Trump’s Kashmir Intervention Undermined US-India Strategic Trust, Says Analyst

Photo: Reuters via ANI

India-West News Desk

NEW DELHI – President Trump’s recent intervention in the military conflict between India and Pakistan has not only tilted the scales in favor of a state sponsor of terror but has also “undermined America’s strategic partnership with India,” according to Brahma Chellaney, an opinion contributor for The Hill.

In an opinion piece published in The Hill, Chellaney argues that Trump’s actions after India launched a “calibrated military campaign” against Pakistan on May 7, in response to a terrorist attack in Indian-administered Kashmir, were not about impartial de-escalation. Instead, he contends, the US coerced India into prematurely ending its operation, thereby “sparing Pakistan the consequences of its actions” and damaging the “foundation of U.S.-India strategic trust.”

Chellaney highlights Trump’s public boasts about “brokering a historic ceasefire” between the two nations, which he suggests masks a less palatable truth: the intervention was aimed at “shielding a longtime ‘major non-NATO ally’ from the fallout of its proxy warfare.” He points out that India’s campaign, though short, achieved notable successes, degrading Pakistan’s air defenses and striking key air bases. However, just hours after India seized the battlefield initiative on May 10, a ceasefire was accepted under direct U.S. pressure, with Trump announcing it even before India or Pakistan.

The article in The Hill details how Trump later revealed he had threatened trade sanctions to halt India’s advance, stating, “If you don’t stop, we are not going to do any trade.” Chellaney critically questions this, asserting that if true, the U.S. leveraged “economic blackmail – not diplomacy – to protect a state that exports terrorism.” This, he warns, raises concerns about Washington “weaponizing defense supply chains” in future conflicts, especially given India’s increasing reliance on U.S. military hardware.

Chellaney also links the timing of a $2.4 billion International Monetary Fund bailout for Pakistan, approved under strong American influence two days into India’s military campaign, as further evidence of rewarding “the most persistent terror sponsor in South Asia.” He states that “the bailout signaled to the world that you can export jihadist terror and still enjoy Western protection.”

 Chellaney al;so criticizes Trump’s “unsettling willingness to engage with actors whom most nations deem beyond the pale,” citing a meeting with a U.S. and U.N.-designated terrorist. He also takes issue with Trump’s proposal to mediate the Kashmir dispute, arguing that such “false equivalence – between the target of terror and its perpetrator – has justifiably infuriated both the Indian government and public.” He concludes that Trump’s behavior “highlights the jarring truth that Trump’s America is not a reliable strategic partner for India,” potentially accelerating “the unraveling of trust between the world’s two largest democracies.”