As the world watches another tense moment unfold between India and Pakistan, the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam—claiming the lives of 26 mostly Hindu tourists—has triggered a wave of international diplomatic offers to minimise the temperatures. Nations big and small are vying for a role in easing tensions, if not shaping outcomes. But New Delhi has made it clear: it wants partners, not preachers.A familiar crisis, a crowded chorusFollowing the Pahalgam massacre, diplomatic wires lit up as global powers sought to step into the familiar terrain of India-Pakistan hostility, a conflict that has seen numerous flashpoints since their 1947 partition. What’s different this time is the sheer number of countries offering mediation—some with strategic stakes, others with regional influence or historical connections.Yet, amid the overtures, India’s message remains unambiguous. External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, speaking just days after the attack, stated that India seeks “
partners, not preachers”—a phrase loaded with diplomatic resistance to unsolicited advice, particularly from those who fail to practice what they preach.STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS ADUnder President Donald Trump’s second term, the US has demonstrated a dual-track diplomacy,
walking a fine line between asserting support for India’s anti-terror stance and avoiding overt condemnation of Pakistan. Trump, no stranger to South Asian affairs after his
controversial mediation offer during his first term, was notably more restrained this time.Declaring his closeness to both India and Pakistan, Trump remarked that the two nations would “figure it out one way or another”—a statement reflecting his desire to keep a semblance of neutrality while preserving strategic ties with both countries. This is a calculated posture, especially considering Washington’s broader Indo-Pacific interests and its simultaneous desire to prevent a regional conflict that could benefit China.More from India
After Pahalgam terror attack, how social media has become a battleground of fake news
How Pahalgam terrorists are still hiding in south KashmirDespite a previous freeze in aid to Islamabad, the Trump administration has greenlit over $5.3 billion in security-related exemptions and $400 million for maintenance of Pakistan’s F-16 fleet. That financial cooperation, despite past rhetoric accusing Pakistan of harbouring terrorists shows America’s cautious diplomacy.High-level engagement also came from US Secretary of State
Marco Rubio and Vice President
JD Vance, who both called for restraint. Vance, in particular, urged India to avoid broadening the conflict while nudging Pakistan to take responsibility “to the extent that it is responsible”—a diplomatic formulation that keeps options open.Notably, Rubio reached out directly to Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif rather than his foreign minister, reflecting the gravity of the crisis. Meanwhile, strong backing for India came from US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth and intelligence chief Tulsi Gabbard. Gabbard did not mince words, calling the attack an act of Islamist terror targeting Hindus and unequivocally supporting India’s right to bring the perpetrators to justice.Russia too tries to balance, or tilt itRussia, long a key player in India’s defence architecture, has also stepped into the fray, with Foreign Minister
Sergei Lavrov speaking with both Indian and Pakistani counterparts. Lavrov’s back-to-back calls emphasised Moscow’s willingness to assist in a “political settlement” should both sides express interest.Russia’s long-standing ties with India, particularly in defence and energy sectors, afford it unique leverage. However, Russia has also cultivated relations with Pakistan in recent years, including joint military drills and energy cooperation. Lavrov’s offer is less about idealism and more about extending Russia’s diplomatic relevance, especially as it navigates Western isolation over Ukraine.STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS ADIndia, traditionally cautious about third-party mediation in Kashmir, has not publicly welcomed or rejected the Russian overture. Given Jaishankar’s recent remarks favouring practical partnerships, any serious Russian role would need to be carefully calibrated and devoid of pressure.Iran’s diplomatic gambleIranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s arrival in Pakistan marked the first high-profile visit by a foreign dignitary since the Pahalgam attack. Tehran’s
