A fragile silence

When President Donald Trump recently claimed victory in mediating ceasefires in Ukraine, Gaza, and now between India and Pakistan, he presented himself as a peacemaker able to halt global violence. Yet silencing guns is not a sign of true peace.

Temporary truces leave deep structural issues unresolved, deeply intensifying political wounds—ignored and unaddressed by a leader whose interest in peace appears limited to transactional quick fixes rather than sustainable resolutions. In South Asia, where Trump’s latest intervention resulted in a fragile halt to the worst India-Pakistan clashes in decades, the core issues remain untouched, risking further—and potentially catastrophic—escalations.

American presidents have historically held a strong influence in times of crises between Islamabad and New Delhi. In previous conflicts, notably in 1965, 1971 and even Kargil, the US mediated discreetly, emphasizing diplomatic dialogue, compromise, and conflict resolution. Trump’s recent ceasefire, though publicly celebrated, lacks exactly this depth. It hinges merely on the immediate silencing of weapons, overlooking underlying triggers that brought the nuclear-armed neighbours to near-war.

The catalyst for the recent escalation was April’s tragic attack in Pahalgam, Indian-occupied Kashmir, which claimed the lives of 26 civilians. India quickly attributed blame to Pakistan, without sharing any concrete evidence or allowing a neutral investigation despite Pakistan’s insistence. India’s eventual reaction—Operation Sindoor—was framed as a non-escalatory, defensive measure. The reality, however, was starkly different from what was claimed. Indian strikes included residential areas, mosques, and essential civilian infrastructure such as the Neelum-Jhelum Hydropower Project. This was clearly a provocation, and that too, without any basis. What followed was a series of events with both sides escalating until Trump’s intervention prevailed.

But the ceasefire ignores a critically overlooked oversight: the absence of a neutral, international investigation into the Pahalgam incident. Turkish President Erdogan had wisely suggested such an international probe, recognizing its value in establishing accountability. Without investigation and transparency, India’s aggressive military response remains dangerously legitimized, incentivizing future similar actions. Trump, despite portraying himself as a mediator, has so far failed to secure this foundational prerequisite for a lasting peace.

The second oversight is even more perilous: the unilateral suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty by India and the deliberate omission of its restoration in peace talks. Long regarded as one of the world’s most resilient water-sharing agreements, this treaty—brokered by the World Bank in 1960—has been pivotal to regional stability. India’s decision to choke off Chenab river flows, drastically reducing water discharge from 35,000 cusecs to merely 3,100, has not only jeopardized millions of Pakistani livelihoods but deliberately “weaponized” water to exacerbate regional tensions.

Indian construction of upstream dams, notably Pakal Dul and Baglihar, violates explicit treaty clauses requiring mutual consultation and cooperation. Such provocations are not minor disputes. They constitute acts of strategic hostility, carrying direct humanitarian consequences and significantly undermining trust between two nuclear-armed states. Yet Trump’s mediation made no mention of restoring treaty compliance or initiating a World Bank-led dialogue to manage water grievances.

In the past, multilateral institutions like the World Bank actively brokered disputes, as opposed to being just passive observers. They facilitated dialogues and effectively mediated crises related to treaty violations. Today, as Trump’s administration proudly announces a ceasefire, this critical institutional role has been abandoned. In doing so, the United States allows a dangerous precedent to form: agreements signed under international auspices can be suspended with impunity if a state chooses unilateral action.

This negligence mirrors Trump’s approach elsewhere. In Gaza, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continues his devastating war, repeatedly breaking Trump brokered cease-fire terms. Trump’s support for Netanyahu has been unwavering, yet that relationship has failed to bring meaningful resolution to the plight of hostages, reduce civilian casualties, or secure lasting stability. Temporary ceasefires in Palestine, too, ignore the fundamental issue of its statehood and sovereignty, ensuring repeated cycles of endless violence.

Similarly, in Ukraine, Trump announced a fragile truce with Russia, ignoring fundamental Ukrainian demands for territorial sovereignty and lasting security assurances. Despite entering into a minerals deal with Ukraine, no meaningful peace has yet been achieved; Russian missiles continue to strike civilian areas, confirming the limitations of ceasefires that address symptoms rather than core political conflicts.

In all these scenarios—Ukraine, Gaza, and South Asia—Trump’s diplomacy follows a similar disturbing pattern. Immediate violence is paused, but the underlying drivers of conflict remain untouched, virtually guaranteeing future instability. Trump’s transactional diplomacy values headlines over lasting outcomes, spotlighting short-term fixes rather than long-term strategic engagements essential for true peace.

For Pakistan, the implications of this fragile peace are especially severe. The country faces an existential climate threat, grave economic challenges due to IMF-imposed austerity, and soaring poverty levels that are already exacerbating domestic instability. With the Indus Waters Treaty sidelined, agricultural disruptions will only intensify food insecurity, heightening socio-economic stresses. Pakistan’s strategic calculus must factor in these striking realities.

A lasting peace requires resolving these core economic and environmental tensions, not just the cessation of fire.

An independent international investigation into the Pahalgam incident, as President Erdogan rightly proposed, is crucial not only for justice but also to rebuild trust and de-escalate regional tensions. Equally urgent is restoring India’s adherence to the Indus Waters Treaty, ensuring reliable water flow and cooperative river management. Without both steps, Trump’s ceasefire is dangerously incomplete, risking imminent collapse.

The question now for the international community—and especially institutions like the World Bank—is whether they will step back into their essential mediation roles. The treaty violations must trigger swift, impartial action, reaffirming the global order’s foundational commitment to diplomatic resolution and multilateral accountability.

Ultimately, Trump’s brand of quick-fix diplomacy must give way to more robust, sustainable international engagement. True peace requires tackling underlying issues, establishing genuine accountability, and ensuring enforceable treaty compliance. Otherwise, we risk repeating cycles of violence, each more dangerous and costlier than the last.

This latest ceasefire comes with a silver lining for world peace—an opportunity that Trump and the international community must urgently seize to address the deeper crises at hand. The clock is ticking, and temporary solutions will no longer suffice.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025