India pushes back on Trump’s offer to mediate on Kashmir, rebuts claim on trade
Randhir Jaiswal said Pakistan is only “fooling itself” if it thinks it can escape the consequences of nurturing “terrorism on an industrial scale”
NEW DELHI: India on Tuesday pushed back against US President Donald Trump’s offer to mediate on Kashmir and his claim that he used trade to prevent a “nuclear war” between India and Pakistan, with the external affairs ministry saying the military action under Operation Sindoor was “entirely in the conventional domain”.

India attacked terrorist infrastructure in territories controlled by Pakistan on May 7 under Operation Sindoor in retaliation for the Pahalgam terror attack, triggering four days of intense strikes and counter-strikes by the two sides using drones, missiles and other long-range weapons that raised fears of an all-out war.
Also Read: 'Parast ho jao lekin dhol bajao': MEA's swipe at Pakistan's ‘victory’ claims
Trump was the first to announce on May 10 that the two sides reached an understanding to halt military actions, and the state department subsequently described the development as a “US-brokered ceasefire”. Trump has also offered to mediate on the Kashmir issue and claimed he used trade to stop what could have been a “bad nuclear war” between the two countries.
Responding to a question about Trump’s offer to mediate on the Kashmir issue, external affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said India’s long-standing position has been that any issues related to Jammu and Kashmir “have to be addressed by India and Pakistan bilaterally”.
Also Read: ‘Our targets were…’: What India said on Pakistan ‘nuclear leakage’ buzz
He added, “That stated policy has not changed. As you are aware, the outstanding matter is the vacation of illegally occupied Indian territory by Pakistan.”
Jaiswal responded to another question on Trump’s comments about a possible nuclear war by saying that the military action during Operation Sindoor was “entirely in the conventional domain”. He noted there were some reports that Pakistan’s National Command Authority, which has command and control of the nuclear arsenal, would meet on May 10 – the day of the most intense strikes – but this was later denied by the Pakistani side.
“Pakistan’s foreign minister has himself denied the nuclear angle on record. As you know, India has a firm stance that it will not give in to nuclear blackmail or allow cross-border terrorism to be conducted invoking it,” Jaiswal said.
During conversations with various countries amid the latest crisis, the Indian side cautioned them that “subscribing to such scenarios could hurt them in their own region”, Jaiswal said, adding that trade did not figure in any conversation between Indian and American leaders from the time Operation Sindoor began on May 7 till the understanding on halting military actions on May 10.
When Prime Minister Narendra Modi outlined India’s “new normal” for fighting terrorism during an address to the nation on Monday night, he said that India “will strike precisely and decisively at the terrorist hideouts developing under the cover of nuclear blackmail”.
Jaiswal also addressed speculation about the role played by the US and other countries in the recent crisis by saying that the “specific date, time and wording of the understanding” to halt firing and military actions was worked out between the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) of India and Pakistan during their phone call that began at 3.35 pm on May 10.
“The request for this [phone] call was received by the external affairs ministry from the Pakistani high commission at 12.37 pm...The timing was then decided based on the availability of the Indian DGMO at 3.35 pm,” he said.
Early on May 10, India mounted “extremely effective” attacks on eight Pakistan Air Force bases and this was the reason “they were now willing to stop firing and military action”, he said. “Let me be clear. It was the force of Indian arms that compelled Pakistan to stop its firing,” he added.
During conversations with other countries, India’s message was that it was responding to the Pahalgam terror attack by targeting terrorist infrastructure. “However, if the Pakistani armed forces fire, Indian armed forces will fire back. If Pakistan stops, India will also stop,” he said. “It is natural that many foreign leaders who heard this from us would have shared it with their Pakistani interlocutors.”
Jaiswal made it clear that the punitive diplomatic and economic measures announced by India a day after the Pahalgam attack, including the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, remain in place. He noted that the treaty was concluded in a spirit of goodwill and friendship but Pakistan has held these principles in abeyance by promoting cross-border terrorism. “India will keep the treaty in abeyance until Pakistan credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism,” he said.
While Pakistan’s foreign office on Tuesday described India’s new approach to countering cross-border terrorism as an attempt to fabricate “narratives to justify aggression”, Jaiswal said Pakistan is only “fooling itself” if it thinks it can escape the consequences of nurturing “terrorism on an industrial scale”. The terrorist infrastructure sites targeted by India were responsible for the deaths of Indians and many other people around the world. “There is now a new normal. The sooner Pakistan gets used to it, the better,” he said.
Jaiswal also responded to claims by Pakistan’s foreign minister Ishaq Dar in an interview to CNN, saying that Operation Sindoor destroyed terrorism centres at Bahawalpur, Muridke, Muzaffarabad and other places. Noting that Pakistan’s military capabilities were “significantly degraded” and key airbases “effectively put out of action”, Jaiswal said: “If the Pakistani foreign minister wishes to project these as achievements, he is welcome to do so.”
He added, “Till the night of May 9, Pakistan was threatening India with a massive assault. Once their attempt failed [on the morning of May 10] and they received a devastating Indian counter-response, their tune changed and their DGMO eventually reached out to us.”