How India Delicately Averted Trump’s Attempt to Insert Himself in Mediation Between India and Pakistan

The United States’ role in the recent India-Pakistan conflict situation constitutes a substantial secondary narrative and therefore merits attention. Interest in this topic is heightened by the charismatic leaders, President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who are adept at employing social media towards creating narratives and responding to public concerns. Trump demonstrated audacity by establishing his own platform, Truth Social, following his ban from Twitter or ‘X’ as it is now called. Modi is likely the most followed serving leader on ‘X’. Fortunately, India-U.S. relations remain robust despite some spotlight on divergences in their respective approaches to the tensions.

In summary, on 22 April 2025, terrorists perpetrated a horrific act in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, resulting in the unfortunate loss of 26 civilian lives against the backdrop of a normalizing situation there. Almost immediately, The Resistance Front (TRF), linked to the United Nations proscribed Lashkar-e-Taiba and Pakistan, claimed responsibility. In response, India implemented a series of retaliatory measures, including suspending the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) and conducting punitive military strikes against Pakistani extremist institutions, long suspected of serving as breeding grounds for jihadists. This escalation of tensions culminated in an India-Pakistan military confrontation, followed by the ceasefire on May 11, 2025. 

U.S. Vice President JD Vance’s visit to India during this period was in fact overshadowed by the tragic Pahalgam terrorist attack. Significantly, he continued with his visit, which would have been appreciated by the Government of India.

In matters related to terrorism, authorities are often challenged in constructing legally watertight cases supported by appropriate evidence, akin to conventional criminal investigations. However, at this juncture, the focus rightly lies on Pakistan-based jihadist organizations, known to operate with impunity under Pakistani state patronage. Pictures of senior Pakistani military personnel at the funerals of the slain terrorists tends to additionally confirm this view. Notably, there have been previous strikes in the Jammu & Kashmir region coinciding with visits to India by U.S. leaders, suggesting Pakistan’s attempt to draw the U.S. into this dispute. 

Following the April 2025 terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, President Trump called PM Modi to strongly condemn the attack, express condolences, and extend ‘full support’ to India. Broadly, first U.S. reaction appeared to be not to interfere in the India-Pakistan clashes. Donald Trump claimed on April 26, 2025, that the India-Pakistan conflict dates back ‘1,500 years,’ whereas the reality is that Pakistan was created in 1947. His remarks came across as an oversimplification of a complex, modern geopolitical issue.

On May 8, 2025 Vice President JD Vance supplemented President Trump’s comments by saying that a war between India and Pakistan was “none of our business” and that the U.S. would not insert itself into a conflict that “fundamentally does not concern us and is beyond America’s capacity to manage.”

And on May 10, 2025, President Trump pre-empted India’s announcement of a ceasefire through a post on his Truth Social account. He attributed the breakthrough to U.S. mediation and claimed that the U.S. had conditioned trade to the ceasefire. The ceasefire announcement was promptly confirmed by both governments on the same day, although the extent of U.S. involvement remains subject to differing interpretations by the parties involved. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that, in addition to the ceasefire, both countries had agreed to “initiate discussions on a wide range of issues at a neutral location.”

Trump’s preemptive announcement caused unhappiness in New Delhi particularly, which clarified that Pakistan’s Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) had requested his Indian counterpart for the ceasefire, which India accepted. India emphasized that the ceasefire understanding of May 10, 2025, was worked out not through any third-party intervention but directly between the DGMOs of India and Pakistan.

The Indian government also dismissed President Trump’s claim that the U.S. had brokered the ceasefire by using trade as leverage. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) stated that “the issue of trade did not come up in any of the discussions” with U.S. leaders during the escalation. 

In response to the escalation of tensions between India and Pakistan following the April 2025 attack in Kashmir, the United States issued statements and took diplomatic steps that seemed carefully balanced, emphasizing the need for restraint and dialogue from both sides. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio reached out to the foreign ministers of both countries, urging them to avoid further escalation and to prioritize diplomacy and open communication. The U.S. State Department reiterated its commitment to regional stability and has encouraged both India and Pakistan to cooperate in investigations and work together to de-escalate tensions, rather than taking unilateral actions. Such remarks suggested an effort by Washington to “hyphenate” its engagement by treating both countries equally rather than favoring one side over the other.

Trump’s pre-emptive announcement caused unhappiness in New Delhi particularly, which clarified that Pakistan’s Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) had requested his Indian counterpart for the ceasefire, which India accepted.

