US Again Claims It Stopped India-Pak War Using "Trade Leverage"
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Tuesday once again claimed that US President Donald Trump has ended the military conflict between India and Pakistan.
"The President is using the might of American strength to demand that respect from our allies, our friends, our adversaries all around the world," Leavitt said at a press briefing.
She said that it was seen not only in the progress with Russia and Ukraine but also "in the closing of seven global conflicts around the world." "We've seen it with the end of the conflict between India and Pakistan, which could have resulted in a nuclear war if we had not had a President who believed in the strength and the leverage that comes with the job of being the President of the United States of America," Leavitt said.
In an answer to another question, Leavitt said that Trump used trade "in a very powerful way as leverage" to bring the India-Pakistan conflict to an end.
Since May 10, when Trump announced on social media that India and Pakistan had agreed to a "full and immediate" ceasefire after a "long night" of talks mediated by Washington, he has repeated his claim over 40 times that he "helped settle" the tensions between India and Pakistan.
India has been consistently maintaining that the understanding on cessation of hostilities with Pakistan was reached following direct talks between the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) of the two militaries.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said in Parliament that no leader of any country asked India to stop Operation Sindoor.
Meanwhile, replying to one more question, Leavitt said that Trump has imposed sanctions on India to bring an end to the Russia-Ukraine war.
"The President has put tremendous public pressure to bring this war to a close. He has taken actions as you seen sanctions on India and other actions as well. He has made himself very clear that he wants to see this war end," she added.
Earlier in an interview to CNBC, US treasury secretary Scott Bessent also accused India of "profiteering" by reselling Russian oil.
US President Donald Trump imposed tariffs totalling 50 per cent on India including 25 per cent for New Delhi's purchases of Russian oil that will come into effect from August 27.
India has called the tariffs "unjustified and unreasonable".
India said that, like any major economy, it will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
18 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Crimea's return impossible for Kyiv': Trump rules out sending US soldiers to Ukraine peace mission
President Donald Trump on Tuesday offered his assurances that U.S. troops would not be sent to help defend Ukraine against Russia after seeming to leave open the possibility the day before. Trump also said in a morning TV interview that Ukraine's hopes of joining NATO and regaining the Crimean Peninsula from Russia are 'impossible.' The Republican president, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and other European leaders held hours of talks at the White House on Monday aimed at bringing an end to Russia's war against Ukraine. While answering questions from journalists, Trump did not rule out sending U.S. troops to participate in a European-led effort to defend Ukraine as part of security guarantees sought by Zelenskyy. Trump said after his meeting in Alaska last week with Russian President Vladimir Putin that Putin was open to the idea of security guarantees for Ukraine. But asked Tuesday on Fox News Channel's 'Fox & Friends' what assurances he could provide going forward and beyond his term that American troops would not be part of defending Ukraine's border, Trump said, 'Well, you have my assurance, and I'm president.' Show more Show less
Hindustan Times
18 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Anatomy of the budding India-China bonhomie
Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi's just concluded visit to India and the agreement between the two sides on the India-China boundary question is an encouraging sign in mending the relationship between the two countries, which has been struggling to normalise since the border standoff in 2020. Wang Yi's visit to Delhi and the agreement outlining several measures to manage the contested border ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's planned trip to China for the annual Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Summit also reflect broader changes occurring in geopolitics. The India-China dynamics must also be read in conjunction with the engagement of the two countries with Russia. The three-way conversations involving Russia, India, and China are noteworthy as it is reflective of the broader regional geopolitical realignments in response to US policies towards them. In an ideal world, New Delhi would prefer to see Chinese power balanced by the US and/or Russia. (AFP) External affairs minister S Jaishankar is now in Russia. For both India and China (as also for Russia), the three-way conversations present an excellent opportunity to signal to Washington that there are possibilities of alternative global blocs and realignments outside of Washington's orbit and influence. What is perhaps more important and consequential are the underlying causes behind the current bonhomie between India and China. Beyond the optics, it is also evident that both India and China are eager to achieve a degree of normalcy in their relationship. The statement from the ministry of external affairs on the outcomes of Wang's India visit testifies to that. It is, therefore, possible to argue that there is a convergence between New Delhi and Beijing on the need to normalise bilateral relations. However, their respective definitions of normalcy are different. For China, normalcy means moving on from the current border impasse with India and focussing on the global balance of power. As Wang said, 'We (India and China) should never allow bilateral relations to be defined by the boundary question or specific differences to affect the overall picture of our bilateral ties.' Without normalcy with India, China knows that it will not be in a position to leverage Indian unhappiness with US President Donald Trump for its own larger geopolitical purposes. In other words, China seeks to exploit the current opportunity to challenge the US's global supremacy, and for that purpose, normalcy with India would be helpful. But the question is whether Beijing is willing to engage in sustained give-and-take negotiations with New Delhi to settle the border issue. For New Delhi, normalcy with China is centred on disengagement at the border so that it can focus on the larger geopolitical questions of India-China relations, India-China-Russia dynamics, and so on. For India, normalcy on the border and status quo ante bellum as of 2020 is key. China's global objectives behind the current warmth towards India should not be missed. Wang stated recently that 'as important members of the Global South, we have the responsibility to take the lead in opposing hegemonism and power politics'. There is little doubt that China would want to use India and Russia, and the Global South, to target the US-led world order. However, let's be clear. If Trump offers a G-2 with China, Beijing is likely to settle for it, sacrificing