US President Donald Trump on Wednesday claimed that his intervention during tensions between India and Pakistan prevented the situation from escalating. In his State of the Union address, he said that if he had not acted in time, the life of Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif could have been in serious danger and the region could have spiraled into a nuclear conflict.
Addressing lawmakers, Trump said his efforts averted a potential nuclear conflict between India and Pakistan. He also added that he played a role in de-escalating several conflicts in the early months of his term. However, without naming any military operations, he said the situation was extremely sensitive at the time and a wrong move could have led to widespread devastation.
The president also indicated that his mediation was crucial in reaching a ceasefire. He said diplomatic pressure and dialogue were used to persuade both sides to disengage. Trump said such interventions are essential for global stability, especially when two nuclear-armed countries are facing each other.
This statement has sparked a heated debate in international politics. Critics say Trump often exaggerates his role in foreign policy, while supporters see it as evidence of his active involvement in crisis management. This claim is also relevant in the context of India and Pakistan, given the sensitivity surrounding formal third-party mediation between the two countries.
Experts believe such claims should be evaluated based on a solid diplomatic record and official statements. Trump’s statement is once again rekindling global debate about India-Pakistan relations, nuclear risks, and the role of international mediation.