Trump insisted that his direct intervention, backed by the threat of severe trade consequences, forced both India and Pakistan to pull back from a dangerous military escalation in May. He portrayed the situation as one on the verge of a nuclear crisis, claiming that aircraft were being shot down and that tensions were rapidly spiralling. According to him, millions of lives could have been lost had he not contacted both leaders and warned that the United States would suspend economic cooperation if hostilities did not cease immediately. In his telling, this diplomatic pressure served as the decisive factor in avoiding a catastrophic conflict.
He linked this narrative to a broader claim that his leadership has stopped multiple wars since his return to office, presenting the India-Pakistan incident as one among eight such crises he personally defused. As part of this argument, he emphasised his willingness to take assertive steps in moments of global tension, positioning himself as a leader capable of forcing outcomes through economic leverage and direct communication with heads of state.
During the same interview, Trump reiterated controversial assertions that several nuclear-armed countries are secretly testing nuclear weapons underground. He accused Pakistan, China, Russia, and North Korea of conducting covert detonations, arguing that authoritarian governments conceal such activities from the world. He contrasted this with what he called America’s transparency, suggesting that the United States discusses its nuclear posture openly while adversaries operate in secrecy. In his view, hidden testing abroad justifies the United States considering underground nuclear tests of its own after decades of adherence to a voluntary moratorium.
Trump suggested that these developments coincided with his recent diplomatic engagement with China, implying that nuclear readiness and strategic messaging remain central to U.S. policy. He hinted that a decision on testing would soon become public, reinforcing a stance that Washington will not allow rival nations to gain a strategic edge without response.
India, however, sharply disputed Trump's account of the May confrontation. Indian officials clarified that de-escalation followed structured communication between the Directors General of Military Operations from both countries, not external mediation. They stated that the nations’ own military channels and diplomatic systems were responsible for reaching an understanding. India’s position underscores that it does not acknowledge foreign intervention as the cause of stability and rejects the framing that outside pressure resolved the crisis.