its secondary geopolitical equations. A similar logic extends to Russia as well. Moscow would vociferously promote the virtues of an alternative world order outside of the US orbit, but what it wants is to be recognised and treated by Washington and Europe as a great power and be accommodated within the European balance of power system, rather than being part of a China-led global order. As for India, it will continue to emphasise the importance of the Global South, multipolarity, and global alternatives, but New Delhi is not comfortable being part of a China-led, Russia-backed, non-American world order. If India is accommodated into a US-led world order as an important stakeholder, New Delhi is likely to accept that. In an ideal world, New Delhi would prefer to see Chinese power balanced by the US and/or Russia. However, since these options are not currently available, it is inclined to settle for underbalancing China, given its lack of capacity to balance Beijing on its own. In that sense, the three countries – India, China, and Russia – are hedging against geopolitical uncertainties and opting for their respective second-best options. This essential geopolitical dynamic should not be lost on our policymakers. In the meantime, and notwithstanding the deep mistrust between the two countries, India needs to engage with China for two key reasons. For India, conflict management with China is a key issue, as the fundamental contradictions in the relationship are unlikely to disappear soon. Therefore, it is essential to establish and strengthen confidence-building measures (CBMs) to manage Sino-Indian tensions. In that sense, the recent agreements are in the right direction. A no less important reason for India to engage with China on a sustained basis is that managing the relationship with Beijing — its rise as a global power and ambitions for superpower status, aggressive pursuit of its territorial ambitions, and attempts at unipolarity in Asia — is going to be India's most crucial task for the next several decades. From that perspective alone, New Delhi will need to engage productively with Beijing. Happymon Jacob is the founder and director of the Council for Strategic and Defense Research and the editor of INDIA'S WORLD magazine. The views expressed are personal
Mint
18 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump's tariff shadow loomed over monetary policy decision in August, minutes show
Mumbai: When the rate-setting committee of India's central bank met two weeks ago, an uncertain global environment brought about by the tariff tantrums of US president Donald Trump loomed large. It forced the six-member panel to unanimously vote for a status quo on interest rates, despite a benign inflation, showed minutes. 'Considering all these, especially the current state of uncertainty on the external front, monetary policy needs to remain watchful,' said governor Sanjay Malhotra, according to the minutes of the meeting released by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on Wednesday. Malhotra put forth four reasons behind his decision to vote for a pause in interest rates. First, the global economy, he said, continued to undergo a period of heightened uncertainty on the back of trade and tariff negotiations. Second, while economic growth, projected at 6.5% in FY26, is resilient, uncertainty in external demand remained a major drag on growth. Third, inflation continued to ease but was primarily on account of softening food prices. Lastly, the transmission of recent policy rate cuts is ongoing. The monetary policy committee (MPC) lowered the repo rate by 100 basis points (bps) since February, with an outsized and surprising 50-basis point cut in June alone. A basis point equals a hundredth of a percentage point. Trump's tariffs on the world's fifth-largest economy—one that he has often referred to as 'tariff king'—are expected to hit sectors particularly exposed to exporting goods to the US. These include textiles, jewellery, apparel, seafood, machinery and mechanical appliances, chemicals, and auto components. Infact, economists estimate India's growth rate to decline 20-30 basis points on the back of these tariffs. India faces one of the highest levies, at 50%, including 25% for buying Russian energy. On 6 August, the MPC revised its FY26 consumer price inflation projection lower to 3.1%, from 3.7% earlier, while retaining its growth outlook at 6.5%. The panel has three members from RBI, while the remaining are external. The MPC's newest internal member and RBI deputy governor Poonam Gupta said that taking into account the growth-inflation outlook, past actions of the central bank, the state of the domestic economy, and the global dynamics, she does not see the scope or rationale for another cut. Gupta said that the August policy action needs to be seen in the context of the past actions. She said that apart from a cumulative rate cut of 100 bps since February, RBI has also deployed other tools during this period. These include easier liquidity conditions, regulatory easing, transparent and frequent communication, and forward guidance. 'The effect of all these actions has been permeating through the economy. Transmission of the cumulative rate cut has been impressively rapid, but it is still unfolding, and is likely to pick up in the coming months, facilitated by the CRR (cash reserve ratio) cuts coming into effect from September 2025,' said Gupta. Monetary policy committee member and executive director Rajiv Ranjan presented arguments for a pause as well as a cut in the repo rate of 25 bps. However, those in favour of a pause outweighed ones that made the case of another rate cut. Ranjan said that growth remains resilient, supported by public capex, resilient rural demand, and steady services activity. 'Inflation is significantly lower than projected earlier, but the decline is concentrated in a few volatile components and the outlook suggests a rise in inflation to above the target going forward,' he said. According to Ranjan, in the next few months, more clarity will emerge on how tariffs and their impact on the macroeconomy evolves and therefore, it would be prudent to allow time for the recent policy easing to transmit fully into the economy and to assess its effects on real economic activity. 'An additional rate cut at the current juncture could also reduce our policy space should global or domestic risks materialise,' said Ranjan. External members also highlighted the uncertainties in global conditions as a reason to hold back on further rate cuts. Saugata Bhattacharya said that given the level of extant and evolving uncertainty, 'it is difficult to provide even a modicum of forward guidance'. Policy decisions, said Bhattacharya, will continue to be based on incoming data and be taken on a meeting-by-meeting basis. He said that the rate-setting panel has been proactive in easing monetary policy since February 2025, which came in conjunction with multiple RBI measures to reinforce transmission and ease lending conditions. 'At this point, we need to step back, assess the impacts of the rate decisions and other policy actions,' he said. He said that the outcome and timelines of a bilateral trade deal with the US are unclear and if these tariffs persist, there is likely to be an adverse impact on India growth in FY26, and probably beyond.
