Trump’s repeated emphasis on tariffs as a global peacekeeping tool has drawn skepticism from analysts who question both the feasibility and veracity of his claims. Economists argue that trade sanctions can influence state behaviour over time, but attributing the immediate cessation of military hostilities between two nuclear powers solely to tariff threats oversimplifies complex geopolitical dynamics. They point out that India and Pakistan have historically relied on diplomatic backchannels, intelligence coordination, and international mediation to manage conflicts.
Political commentators in the US have also raised concerns about the blending of domestic political narratives with foreign policy claims. By highlighting Pakistan’s public praise and Nobel Peace Prize nomination, Trump frames himself as a decisive peacemaker, which resonates with his domestic base. However, critics note that such statements risk misrepresenting the actual role of professional diplomats and military officials in conflict resolution.
In India, officials have largely dismissed Trump’s account, emphasizing that bilateral mechanisms such as DGMO-level discussions were key to de-escalation. Indian analysts caution that attributing conflict resolution to external figures can undermine the credibility of established military and diplomatic processes. They also note that the repeated misidentification of India with Iran by Trump has sparked concerns over misinformation and public misunderstanding of sensitive geopolitical matters.
Meanwhile, Pakistan appears to have leveraged the narrative for diplomatic advantage. Sharif’s public praise of Trump allows Islamabad to showcase international recognition of its security concerns and amplify the perception of US engagement in regional stability. Analysts suggest that Pakistan’s strategy may be aimed at bolstering its diplomatic standing while also appealing to domestic audiences by projecting influence over a global leader.
Overall, while Trump’s anecdotes have captured media attention and elicited dramatic headlines, the underlying reality highlights the continued centrality of bilateral negotiations, military-level engagement, and multilateral diplomacy in maintaining peace between India and Pakistan. The episode illustrates how public narratives and personal diplomacy are increasingly used to shape perceptions of global influence, even when they diverge from the documented facts.
