Donald Trump has once again reiterated his claim of brokering peace between India and Pakistan following their May 2025 conflict, this time making the remark alongside UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer during a London press conference.

Trump stated that he had mediated several disputes globally, including between “two nuclear countries” India and Pakistan, through trade leverage, suggesting that access to American markets was conditioned on their restraint.

His latest remarks echo previous assertions where both he and White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt highlighted Washington’s role in halting hostilities after the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack and India’s subsequent launch of Operation Sindoor.

According to Trump and his administration, U.S. trade pressure was the decisive factor in compelling both sides to accept a ceasefire, and they have portrayed this as a diplomatic success for the Trump presidency.

The White House emphasised that Trump was “proud” of this strategy, underscoring his broader narrative of using America’s economic heft as a foreign policy tool to enforce peace.

By contrast, India has firmly rejected the notion of outside intervention, maintaining that the ceasefire was initiated after Pakistan’s Director General of Military Operations contacted his Indian counterpart to request an end to engagements following heavy losses and growing escalation risks.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has strongly asserted India’s autonomy in executing Operation Sindoor, stating that no foreign leader pressured New Delhi to halt military action.

Speaking in Parliament, Modi underscored that India had broken the precedent of succumbing to Pakistan’s nuclear blackmail, affirming that India responded solely on its own strategic and security calculations.

He disclosed that while the U.S. Vice President attempted to contact him on May 9 at the height of the conflict, he was engaged in operational consultations with the armed forces and only later returned the call.

Modi recounted that the American interlocutor had warned of a potential major Pakistani attack, to which he responded with unambiguous resolve—that any such move would trigger severe Indian retaliation.

The conflicting narratives—Trump’s claim of U.S.-led de-escalation versus India’s stress on independent decision-making—highlight a diplomatic tug-of-war over credit for conflict resolution.

For Washington, the claim feeds into Trump’s campaign narrative of global deal-making prowess, while for New Delhi, asserting full control over Operation Sindoor reinforces India’s strategic autonomy and credibility in the face of terrorism and cross-border aggression.

Pakistan’s side, meanwhile, remains less vocal but is believed to have sought ceasefire after its military and terror infrastructure sustained significant damage during the Indian retaliation.

This divergence underscores both the geopolitical significance of the clashes and the political utility of claiming credit for peace-making among global leaders.

Based On ANI Report