The recent tensions have marked at least the fourth successful mediation effort by the U.S. to persuade both nations to abandon their warlike posturing and withdraw their forces to safer positions.
Analysis
By Ranjit Kumar
Military tensions between India and Pakistan have consistently captured the attention of the global community, leading India to reluctantly accept U.S. mediation in efforts to ease the strained relations between these two nuclear-armed neighbours. Pakistan officially declared itself a nuclear power in 1998, following its nuclear tests that year, which came shortly after India conducted its own tests in May 1998 at Pokhran. However, suspicions regarding Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities had been circulating since the mid-1980s. This backdrop of nuclear anxiety became particularly pronounced in 1986 when the Indian Army mobilized a significant number of troops for the large-scale military exercise known as Brass Tacks along the Rajasthan border. The U.S. administration intervened during this period of heightened military readiness to help de-escalate the situation and prevent potential conflict.
This pattern of intervention reflects …
Fast forward four decades, and the United States has once again positioned itself as a key mediator in the ongoing tensions between India and Pakistan. Historically, whenever these two nations have engaged in military confrontations or heightened rhetoric that raised fears of nuclear conflict, the U.S. has stepped in to mitigate the situation. This pattern of intervention reflects a long-standing commitment by U.S. leaders to encourage dialogue and restraint between the two countries. The recent tensions have marked at least the fourth successful mediation effort by the U.S. to persuade both nations to abandon their warlike posturing and withdraw their forces to safer positions.
Playing a crucial role in de-escalating the tense situation
The first significant instance of U.S. intervention occurred during the 1986-87 period when the Indian Army conducted its largest military exercise to date, involving over half a million troops. This massive mobilization raised alarms within the Pakistani military establishment, which feared an imminent invasion and subsequently increased its own troop presence along the border. The resulting standoff heightened the spectre of a nuclear confrontation, prompting urgent backchannel communications from the U.S. administration. These diplomatic efforts aimed to encourage both India and Pakistan to reduce their military deployments and engage in constructive dialogue, ultimately playing a crucial role in de-escalating the tense situation and averting a potential crisis.
Pakistan had assembled at least ten nuclear weapons, with fears
In May 1990, following a period of unrest in Kashmir, India escalated its military presence along the international border, particularly in the Rajasthan region, while simultaneously increasing troop deployments in Jammu and Kashmir. In response, General Aslam Beg, the Chief of the Pakistani Army, positioned his forces closer to the Line of Control (LOC). This military buildup heightened tensions between India and Pakistan, bringing the two nations perilously close to the brink of war. The international community expressed significant concern over the potential for a nuclear conflict, especially as U.S. intelligence reports indicated that Pakistan had assembled at least ten nuclear weapons, with fears that some of these warheads might be deployed on F-16 fighter jets supplied by the United States.
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/114487190752990599/embed
Shuttle diplomacy to ease border tensions
In an effort to mitigate the escalating crisis, U.S. National Deputy Security Advisor Robert Gates undertook diplomatic missions to both New Delhi and Islamabad, employing shuttle diplomacy to ease border tensions. During his visits, Gates cautioned General Aslam Beg that the U.S. would withhold military assistance in the event of a conflict and urged Pakistani military leaders to refrain from supporting militant groups in Indian-administered Kashmir. Simultaneously, he advised Indian officials to exercise restraint to prevent any provocations that could spiral out of control. Thanks to these diplomatic interventions, India and Pakistan agreed to initiate dialogue at the foreign secretary level to address their bilateral disputes, including the contentious issue of Kashmir. The U.S. administration’s involvement proved crucial in managing the crisis, which had raised alarming fears of nuclear warfare, ultimately averting a potential catastrophe through effective negotiation and mediation.
The United States played a pivotal role
The United States has historically played a pivotal role in mediating conflicts between India and Pakistan, particularly during moments of heightened tension. One notable instance occurred during the Kargil conflict in 1999, when then-President Bill Clinton intervened to prevent a full-scale war between the two nations. As the situation escalated, Clinton extended an invitation to Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to discuss a resolution in Washington. While Vajpayee declined the offer for US mediation and chose not to visit, Sharif, facing immense pressure, accepted the invitation. On July 4, 1999, despite it being a national holiday, Clinton dedicated significant time to engage with Sharif, ultimately persuading him to agree to a ceasefire and withdraw Pakistani troops from the strategically significant Kargil heights.
The US once again intervened to avert a potential crisis
In a more recent development, the US once again intervened to avert a potential crisis following the tragic killing of 26 tourists in the Pahalgam region of Kashmir. This time, the urgency of the situation prompted a concerted effort from US leaders, including President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance , and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who spent three days on the phone with Pakistani Army Chief General Asim Munir. Their intervention was sparked by alarming intelligence indicating an imminent escalation of hostilities on May 9. As communication channels faltered and tensions rose, the risk of a significant military confrontation loomed large, raising fears of a nuclear exchange. Reports suggest that US officials warned their Pakistani counterparts that the release of an IMF loan could be jeopardized, highlighting the dependency of the Pakistani military on US support for the maintenance of F-16 fighter jets, for which the US had recently provided $399 million in assistance.
India justified its military actions …
The military tensions between India and Pakistan, two nuclear-armed neighbours, consistently raise significant international alarm. Following the tragic Pahalgam massacre, where 26 tourists lost their lives, India escalated the situation by conducting a counter-strike against terrorist training camps. This prompted a range of countries, from Saudi Arabia to the United States, to intervene, urging both nations to de-escalate their aggressive postures. India justified its military actions as a response to provocations stemming from terrorist activities, asserting that its operations were specifically targeted at terrorist infrastructure. However, the Pakistani military responded with considerable force, leading to further retaliatory measures from India, which in turn heightened the conflict and invited even more intense military responses.
The nature of international intervention, differed markedly
The unfolding events bore a striking resemblance to the 2001 terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament, which had previously led to the initiation of Operation Prakram, bringing the subcontinent perilously close to nuclear confrontation. This time, however, the nature of international intervention, particularly from the United States and Western nations, differed markedly. The aftermath of the Pahalgam incident and the subsequent Operation Sindoor, executed by Indian forces on May 7, resulted in the elimination of approximately 100 terrorists across nine different facilities, including ten prominent figures from the terrorist organizations Jaish-e-Mohammad and Lashkar-e-Taiba. The global community observed with concern as both the Pakistani military and civilian leaders openly honoured the deceased terrorists, further complicating the narrative surrounding the conflict.
This growing awareness contributed to a more proactive role
The situation prompted a shift in perception, even among Islamic nations such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which began to recognize the extent to which the Pakistani military regime was supporting and harbouring terrorist elements. This growing awareness contributed to a more proactive role for not only the United States but also Gulf countries in mediating the escalating tensions. The international community’s response underscored the urgent need for dialogue and restraint, as the spectre of nuclear conflict loomed over the region, reminding all parties involved of the dire consequences that could arise from continued hostilities.
(The writer is a senior journalist and strategic affairs analyst)