US President Donald Trump backpedals on claims of directly mediating the India-Pakistan ceasefire, acknowledging a more indirect role while India rejects any US involvement, asserting the truce resulted from direct military talks between the two nations.
Amid growing scrutiny, US President Donald Trump appeared to walk back his earlier claim of directly mediating a ceasefire between India and Pakistan. Speaking at a public event during his visit to troops at al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, Trump remarked, “I don’t want to say I did, but I sure as hell helped settle the problem,” indicating a more indirect role in easing tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbours. He suggested that rising hostility could have spiralled into a missile conflict but claimed things were ‘settled,’ and both nations were encouraged to focus on trade instead. “Pakistan was very happy with that, and India was very happy with that,” he added, expressing optimism about diplomatic progress.
Trump further reflected on the long-standing hostilities between the two countries, saying, “They have been fighting for about a thousand years in all fairness. So I said, you know, I could settle that up… let me settle it up, and let’s get them all together.” However, he acknowledged the complexity of the situation, admitting, “I’m not sure about settling. That’s a tough one.” His comments mark a shift from his earlier tone, offering a more ambiguous account of the US role in the de-escalation while highlighting the historical roots and volatility of the India-Pakistan conflict.
His remarks came just days after he claimed on his social media platform, Truth Social, that the United States had successfully mediated a “full and immediate ceasefire” following “a long night of talks.” This statement came in the aftermath of escalating military exchanges between the two nuclear-armed nations.
India rejects mediation claim
However, India has categorically refuted any suggestion of US involvement in securing the truce. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) clarified that the ceasefire was arranged through direct communication between the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) of India and Pakistan. According to the MEA, the initiative for peace was taken by Pakistan, which reached out to India after suffering retaliatory strikes on several key military and airbase installations under “Operation Sindoor.”
India’s response also countered Trump’s follow-up remarks made during the Saudi Arabia–U.S. Investment Forum on May 13, where he described the ceasefire as a diplomatic success driven by trade initiatives. Trump even suggested the possibility of improving relations through shared cultural diplomacy, saying, “Maybe we can even get them together where they go out and have a nice dinner together.”
But later that day, the MEA once again dismissed his claims, stating unequivocally that “no discussions on trade with the U.S. took place during Operation Sindoor.” The ministry reiterated that the ceasefire agreement was a direct result of military-to-military engagement and not external diplomacy.
Modi reaffirms India’s position
In his national address on May 12, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi indirectly dismissed any suggestion of third-party mediation. Reasserting India’s long-held position, Modi stated that any dialogue with Pakistan would be limited to issues of terrorism or the status of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), not bilateral disputes mediated by foreign powers.
The latest developments underscore the delicate balance of diplomatic narratives in South Asia, where both India and Pakistan remain highly sensitive to external involvement in their bilateral affairs. While Trump may have attempted to portray himself as a peacemaker, New Delhi’s firm denials indicate that the path to de-escalation remains firmly in the hands of the two countries themselves.
