Following U.S. President Donald Trump’s remarks offering to mediate on the Kashmir issue, Indian opposition party leaders have pushed back strongly, rejecting any suggestion of international intervention. Congress MP Manish Tewari was direct in his response, emphasizing that the Kashmir dispute is not an ancient, biblical-era conflict, but a contemporary issue that dates back just 78 years.
“Someone in the US establishment needs to seriously educate their President that Kashmir is not a biblical 1000-year-old conflict,” Tewari wrote in a post on X (formerly Twitter). He traced the genesis of the issue to October 22, 1947, when Pakistan invaded the then-independent princely state of Jammu & Kashmir. Maharaja Hari Singh formally acceded to India on October 26, 1947, ceding the territory in full, including areas currently under Pakistani control. Tewari questioned why this “simple fact” was difficult to grasp.
Congress leader Jairam Ramesh also criticized the Trump administration’s comments, especially a reference made by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio regarding the possibility of using a “neutral forum” to mediate between India and Pakistan. Ramesh raised key questions in response: “Have we abandoned the Shimla Agreement? Have we opened the door for third-party mediation?”
In a press statement, Ramesh called on the Indian government to convene an all-party meeting chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to discuss a range of issues including “Operation Sindoor,” the Pahalgam terror attack, and the recently announced ceasefire between India and Pakistan. He also advocated for a special session of Parliament to allow a comprehensive discussion on these developments.
Meanwhile, U.S. President Donald Trump, in a social media post, lauded both India and Pakistan for agreeing to a ceasefire. “I am very proud of the strong and unwaveringly powerful leadership of India and Pakistan for having the strength, wisdom, and fortitude to fully know and understand that it was time to stop the current aggression,” he stated. Trump claimed millions of innocent people could have died had the hostilities continued. He added, “While not even discussed, I am going to increase trade, substantially, with both of these great Nations,” and expressed willingness to work with both sides on a long-term solution for Kashmir.
The U.S. President’s framing of the Kashmir issue as a “thousand-year” conflict, however, appeared to undermine his credibility in the eyes of Indian lawmakers, who view the statement as historically inaccurate and diplomatically inappropriate.
Security developments on the ground also played into the larger narrative. The Sri Guru Ram Das Jee International Airport in Amritsar was placed under heightened security on Sunday. Authorities restricted access to the gurdwara located within the airport premises, sparking concerns among devotees. However, Assistant Commissioner of Police (Airport), Yadwinder Singh, assured the public that there was no drone activity and urged against spreading unverified rumours. “The situation is peaceful… there is adequate security,” he said.
Despite the tensions, the situation in areas like Srinagar, Akhnoor, Rajouri, and Poonch remained calm. No reports of drones, shelling, or cross-border firing were received during the night of May 10-11. Nevertheless, Amritsar District authorities maintained a red alert, advising residents to stay indoors and avoid windows or balconies. The alert followed intense shelling from across the border a day earlier.
Political reactions in Jammu and Kashmir to the ceasefire were largely positive. Leaders across the spectrum, including Mehbooba Mufti of the People’s Democratic Party, National Conference president Farooq Abdullah, and Hurriyat chairman Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, welcomed the pause in hostilities. They called it a necessary step toward meaningful peace and political dialogue.
“Terrorism is unacceptable, but it should not dictate when India and Pakistan go to war,” said Mufti, adding that a political resolution is the only viable path forward. Mirwaiz remarked that “better sense has prevailed,” while Abdullah emphasized the toll the conflict has taken on border communities. “Our people have borne the brunt of this deteriorating situation. This pause will offer them some much-needed relief,” he said.
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), on the other hand, held a ‘Tiranga Yatra’ in Bengaluru to express support for the Indian armed forces following Operation Sindoor — a retaliatory strike on nine terrorist sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir in response to the April 22 Pahalgam attack. Union Minister Shobha Karandlaje led the rally, urging citizens to remain united in support of the military and government.
“India is fighting terrorism. Pakistan sent terrorists to Pahalgam. Innocent people were killed after being asked about their religion. Our jawans retaliated. We must stand united with the country,” she said. The BJP Minority Morcha also launched a nationwide campaign titled “Nagrik Tiranga Yatra for National Security” to bolster public support under the broader “Operation Sindoor” initiative.
As the military dimension grabbed attention, the Maharashtra government began focusing on its under-resourced civil defence force. Following nationwide mock drills, the state’s civil defence directorate announced new efforts to revamp the agency, including introducing a civil defence course in the University of Mumbai’s engineering curriculum from the upcoming academic year. “Students who wish to serve the nation while pursuing their education will get an opportunity through this course,” said Director Prabhat Kumar.
Meanwhile, divergent opinions about the ceasefire emerged on social media and among analysts. Foreign affairs expert Brahma Chellaney questioned whether Prime Minister Modi had decided against pursuing Operation Sindoor to its “logical conclusion” — ending Pakistan’s decades-long strategy of cross-border proxy warfare. Some critics argued that the ceasefire prematurely let Pakistan off the hook following the Pahalgam attack.
Congress leader Sachin Pilot, however, praised the Indian military for what he called a “precise and adequate” strike on terror camps. Speaking to The Times of India, Pilot emphasized that the response avoided civilian casualties and directly targeted terrorists. He also reminded that Pakistan has a history of harbouring terrorists, citing Osama bin Laden’s hiding in Abbottabad and the activities of Masood Azhar and Hafiz Saeed.
As tensions ease and the public digests a flurry of official statements, military operations, and international commentary, the road ahead remains uncertain. With diplomacy back on the table and domestic voices urging a mix of vigilance and political dialogue, India’s next moves — both at the border and on the global stage — will be closely watched.