Trump's Mediation: A Risk India Can't Afford

The idea of Donald Trump mediating in Operation Sindoor is not just impractical—it’s a diplomatic hazard. Here’s why this move is not just impractical but potentially dangerous.

A Violation of the Shimla Agreement	The 1972 Shimla Agreement mandates that India and Pakistan resolve disputes bilaterally. Trump's offer undermines this foundation, challenging India's sovereignty and long-standing policy.
Ignoring Pakistan’s Role in Terrorism	For years, India has highlighted Pakistan’s involvement in cross-border terrorism through groups like JeM and LeT. Equating India's defense strategies with Pakistan’s proxy warfare dangerously oversimplifies the conflict.
India’s Clear Stance	New Delhi has consistently rejected third-party intervention, emphasizing that bilateral dialogue is the only path forward. External mediation is seen as interference, not assistance.
Growing Distrust	Recent U.S. statements comparing India's security actions to Pakistani aggression have deepened skepticism. Washington’s approach overlooks the fundamental difference between a state defending its borders and one enabling terrorism.
Why Trump’s Involvement is Risky	His unpredictable political style, history of controversial deals, and personal business interests add unnecessary volatility. In delicate geopolitical conflicts, reckless diplomacy can have lasting consequences.

As global power shifts and diplomatic maneuvers unfold, India remains firm in its rejection of outside mediation, standing by its sovereignty and time-tested policies. With Washington recalibrating its ties with Beijing, New Delhi must focus on strengthening bilateral partnerships that respect its strategic autonomy, ensuring that diplomatic narratives are shaped by India—not imposed upon it.