Srinagar, June 13 — In a moment that blended bravado with diplomacy, former U.S. President Donald Trump once again offered to mediate the decades-old Kashmir conflict between India and Pakistan — a gesture he insists could help prevent another war in South Asia, even as India has consistently turned down such offers.
Speaking at a bill-signing ceremony at the White House, Trump reflected on his time in office, claiming that he had “stopped a war” between the two nuclear-armed neighbors through a mix of timely phone calls and trade discussions. “They were getting ready,” he said, recalling a tense episode that he believes could have spiraled into something far worse. “I called each of them. I know both leaders. I respect them. I talked about trade. They understood, and they stopped.”
Trump expressed concern over the simmering tensions and potential for escalation. “It was Pakistan’s turn to strike,” he said, suggesting that the region was on the brink of a dangerous confrontation. He even mentioned warning both countries against resorting to nuclear weapons, leveraging the United States’ trade relationships as a tool of influence. “Nobody talks about it, but it was a big deal,” he said. “Nobody died. That matters.”
His comments came in the wake of a recent flare-up in the region. In early May 2025, India launched ‘Operation Sindoor’—a coordinated tri-service military strike targeting terror infrastructure across the Line of Control in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoJK). This was in response to a deadly terrorist attack on April 22 in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, which claimed the lives of 26 civilians.
Pakistan responded with attempted strikes on Indian military positions over the following days, but the cycle of violence was halted after both sides agreed to stand down during high-level military talks on May 10.
Despite India’s repeated rejection of external mediation on Kashmir, Trump’s remarks underline his belief that diplomacy and trade can shape peace. Whether such claims hold weight or not, they reflect the persistent interest — and sometimes overconfidence — that world leaders show in resolving one of the world’s most intractable conflicts.
