be Islamic imperialism in the region.Munis D. Faruqui, The Princes of the Mughal Empire, 1504–1719, Cambridge University Press (2012), p. 1
M. S. Golwalkar, who was the leader of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and thus one of the most important Hindu nationalist voices, also saw Pakistan as continuing "Islamic aggression" against Hindus: "The naked fact remains that an aggressive Muslim State has been carved out of our own motherland. From the day the so-called Pakistan came into being, we in Sangh have been declaring that it is a clear case of continued Muslim aggression (...) we of the Sangh have been, in fact, hammering this historical truth for the last so many years. Some time ago, the noted world historian Prof. Arnold Toynbee, came forward to confirm it. He visited our country twice, studied our national development at close quarters, and wrote an article setting forth the correct historical perspective of Partition. Therein he has unequivocally stated that the creation of Pakistan is the first successful step of the Muslims in this 20th century to realise their twelve-hundred-year-old dream of complete subjugation of this country."Quoted in Christophe Jaffrelot, Hindu Nationalism: A Reader, Princeton University Press (2009), p. 119
On the more popular level, there have been many anti-Pakistan rallies involving the burning or desecration of Pakistani flags.
Sports
In February 2011, the Shiv Sena stated that it would not allow Pakistan to play any 2011 Cricket World Cup matches in Mumbai. Pakistan Hockey Federation also feared of sending the national hockey of Pakistan because of anti-Pakistani sentiment in India. The state of Maharashtra, where Shiv Sena is prominent, has been deemed an unsafe venue for hosting visiting Pakistani teams. Shiv Sena has periodically disrupted cricketing occasions involving the two countries. In 1999, it tampered the pitch at Feroz Shah Kotla Ground to stop a match between the two sides, while during the 2006 Champions Trophy it made threats against hosting Pakistan's matches in Jaipur and Mohali. Post-2008, it has frequently threatened against the resumption of a bilateral Indo-Pakistani cricket series. In October 2015, Shiv Sena activists barged into the headquarters of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) in Mumbai, chanting anti-Pakistan slogans and stopping a scheduled meeting between BCCI president Shashank Manohar and the Pakistan Cricket Board's Shahryar Khan and Najam Sethi. In the 2023 Cricket World Cup, Pakistan Cricket Fans and media personnel were barred from attending the group stage match between the two nations.
As a result of the November 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai by Pakistan-based militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba, Pakistani players were excluded from the Indian Premier League from the second season. In addition, India refused to play with Pakistan in any bilateral series and pulled out from the 2009 series. Furthermore, in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack in April 2025 and the subsequent conflict, there have been no handshakes between captains of both teams during the 2025 Asia Cup and the 2026 Men's T20 World Cup.
Media Several major Bollywood films have depicted Pakistan in a hostile manner by portraying Pakistanis and the state as a hostile enemy. Other Bollywood movies, however, have been highly popular in Pakistan and India's Bollywood movie star. Although Bollywood films were banned for 40 years prior to 2008 because Indian culture was officially viewed as being "vulgar", there had been an active black market during the period and little was done to disrupt it.How Pakistan Fell in Love With Bollywood. Foreign Policy (15 March 2010). Retrieved 3 June 2012.
In 2012, Raj Thackeray and his party Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) told Indian singer Asha Bhosle not to co-judge in Sur Kshetra, a musical reality show aired on a local television channel that featured Pakistani artists alongside Indians. The MNS threatened to disrupt the shoot among other consequences if the channel went on to air the show. However, amid tight security in a hotel conference, Bhosle played down the threat, saying she only understood the language of music and did not understand politics. In the past, Shiv Sena has disrupted concerts by Pakistani artists in India. In October 2015, Shiv Sena activists assaulted Indian journalist Sudheendra Kulkarni and blackened his face with ink; Kulkarni was due to host a launch event for former Pakistani foreign affairs minister Khurshid Mahmud Kasuri's book in Mumbai. The Shiv Sena have also blocked the screening or promotion of Pakistani films in Indian cinemas, or Indian films starring Pakistani actors, as well as threatening Pakistani artists in Maharashtra.