By Uzma Ehtasham
The recent endorsements of former U.S. President Donald Trump by Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and the chairman of the Pakistan People’s Party, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, as a “champion of peace” mark a significant moment in a region long scarred by conflict and deep-rooted suspicion. Their praise of Trump’s role in facilitating a ceasefire between Pakistan and India has been met with cautious optimism, offering a rare glimmer of hope amid decades of hostility and geopolitical tension. Shehbaz Sharif expressed a hopeful vision for a new phase in Pakistan-U.S. relations, presenting the ceasefire as a promising step towards lasting peace.
In a speech delivered at an Independence Day event hosted by the American embassy, the prime minister emphasized the professionalism and bravery of Pakistan’s armed forces during the recent conflict. His remarks condemned India’s aggressive rhetoric as reckless and destabilizing for the region, reinforcing Pakistan’s position as a nation striving for peace and stability. Sharif’s commendation of Trump went beyond mere diplomacy; he framed the former president as an advocate not just for peace, but also for economic cooperation, highlighting the importance of dialogue in resolving entrenched disputes.
Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, speaking to overseas Pakistanis in New York, echoed the prime minister’s sentiments while adding important nuance. While he acknowledged Trump’s mediation as a crucial factor in halting open hostilities, Bilawal was clear that sustainable peace in South Asia hinges on a just resolution of the Kashmir dispute. His speech painted a sobering picture of the human cost inflicted by the conflict, spotlighting India’s alleged aggressive tactics, including the weaponization of water resources and attacks on civilian infrastructure. Bilawal’s call for dialogue and diplomacy was a plea for a solution rooted in justice and respect for the aspirations of Kashmiris, underpinned by United Nations resolutions.
His address was a reminder that ceasefires, while vital, are but the first step in a far more complex journey toward lasting peace. Yet, the narrative of Trump as a peace broker sits uneasily amid a backdrop of geopolitical complexity and contradiction. India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has faced intense domestic criticism over Trump’s interventions, reflecting broader nationalistic resistance to what is perceived as external meddling. Nevertheless, Trump’s efforts undeniably helped prevent a dangerous escalation between two nuclear-armed neighbors, steering them away from the brink of war. His offer to mediate the Kashmir dispute brought international focus back to a region long subject to unilateral Indian decisions, particularly since the revocation of Kashmir’s special status in August 2019.
But the cautious optimism expressed by Pakistani leaders must be balanced with a realistic understanding of the nature of U.S. foreign policy. Regardless of which party occupies the White House, American administrations have consistently pursued national interests first and foremost, often at the expense of stability in other regions. From the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan to sanctions and threats against countries like Pakistan and Iran, there is a clear pattern of intervention driven by strategic considerations rather than a principled commitment to peace. Trump’s record on global justice complicates the picture further. His administration’s overt support for Israel, epitomized by the controversial move of the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and tacit approval of military actions in Gaza, stands in stark contrast to the image of a peace champion.
The devastating military campaign in Gaza, with its tragic civilian toll, has sparked widespread condemnation worldwide, including protests by lawmakers, activists, and public figures in Europe and the United States. The repeated U.S. vetoes at the United Nations Security Council against ceasefire resolutions have revealed a willingness to shield Israeli actions regardless of humanitarian consequences, raising uncomfortable questions about the limits of American diplomacy. Within this complex and often contradictory context, the recent Pakistan-India ceasefire facilitated by the U.S. must be seen as a pragmatic intervention rather than an altruistic gesture. Trump’s shift from disengagement to active mediation aligns with American strategic interests, which invariably influence the shape and scope of any peace efforts.
While Pakistan’s cautious welcome of this engagement is understandable, it is essential to recognize that Washington’s actions will always be guided by its own security priorities. The real hope lies in the sincere pursuit of a peaceful and just settlement of Kashmir, one that respects international law and the rights and aspirations of the Kashmiri people. This, however, requires a genuine willingness from India to engage in meaningful dialogue. The challenge is formidable, given the entrenched positions and nationalistic fervor on both sides, but without such engagement, no ceasefire can evolve into lasting peace. Pakistan’s leaders have rightly praised the ceasefire and the renewed American involvement, but the path ahead demands vigilance and realism. Lasting peace cannot rest solely on the shifting alliances of political leaders or temporary geopolitical interests.
It requires an unwavering commitment to principles that transcend convenience and partisan alignments—principles of justice, respect for human rights, and mutual recognition. In a region where decades of conflict have caused untold suffering, the promise of peace championed by both outsiders like Trump and insiders like Pakistan’s political leadership must be tested not just in words, but in action. Only then can the fragile hope that flickers in moments like this ceasefire be transformed into a durable peace, securing a future of stability and cooperation for South Asia and beyond. The world watches with cautious hope, aware that the road to peace is long, difficult, and fraught with setbacks, but also knowing that it is the only path worth pursuing.
(The writer is a public health professional, journalist, and possesses expertise in health communication, having keen interest in national and international affairs, can be reached at uzma@metro-morning.com)
