Why Trump first stayed away, then claimed the Indo-Pak ceasefire
Here’s what might have prompted Donald Trump to initially ignore the Indo-Pak conflict and later take full credit for brokering the peace
By Sanjay Dubey
When the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) of India and Pakistan spoke on May 10, 2025, and agreed to a ceasefire after four days of escalating conflict, neither country announced it immediately. It was Donald Trump who first broke the news on social media, followed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Only then did India and Pakistan confirm the ceasefire — each framing it differently. While Pakistan publicly thanked Trump, India made no mention of America’s role.
This sequence raises an obvious question: why did the Trump administration initially stay out of Indo-Pak ceasefire efforts, only to suddenly claim credit? That indifference was clear just two days earlier when US Vice President JD Vance declared that America wouldn’t intervene in a conflict “that is fundamentally none of our business.” Yet after the ceasefire, Vance posted on Twitter: “Great work from the President’s team, especially Secretary Rubio.”
The answer lies in a mix of foreign policy compulsions and domestic political calculations. Here’s a breakdown.
Failure to broker peace in Ukraine
Trump’s second presidency began with high-profile promises to deliver what his predecessors could not: a negotiated settlement in Ukraine. Yet, for all its public statements and private diplomacy, the administration fell short of achieving even a limited ceasefire between Kyiv and Moscow. The diplomatic setback damaged Trump’s image as a leader capable of striking tough deals. Seizing credit for brokering peace between India and Pakistan — two nuclear-armed nations with a historically volatile relationship — offered a chance to offset that failure and showcase a global ‘win’.
Erosion of U.S. Global Influence and Traditional Alliances
President Trump's "America First" doctrine has led to a marked decline in U.S. global influence. His administration's withdrawal from key international agreements and organisations—such as the Paris Climate Agreement, the WHO, and the UNHRC—has diminished America's role as a global leader. This retreat has created a vacuum that other nations, notably China, are eager to fill, positioning themselves as alternative leaders in global governance.
Simultaneously, Trump's transactional approach to international relations has strained long-standing alliances. Allies in Europe and elsewhere have expressed concerns over the U.S.'s commitment to collective security. In this context, the Indo-Pak ceasefire offered a rare opportunity for the U.S. to reassert its relevance and demonstrate a measure of commitment to engaging in matters of global consequence.
Novice foreign policy team
One of the most widely noted features of Trump’s second term has been the composition of his foreign policy team. With figures like Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance holding key roles, and Trump himself historically disinterested in subtle diplomatic maneuvering, the administration has shown a preference for bold, headline-grabbing moves over careful back-channel negotiations. The decision to initially stay out of visible ceasefire efforts likely stemmed from a fear of diplomatic missteps in a conflict as sensitive and layered as India-Pakistan. Claiming credit after the fact carried none of those risks.
Domestic electoral optics
With the US midterm elections scheduled for November 2026, the Trump administration is under pressure to deliver high-visibility successes that can galvanise its base and shape public perception of American strength. Foreign policy wins — particularly those that don’t require troop deployments or financial commitments — serve as effective political capital. Additionally, claiming credit for a South Asian ceasefire also offered Trump’s team a chance to appeal to influential diaspora communities in key battleground states like Michigan, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Florida, where Indian American and Pakistani American voters could affect Congressional races.