Highlights:
-
Trump again claims he stopped a potential nuclear war between India and Pakistan
-
India maintains there was no third-party mediation in the May 10 ceasefire
-
Trump says Pakistan’s leadership credited him with saving millions of lives
-
Crisis followed India’s Operation Sindoor targeting terror infrastructure
- Advertisement - -
Conflicting narratives continue over the role of US diplomacy
President Donald Trump has once again asserted that his administration played a decisive role in preventing a potential nuclear war between India and Pakistan, repeating a claim that New Delhi has consistently rejected. Speaking on December 22 at his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, Trump said US intervention helped de-escalate tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbors at a critical moment earlier this year.
The remarks came as Trump unveiled the US Navy’s new Golden Fleet initiative alongside Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Navy Secretary John Phelan, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. During the event, Trump returned to his long-standing assertion that Washington stepped in as hostilities intensified, claiming Pakistan’s leadership later credited him with preventing massive loss of life.
“We stopped a potential nuclear war between Pakistan and India,” Trump said. Referring to Pakistan’s leadership, he added that a senior figure described him as having “saved 10 million lives, maybe more.”
Trump Repeats Claim of Preventing India-Pakistan Nuclear War
This is not the first time Trump has made the claim. Since May 10, when he announced on social media that India and Pakistan had agreed to a “full and immediate” ceasefire, Trump has repeated the assertion dozens of times in speeches, interviews, and public appearances. He has consistently framed the de-escalation as a result of overnight talks mediated by the United States.
At Mar-a-Lago, Trump described the situation leading up to the ceasefire as rapidly deteriorating. He alleged that military aircraft had been shot down and that hostilities were escalating before diplomatic efforts took effect.
“That war was starting to rage,” Trump said. “So we solved all these wars. The only one I haven’t solved yet is Russia, Ukraine.”
India Rejects Trump’s Mediation Claim
India has firmly rejected Trump’s version of events. New Delhi has repeatedly stated that the May 10 understanding to halt hostilities was reached through direct engagement between India and Pakistan, without any third-party mediation. Indian officials have emphasized that decisions regarding escalation and de-escalation were sovereign and bilateral.
The Indian government has maintained this position consistently since Trump first announced the ceasefire, underscoring long-standing sensitivities in South Asia regarding external involvement in disputes between the two countries.
Trump, Operation Sindoor, and the Escalation
The military crisis referenced by Trump followed India’s launch of Operation Sindoor on May 7. According to Indian officials, the operation targeted terrorist infrastructure located in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. The strikes were carried out in response to an April 22 attack in Pahalgam that killed 26 civilians.
India said the objective of Operation Sindoor was to prevent future attacks and degrade militant networks operating across the border. The operation marked a sharp escalation in tensions between the two countries.
Over the following four days, the situation intensified. Cross-border drone activity and missile strikes were reported, raising international concern over the possibility of a wider conflict between two nuclear-armed states. The escalation drew global attention due to the risk of miscalculation.
On May 10, both sides announced an understanding to halt hostilities, bringing the immediate confrontation to an end.
Competing Narratives Around Trump’s Role
While Trump continues to portray the ceasefire as a diplomatic success driven by US involvement, Indian officials have maintained that no external mediation took place. The competing narratives reflect broader political and diplomatic sensitivities surrounding foreign intervention in South Asian conflicts.
For Trump, the episode has become a recurring reference point as he highlights his foreign policy record. By emphasizing claims of preventing nuclear war, Trump has sought to reinforce his image as a leader capable of managing high-stakes international crises.
India’s position, however, remains unchanged. Officials have consistently reiterated that the de-escalation was the result of direct communication between New Delhi and Islamabad, without the involvement of Washington or any other third party.
The differing accounts underline the complexity of diplomatic messaging around the India-Pakistan relationship and reflect the political significance of the episode as Trump continues to cite it as evidence of his global leadership.
