'Would not go to nuclear, but might have': Trump confused over nuke war claims, but takes credit for stopping India, Pak tensions again

US President Donald Trump on Friday (June 8) once again claimed that he played a key role in stopping a possible war between India and Pakistan. However, he took a U-turn on his claims that it would be a nuclear war, saying that the war did not reach the potential of a nuclear war but could have gone to that level. India has categorically rejected his mediation claims and said that the hostilities was nowhere near nuclear war.

Speaking to reporters on Air Force One, Trump said he used trade as a tool to get both sides to stop the escalating war. "You know, I did something that people don't talk about, and I don't talk about very much, but we solved a big problem, a nuclear problem potentially with India and with Pakistan. I spoke to Pakistan, I spoke to India, they have really great leaders, but they were going at it, and they could have gone at it nuclear," Trump said.

Trump added, "Both nuclear countries, strong nuclear countries, and I talked about trade and said, 'We're not doing trade if you guys are going to be throwing bombs at each other." They both stopped, and I stopped that war immediately. It was going much further, and hopefully, it would not go to nuclear, but it might have gone to nuclear. In fact, it might have gone to nuclear in the next round, but we stopped it, and I'd like to commend the leaders of both countries, Pakistan and India."

India had conducted Operation Sindoor early on May 7 and hit terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, in response to the Pahalgam terror attack. Hostilities arose between the two countries thereafter. On May 10, the DGMOs of both countries agreed to stop firing based on a bilateral understanding.

India's stance on Trump's mediation claims

Earlier, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor commented on US President Donald Trump's repeated claims of mediation and put forward India's position in front of UP Vice President JD Vance. Tharoor said that the message of India's stance on the mediation claim was understood by Vance and also by the other levels of the US administration.

Speaking to news agency ANI, Tharoor said, "No one needed to persuade us to stop. We had already said to stop. If there was any persuasion by the American president or his senior officials, it would have been the persuasion of the Pakistanis. They would have had to be persuaded. We don't need to be persuaded because we don't want war."

Tharoor said US Vice President Vance understood the Indian position on mediation claims. "The meeting with Vice President Vance was outstanding, very good, very clear. I think we made our position amply clear on this question of mediation, and Vice President Vance fully understood our points," he said.

Tharoor said that mediation implies equivalence between the two parties. And there can be no equivalence between Pakistan, which is an incubator of terrorism, and India, a victim of terror. "The main point is that mediation implies an equivalence between two parties, and there can be no equivalence between terrorists and their victims, between those who are offering safe havens to terrorists and, on the other one on our hand, multi-party democracy.