By The Indian government has categorically denied former U.S. President Donald Trump’s assertion that he brokered a ceasefire between India and Pakistan following Operation Sindoor, rejecting claims of American mediation or trade threats influencing India’s military or diplomatic decisions. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) stated unequivocally that the decision to halt hostilities was a bilateral military understanding between India and Pakistan and not the result of foreign pressure or intervention.
Trump, in a post on TruthSocial on May 11, claimed that his administration had prevented a nuclear conflict and pressured both New Delhi and Islamabad to stop military action by threatening to cut off trade. He described the outcome as a “full and immediate ceasefire” and suggested it was a major diplomatic success by the United States.
India: “Force of Indian Arms” Ended Hostilities
In response, MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal dismissed Trump’s claims, emphasizing that the cessation of military operations between India and Pakistan from May 10 onward followed a mutual understanding between the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) of the two nations. Jaiswal also pointed out that India’s decisive military response, particularly the targeted airstrikes on Pakistani airbases, had forced Pakistan to seek a cessation of hostilities.
“Let me be clear. It was the force of Indian arms that compelled Pakistan to stop its firing,” Jaiswal told reporters in New Delhi. “There is no role of any third party or foreign leader in this process.”
From May 7 to May 10, Indian Armed Forces carried out Operation Sindoor, a series of targeted strikes on terror infrastructure at nine locations in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) in retaliation to the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam, which killed 26 civilians.
No Evidence of Trump’s “Trade Threats”
President Trump also alleged that he had pressured both countries by threatening to cut off trade, thereby forcing them to de-escalate. In response, Jaiswal said, “The issue of trade did not come up in any of the discussions between Indian and U.S. officials.” He noted that while there were regular diplomatic communications during the tense standoff, they focused on the evolving security situation and India’s firm resolve to counter terrorism, not trade pressure or mediation.
“There were conversations between Indian and U.S. leaders from May 7 to May 10, but they did not include any mention of trade threats,” he said.
India Reiterates Stance on Jammu & Kashmir
The MEA reiterated India’s long-standing position that the Jammu and Kashmir issue is a bilateral matter and not subject to third-party intervention. “The stated policy has not changed,” Jaiswal emphasized. “The outstanding matter remains the vacation of illegally occupied Indian territory by Pakistan.”
He also underlined that India’s operations were entirely within the conventional military domain, dismissing Trump’s nuclear conflict narrative as inaccurate and alarmist.
“India has a firm stance that it will not give in to nuclear blackmail or allow cross-border terrorism to be conducted under such threats,” he stated. “We have made it clear in both public and private conversations that promoting such scenarios is irresponsible and may have negative repercussions for other regions.”
Consistent Messaging With Global Partners
India also made it clear that the same message delivered to the global community through media and public addresses was echoed in diplomatic communications with other countries. The government had informed global partners in advance that India would act strongly in response to the Pahalgam terror attack, and the military operations were part of that strategy.
“As regards conversations with other nations, the message from India was clear and consistent,” Jaiswal said. “And exactly the same message that we were conveying from public platforms was the one conveyed in private conversations.”
Conclusion: India Asserts Sovereign Decision-Making
The Indian government’s rebuttal to Donald Trump’s claims underscores India’s position as a sovereign nation making its own strategic decisions in the face of terrorism. Operation Sindoor and its aftermath are now widely viewed as part of India’s doctrinal shift, with New Delhi taking a firmer and more independent stance against state-sponsored terrorism.
The MEA’s dismissal of Trump’s statements also reflects India’s growing confidence on the global stage, as it seeks to correct narratives that undermine its autonomy or exaggerate foreign influence over critical national security decisions.
