[By Guancha Net, Ruan Jiaqi]

US President Donald Trump has been bragging in various ways about his role in facilitating the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, which has caused great dissatisfaction among Indian officials. According to Bloomberg, The New York Times, and other reports on the 13th, Trump continued to claim credit this week, stating that the ceasefire was due to US diplomatic efforts. On Tuesday, the Indian Ministry of Foreign Affairs directly refuted this claim.

Reportedly, Trump's remarks on Tuesday in Saudi Arabia and the day before in Washington both claimed that he proposed if India and Pakistan stopped their hostilities, the US would increase trade with both countries; otherwise, trade would be halted.

"I said, please, we will conduct a lot of trade with you. Stop fighting, stop fighting," Trump vividly described when talking about discussions with India and Pakistan at the White House. "I told them, if you stop hostilities, we will conduct trade. If not, no trade."

He also mentioned that after these incentives and warnings, "suddenly they (India and Pakistan) said, I think we will have a ceasefire."

At the press conference on Tuesday, Indian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Randal Jaiswal clarified that all of the US claims were false. He stated, "The leaders of India and the United States discussed the constantly changing military situation, but trade issues were not mentioned in these discussions."

A senior Indian official who wished to remain anonymous also told Bloomberg that during a series of talks before the ceasefire agreement between India and Pakistan, India never discussed trade issues with US officials.

According to this Indian official, Vice President Pence did not mention trade during his May 9 call with Indian Prime Minister Modi, and Secretary of State Rubio's conversations with Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar and National Security Advisor Ajit Doval also did not touch on this matter.

US media pointed out that within hours after the announcement of the ceasefire agreement, the Indian government refused to publicly acknowledge the role played by the US, insisting that the agreement to stop all military activities was reached "directly" with Pakistan, which contradicted Trump's claim that the "ceasefire was the result of overnight mediation by the US."

Before the ceasefire announcement by India and Pakistan, Trump prematurely revealed related messages on social media and claimed that the US had taken the lead in the negotiations. Bloomberg reported that Trump's statement angered many high-ranking officials in New Delhi, who believed it overshadowed Modi and undermined India's long-standing policy of resolving the Kashmir issue through bilateral channels. Pakistan welcomed this statement.

The New York Times also cited sources as saying that Trump repeatedly casually boasted about US mediation efforts between India and Pakistan, repeatedly hitting one of India's most sensitive political pain points, making the increasingly deepening partnership between the two countries tense.

Reportedly, some analysts who questioned India's approach of strengthening ties with the US viewed Trump's remarks as a form of betrayal. In their view, the message conveyed by the US side easily led Indian citizens to misunderstand that India hastily ceased confrontation under external pressure before thoroughly defeating its weaker opponent. Once such public opinion formed, it would place Indian political leaders in an unfavorable position.

On May 12, Indian Prime Minister Modi made his first public speech after the conflict, without mentioning the US at all. The Indian Express

Indian officials and analysts told US media that New Delhi's frustration had little to do with Trump positioning himself as the core mediator. It is well known that Trump likes to take credit for everything, so it was no surprise that he announced the ceasefire before the agreement was reached. What truly infuriated India was that Trump gave both sides a mild evaluation when announcing the ceasefire. He also failed to mention that the conflict arose from a terrorist attack.

The fuse that rapidly escalated the current India-Pakistan dispute was a terrorist attack that occurred in the Indian-controlled Kashmir region on April 22. Suspected militants fired at tourists in the area, causing at least 26 deaths. Afterward, India accused Pakistan of supporting "cross-border terrorism" by Kashmiri militants, while Pakistan denied this and expressed willingness to investigate the incident impartially.

Tuesday, Trump again spoke offhand in Saudi Arabia, claiming that the leaders of both India and Pakistan were very "strong" and perhaps they could "go out for a delicious dinner together."

The New York Times reported that this statement caused strong dissatisfaction in India, as they did not want to be equated with Pakistan by the US or other countries. Trump's statement that he would continue to "help" the two countries reach a solution regarding Kashmir also upset India, as India has long claimed that the Kashmir dispute is a "bilateral issue" and rejects any external "mediation."

Nirupama Menon Rao, former Indian ambassador to the US, also mentioned that the US approach made India's decades-long effort to get rid of being seen by the outside world through the lens of the India-Pakistan conflict more complicated.

In her view, India has adjusted its foreign policy, positioning itself as a key partner of the US in the region and increasingly willing to play a balancing role against China. Now, however, "India and Pakistan are once again being forcibly linked together."

"India genuinely thought we had escaped this connection, and for the US, Pakistan had gradually faded from sight," she added.

Meanwhile, contradictory statements from the Trump administration have troubled Indian officials.

Last Wednesday, after India's first attack on Pakistan, Pence told US media that the escalating conflict was "basically unrelated" to the US.

US media reported that while some people considered this an instinctive reaction of the isolationist US government, others in New Delhi believed it was a signal from the US continuing to tacitly approve India's military actions.

However, in the following days, Pence and Secretary of State Pompeo became key figures in pushing for urgent diplomatic actions to end the conflict.

According to a senior Indian official, before India attacked Pakistan, the action intent was informed to the Trump administration, and after the initial attack, the situation was reported to Trump's advisors. After the conflict escalated, Pence called Modi to express concern over the high possibility of a "sharp escalation in violence."

This official said that Modi listened to the US advice, but the decision to end the battle was made independently by India. He also mentioned that afterward, Pakistan requested direct communication to discuss ceasefire arrangements. However, Pakistan claimed that India was the first to propose de-escalating the situation.

Some observers pointed out that India's hope for clear support from Washington during its confrontation with Pakistan, or even the fantasy of a complete break between the US and Pakistan, was entirely unrealistic wishful thinking.

Indrani Bagchi, a foreign policy analyst in New Delhi, bluntly stated that India's core value on the US strategic chessboard was merely a pawn used by the US to counterbalance China. She wrote on social media, "The US and China may be strategic rivals globally, but they can agree on Pakistan. This reality has never changed."

This article is an exclusive contribution by Guancha Net and cannot be reprinted without permission.

Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7504106974229840434/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and welcome your opinions to be expressed through the buttons below.