WASHINGTON: The Trump administration on Tuesday doubled down on its narrative that US President Donald Trump played a central role in defusing a potentially nuclear confrontation between India and Pakistan in May.
In a high-visibility moment at the White House on Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu handed Trump a letter nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize, citing, among other things, Trump’s “decisive diplomacy” in resolving disputes.
This symbolic endorsement comes amid growing signs that the Trump administration is carefully shaping its South Asia message — amplifying its version of regional stability while deliberately avoiding any confrontation with India or with Pakistan’s current leadership.
The evolving narrative was further underscored at the State Department’s daily news briefing — the first to publicly address both the ceasefire claim and ex-PM Imran Khan’s continued detention during Trump’s second term in office.
Asked about Indian officials’ repeated denials of Trump’s role in the 2025 Line of Control ceasefire , State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce avoided taking a position. “So many comments speak for themselves,” she said .
“That’s one of the good news aspects of our modern world — people can see what’s really occurring. You’re not reliant on a comment to know what has really happened.”
Pressed further, Bruce added, half in jest: “Everyone will have an opinion. That’s an opinion. Some opinions are wrong. Mine rarely are, but other people’s opinions can be wrong.” She laughed and moved on.
The comments came just hours after Trump himself revisited the claim during his joint appearance with Netanyahu. “We stopped a lot of fights. A very, very big one was India and Pakistan. We stopped that over trade,” Trump said. “They were maybe at a nuclear stage. Stopping that was really important.”
He added that the United States had used the threat of suspending trade talks to pressure both governments and that he had personally contacted the leadership in New Delhi and Islamabad. He also referenced a meeting with Pakistan’s army chief as part of the de-escalation effort.
While Islamabad has not only endorsed this version but also submitted its own Nobel nomination for Trump last month, India continues to strongly refute it.
External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar reiterated this position after a recent meeting with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, telling reporters that “President Trump had nothing to do with the ceasefire.” Indian officials have repeatedly emphasised that the de-escalation was prompted by internal military-level communications, not foreign mediation.
The Trump administration, however, has chosen not to affirm India’s denial — allowing President Trump’s pro-Pakistan narrative to stand uncontested.
For observers in Islamabad, this is significant. Not only is Trump being publicly credited by Pakistan, but the US government, for now, appears content to let that version circulate internationally — a quiet but unmistakable nod to Pakistan’s strategic utility in Washington’s broader diplomatic framework.
When asked directly about Imran’s continued imprisonment — more than a year after his ouster and arrest — the State Department again chose silence over scrutiny.
“For the administration’s opinion regarding Mr. Khan’s situation, I would ask you to check with the White House and my colleague, Karoline Leavitt,” Bruce said, quickly steering the conversation away.
Instead of discussing the democratic process or rule of law — familiar themes in past US commentary on political detentions abroad — Bruce launched into an impassioned defence of President Trump’s global leadership.
“The President has made it clear that he doesn’t expect ever to win something of that sort [the Nobel Peace Prize], and yet the issue for him, the prize, is his success,” she said. “He is now not giving up on the world, and the people of the world are going to decide and make a determination of the greatness of Donald Trump.”
The absence of any reference to Imran’s legal rights or political status indicates a shift in US posture: prioritising stability over values and maintaining silence over expressing concern.
For many Pakistanis, particularly PTI supporters, this shift will be seen as a stark contrast to the more vocal positions taken by many US lawmakers against Imran’s incarceration in the recent past. In April , Republican US Congressman Jack Bergman renewed his call for the release of PTI founder following a recent visit to Islamabad where he met the civilian and military leadership. Special Presidential Envoy for Special Missions of the United States, Richard Grenell, has also consistently voiced support for Imran, calling for his release.
The Trump administration’s emerging South Asia posture is becoming clearer: it is narrative-driven, highly personalised, and largely disengaged from the language of democracy promotion. Pakistan is framed as a cooperative security partner — one that responded positively to Trump’s pressure during the 2025 crisis. India is treated cautiously, without confrontation, but also without the deference New Delhi has come to expect in rejecting any notion of third-party mediation over Kashmir or border issues.
Trump’s references to a possible “nuclear stage” elevate the stakes of the 2025 standoff — and simultaneously bolster his claim to have acted decisively in a high-risk conflict. The claim serves a dual purpose: to enhance his diplomatic résumé internationally and to reinforce his leadership credentials at home.
Meanwhile, the State Department’s posture — ambiguous, amused, and noncommittal — suggests that the Trump administration is comfortable allowing multiple versions of events to exist simultaneously, as long as they don’t disrupt its broader strategic goals.
Tuesday’s remarks make it clear that Trump views himself not only as a participant in global affairs but as a central figure shaping their outcomes. “He deserves every prize,” Bruce said. “He deserved this one for the Abraham Accords.”
Whether the Nobel Committee agrees or not is yet to be seen. But for Pakistan, the symbolism already matters. Trump’s consistent framing of Islamabad as a rational actor that helped de-escalate a major regional conflict — and his apparent disregard for India’s objections — marks a rare public relations victory in a region where international validation is often elusive.
The administration’s silence on Imran, however, sends a different message: that Washington will not risk strategic partnerships or public alignment with current regimes over questions of individual rights, especially not when those questions could complicate a carefully constructed peace narrative.
For now, Trump’s version of the 2025 crisis is gaining traction. Netanyahu’s nomination letter, Pakistan’s endorsement, and the State Department’s studied ambiguity all lend weight to the idea that the India-Pakistan ceasefire was not merely a moment of regional calm — but, in Trump’s telling, a defining chapter in his global peacemaking legacy.
