Did the U.S. Broker the India-Pakistan Ceasefire? EAM Jaishankar Credits Indian Army, Not America

Following weeks of intense military tensions between India and Pakistan, a ceasefire was officially declared on May 10, 2025. But a debate has since emerged about who deserves the credit for the truce—the Indian Armed Forces or international diplomacy, particularly American intervention.

A journalist from the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung posed this exact question to India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar: Should India thank the United States for the ceasefire?

Jaishankar’s reply was firm and unambiguous—“We thank our soldiers, not foreign powers.”

“Ceasefire Happened Because of Indian Army’s Action”: Jaishankar

In a press briefing held in New Delhi, Jaishankar made it clear that India’s military superiority and decisive retaliation forced Pakistan into seeking a ceasefire. He explained how the Indian Armed Forces conducted precision strikes on Pakistan’s key airbases and defense installations, crippling their strategic capabilities.

“Our army responded in a powerful and measured way. Pakistan’s main airbases and defense systems suffered heavy damage. It was Pakistan’s military that contacted our DGMOs and requested a ceasefire. That’s how the ceasefire happened,” Jaishankar stated.

He emphasized that the initiative for the ceasefire came from Pakistan, not from international players.

Military Diplomacy, Not U.S. Pressure, Led to Ceasefire

Refuting the growing narrative that the U.S. mediated the ceasefire between the two South Asian nuclear powers, Jaishankar asserted that the direct communication between Indian and Pakistani military commanders was what led to the cessation of hostilities.

“The decision to stop firing came from direct talks between our military commanders. Before that, our forces had delivered a very strong response in the morning. That changed the dynamics entirely,” Jaishankar added.

He reiterated that Pakistan’s desperation led to the ceasefire—not any foreign pressure.

Why the U.S. is Claiming Credit

Shortly after the ceasefire was announced, U.S. President Donald Trump posted on social media, hinting that Washington played a role in bringing the two countries to the table. Pakistan’s government quickly echoed this claim, likely to deflect domestic criticism and position itself as a cooperative actor on the global stage.

However, India has categorically rejected these claims. The Modi government, through both military and diplomatic channels, has maintained that India’s internal military operation—referred to unofficially as Operation Sindoor—was a unilateral response to Pakistani provocations, and not part of a broader international negotiation.

What Was Operation Sindoor?

Though not officially confirmed in full detail, Operation Sindoor is believed to have been a multi-target strike campaign carried out by the Indian Armed Forces in retaliation for attempted infiltrations and attacks by Pakistan-backed terrorist groups.

Indian intelligence reports suggested that Pakistan was planning to use groups like The Resistance Front (TRF) to launch attacks within India. Jaishankar indirectly referenced these threats, stating:

“We had warned that TRF might attempt something serious in India. When the threat materialized, we acted swiftly and decisively.”

Pakistan’s Attempt to Control the Narrative

By pushing the idea that the U.S. orchestrated the ceasefire, Pakistan is trying to reshape the perception of its military and political posture. The strategy seems to be aimed at:

1. Downplaying the damage caused by India’s strikes

2. Projecting an image of diplomacy over desperation

3. Winning sympathy in Western capitals, especially ahead of global summits

   Related Post

   1. Baba Ramdev Urges Boycott of US Brands Over 50 Percent Tariff
   2. Vaishno Devi Landslide: Record Rainfall in Jammu and Kashmir Claims 34 Lives on Pilgrimage Route

But India has remained firm in its stance: this was a military victory, not a diplomatic one.

Was There a Risk of Nuclear War?

One of the most sensitive and widely speculated concerns during the recent India-Pakistan conflict was the possibility of a nuclear escalation. When asked directly about this by a journalist, Jaishankar gave a sharp yet weary response:

“We are tired of this question. We targeted terrorist infrastructure—not civilian areas. We didn’t take any steps that would threaten ordinary lives. Pakistan, however, chose to retaliate with indiscriminate fire.”

His response signals India’s strategic maturity and restraint, even in the face of provocation, while reiterating its right to self-defense.

International Reactions and India’s Strategic Autonomy

While some countries and international observers have applauded the ceasefire, India’s narrative is sharply focused on its own strategic autonomy. In recent years, India has made it clear that while it welcomes diplomatic support, it does not rely on third parties—particularly when it comes to matters of national security and border integrity.

Foreign policy analysts agree that India’s approach under EAM Jaishankar has evolved into a more assertive, clear-headed diplomacy, where the military, diplomatic, and intelligence apparatus work in synchrony.

Public Sentiment: Widespread Support for the Indian Army

Social media in India erupted in support of the Armed Forces following Jaishankar’s statements. Hashtags like #ThankYouIndianArmy, #OperationSindoor, and #JaishankarDoctrine trended nationally, as citizens hailed the army’s swift response and the government’s bold stance.

Veterans, strategic experts, and former diplomats also praised the clarity with which India handled the ceasefire narrative, refusing to credit international mediation when the trigger and the solution were both internal.

The Bigger Picture: What This Means for India-Pakistan Relations

Although the ceasefire has brought temporary peace, the underlying tensions between India and Pakistan remain unresolved. Key takeaways include:

• Terror infrastructure in Pakistan continues to be a red line for India

• Direct military retaliation, not strategic patience, is now India’s preferred doctrine

• Diplomatic narratives are tightly controlled to reflect India’s sovereign decision-making

• Global players like the U.S. may offer support, but they do not dictate terms

This incident has highlighted a new era of Indian strategic confidence, one where it is less dependent on global powers and more inclined toward swift, autonomous action.

A Ceasefire on India’s Terms

The May 10 ceasefire between India and Pakistan is more than just a break in hostilities—it is a symbol of India’s evolving military and diplomatic stance. Minister S. Jaishankar’s strong words serve as a reminder that India’s security policy is no longer driven by appeasement or dependence, but by strength, clarity, and strategic self-assurance.

In the end, the question—“Should India thank America for the ceasefire?”—was answered not in words, but through actions that spoke volumes.

“We thank the Indian Army,” said Jaishankar. And that statement, perhaps, is the clearest articulation of India’s modern defense posture.