The United States welcomed the India-Pakistan ceasefire with praise, highlighting its own diplomatic contribution towards brokering the agreement and averting further conflict. President Trump and Secretary Marco Rubio emphasized the U.S. role in encouraging restraint and facilitating dialogue between the two countries, with Rubio noting intensive engagement with both sides in the lead-up to the truce. 

U.S. attempts to balance India and Pakistan would undoubtedly be jarring to India, but such attempts are not exclusive to the Trump administration. However, it warrants further analysis to determine whether the recent statements signify a return to the hyphenation of the past or whether they reflect America’s need to maintain a strategic line with Pakistan, perhaps taking into account its significance in the context of the Iran challenge and Afghanistan. 

Prime Minister Modi’s Well-crafted Message

Prime Minister Modi’s public messaging during this crisis period has also been noteworthy. He is a master communicator, and his appearances and messaging were carefully crafted. On April 24, 2025, He delivered an important speech in the state of Bihar, where elections are due towards the end of 2025, in which he strongly condemned the Pahalgam terrorist act and pledged decisive action against the perpetrators and their sponsors. Modi briefly transitioned to English to try and convey an unfiltered message to the international audience, that India would mete out unprecedented punishment to those responsible for the heinous act. 

While the military clashes were on, Modi largely restricted himself to TV visuals where he was seen as confabulating with his close political and military advisers. He also left if to foreign ministry and defense officials to explain the evolving situation. 

On May 12, 2025, Modi laid down a new doctrine in his televised address after the ceasefire with Pakistan. This doctrine marks a shift in India’s strategy against terrorism, stating that India will not tolerate nuclear blackmail and will respond militarily to future threats. Modi highlighted that both terrorists and their sponsors will be targeted without distinction. The doctrine includes three key principles: swift retaliation against attacks, opposition to nuclear blackmail, and targeting state sponsors of terrorism. Modi noted that military action is suspended, not ended, and the country’s future actions depend on Pakistan’s behavior. 

On May 13, 2025, the spokesperson for India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) unequivocally rejected claims of foreign mediation concerning the recent ceasefire understanding with Pakistan. The spokesperson clarified that the ceasefire was worked out directly between the military officials of both nations without any third-party involvement. This underscores India’s consistent policy that all outstanding issues with Pakistan, including Jammu and Kashmir, are strictly bilateral. The MEA also dismissed speculation regarding any potential nuclear escalation, asserting that all military actions remained conventional. The spokesperson reiterated that the ceasefire was a consequence of India’s own military actions rather than external pressure or mediation.

Confident nations seek out their allies and friends in challenging times, while having the capability to pursue independently their national interests. This is the prevailing situation regarding India-U.S. relations. In terms of assessment, despite divergences in approaches to the Pahalgam terror incident, India-U.S. relations have a promising future due to the existence of numerous points of convergence.

Furthermore, while the global community waited with anxious anticipation for a more comprehensive understanding of incoming President’s strategic objectives and priorities during his second term, Trump and Modi were proactive in seeking each other out within a month of the former’s second presidency. Notably, the key outcomes of Modi’s Washington visit in February 2025 encompassed the mutually agreed-upon objective of doubling bilateral trade to a substantial level of $500 billion by the year 2030. Additionally, both parties committed to negotiating a bilateral trade agreement by autumn 2025, with an emphasis on facilitating market access and implementing tariff reductions.

The positive trends in the New Delhi-Washington engagement needs to be acknowledged. During a joint press conference, President Trump announced that the United States and India would work together to combat the menace of radical Islamic terrorism and publicly confirmed Tahawwur Rana’s extradition to India. Tahawwur Rana, who is linked to the Mumbai terrorist attack of November 26, 2008, was subsequently extradited from the US to India on April 10, 2025. This concrete action taken by the US was met with widespread approval in India. 

Donald Trump’s interest in mediating in India-Pakistan matters may be an irritant but this can be handled by India within the framework of the now broad-based India-US relationship. Trump has also offered his services in bringing the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to an end too but has been compelled to moderate his expectations. 

It may be recalled that in 2019, too President Trump offered to mediate between India and Pakistan regarding the Kashmir dispute, asserting that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had sought his assistance. However, India denied this claim and rejected Trump’s offer, reiterating its longstanding policy that all disputes with Pakistan, including Kashmir, must be resolved bilaterally and without third-party intervention. This episode underscores that mediating in international relations presents greater challenges compared to business matters and this is true even for an influential country like the U.S. With realistic expectations, India should be able to manage the U.S. adequately in such matters while maintaining the overall positive trajectory of the bilateral relations. 

---

Gitesh Sarma is a retired Indian diplomat.