offer to mediate signals its broader ambition to project itself as a stabilising power in South Asia, even as it remains embroiled in its own regional complexities.Araghchi is expected to visit New Delhi next, as part of Iran’s bid to bridge the gap between the nuclear-armed neighbours. Iran’s balanced ties with both countries, particularly in the energy and trade sectors, allow it to offer a channel of communication—but not without complications.For India, Iran’s role is complicated by concerns over its relationship with Pakistan and the implications for regional security. Tehran’s proximity to Islamabad in recent months may not inspire full confidence in New Delhi, even if the mediation offer is well-intentioned.Malaysia’s surprising entryMalaysia has also entered the diplomatic fray. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s phone conversation with Shehbaz Sharif, in which he condemned the attack but also supported an independent investigation, marked a significant shift. Malaysia, which has historically backed Pakistan’s Kashmir position at international forums, is now positioning itself as a neutral mediator.Anwar’s offer is rooted in Malaysia’s cultural and diplomatic proximity to both nations, but its credibility as an unbiased actor is uncertain. India’s prior friction with Malaysia—especially during the Mahathir Mohamad era—may limit the current leadership’s influence in New Delhi.STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS ADNonetheless, Malaysia’s support for an “international, transparent, and credible” investigation mirrors Pakistan’s own appeal for a third-party probe—an idea India has consistently rejected, citing its sovereignty over Kashmir.Turkey’s familiar rhetoricTurkey, under President
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has long championed Pakistan’s cause on Kashmir, often invoking Muslim solidarity. Ankara has now renewed its call for de-escalation between India and Pakistan, warning of potential instability that could affect not just South Asia but the wider international community.While Turkish officials dismissed reports of arms deliveries to Pakistan as unfounded, their active concern and repeated emphasis on Pakistan’s security interests make Turkey’s position clear. India, which has pushed back against Erdoğan’s past comments on Kashmir at the United Nations and other forums, remains wary of Turkish involvement.Ankara’s attempts to position itself as a global mediator are aligned with its broader aspirations in the Muslim world, but its credibility with New Delhi remains minimal. Turkish mediation, therefore, may be more symbolic than practical.India’s position: Sovereignty first, no outsidersIndia’s consistent position on the Kashmir dispute has been that it is a bilateral matter. From the Simla Agreement in 1972 to the Lahore Declaration in 1999, New Delhi has avoided third-party mediation viewing it as undermining national sovereignty and complicating resolution.External Affairs Minister Jaishankar’s recent statements reiterate this stance. He criticised foreign actors who engage in “preaching” without understanding ground realities advocating instead for engagement built on mutual respect and shared interests. His comments, though primarily aimed at Europe over Ukraine, carry resonance in the current South Asian context.STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS ADIndia’s call for “partners, not preachers” also reflects its growing global confidence and insistence on reciprocity in diplomacy. As a rising power in an increasingly multipolar world, India is signalling that it will not be lectured, especially by nations that do not apply their own principles consistently.Pakistan’s unfulfilled wishPakistan has welcomed international involvement, especially from countries like Malaysia and Iran, in what appears to be a diplomatic strategy to counter India’s post-attack narrative. By calling for a “neutral” probe and accusing India of aggression, Pakistan is seeking to shift the conversation from culpability to victimhood.Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar has spoken to a dozen international counterparts and raised allegations of an Indian Air Force attempt to breach Pakistani airspace—claims that have not been independently verified. Pakistan’s openness to mediation reflects both diplomatic desperation and tactical manoeuvering.By inviting third-party probes and expressing willingness for international oversight, Pakistan may be hoping to internationalise the Kashmir dispute once again—a strategy India has long resisted and consistently rebuffed.Mediation offers aboundAs the Pahalgam tragedy continues to cast a long shadow over South Asia, the global rush to mediate reveals as much about the ambitions of external actors as it does about the fragility of regional peace. From superpowers like US and Russia to middle powers like Iran, Malaysia and Turkey, the world appears eager to play peacemaker.However, India’s posture remains firm: external involvement, however well-meaning, must align with national interests and principles of sovereignty. Offers of mediation are unlikely to gain traction unless they are grounded in respect, realism and reciprocity.Whether these actors are genuine partners or opportunistic preachers will depend not just on their words, but on how they adapt to the reality of India-Pakistan relations. For now, Delhi seems to be listening—but not necessarily agreeing.STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS ADTagsDonald TrumpIndiaJD VanceMalaysiaPakistanRecep Tayyip ErdoganS JaishankarShehbaz SharifTurkeyUnited States of AmericaEnd of Article
View original post here:
Partners or preachers? The many mediation hopefuls as India-Pakistan tension rise over Pahalgam
