Trump Repeats Ceasefire Claim, Links Tariffs to India-Pakistan Calm Amid Supreme Court Rebuke
US President Donald Trump has once again asserted that his tariff strategy helped defuse tensions between India and Pakistan — a claim he has repeated dozens of times over the past year — even as India continues to reject any suggestion of third-party mediation.
The remarks came during a news conference on Friday, only hours after the US Supreme Court delivered a sharp setback to his trade agenda.
In a 6–3 ruling, the court held that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not grant the President authority to impose sweeping global tariffs.
Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr., and Brett Kavanaugh dissented, but the majority opinion concluded that the statute did not support the expansive duties Trump had introduced.
Calling the verdict “deeply disappointing,” Trump expressed frustration with the court, saying he was “ashamed” of certain justices for lacking the courage to do what he believed was necessary for the country.
Yet even as he criticized the ruling, he pivoted back to one of his most repeated assertions — that tariffs have served not merely as economic tools but as instruments of peace.
“Tariffs have likewise been used to end five of the eight wars that I settled,” Trump said. “I settled eight wars, whether you like it or not, including India, Pakistan — big ones, nuclear, could have been nuclear.”
The Background: Conflict and Counterclaims
The tensions Trump referred to trace back to last year’s escalation between India and Pakistan following the deadly April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam, which claimed 26 civilian lives.
In response, India launched Operation Sindoor on May 7, targeting terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
The strikes marked one of the most serious military confrontations between the two nuclear-armed neighbours in recent years.
Subsequently, both sides announced a cessation of hostilities. Since then, Trump has repeatedly claimed that US intervention — backed by the leverage of tariffs — played a decisive role in halting the escalation.
According to his own tally, he has made this claim more than 80 times since May 10 last year.
India, however, has consistently maintained that the understanding to stop hostilities emerged from direct military-to-military engagement. Officials in New Delhi have emphasized that the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) of the two countries conducted talks that led to the de-escalation, with no external mediation involved.
Linking Tariffs to Security
At Friday’s press conference, Trump doubled down. He suggested that economic pressure strengthened US national security and deterred further conflict abroad.
Referring to recent remarks from Pakistan’s leadership, he said the Pakistani Prime Minister had acknowledged that US intervention prevented catastrophic loss of life.
“They were getting ready to do some bad things,” Trump remarked, implying that the region stood on the brink of a far more destructive confrontation.
For critics, however, the repetition of the claim — especially at a moment when the Supreme Court has curtailed his tariff authority — raises questions about the blending of economic policy and diplomatic credit.
While Trump portrays tariffs as powerful geopolitical leverage, detractors argue that such sweeping trade measures have sparked legal battles at home and economic uncertainty abroad.
The court’s ruling now casts doubt on the legal foundation of Trump’s global tariff regime. Yet politically, he appears determined to frame tariffs as both shield and sword — protecting American interests while shaping international outcomes.
As Washington debates the limits of presidential power under IEEPA, and as South Asia maintains its own narrative of bilateral de-escalation, the gap between competing versions of events remains as pronounced as ever.
#TrumpTariffs #IndiaPakistan #SupremeCourt #OperationSindoor #USPolitics #SouthAsiaTensions #Geopolitics
