Vance's comments on Indo-Pak conflict marks major shift of US foreign policy in the troubled region

While Vance’s comments were open to interpretation, it reaffirmed Donald Trump's global approach.

PUBLISHED MAY 10, 2025

Vance’s comments may remind some of Nixon-era attitudes, though the motivations today are different.

Shubham Ghosh, Foreign Affairs Correspondent

UPDATE: In a post on his Truth Social platform, US president Donald Trump has announced a “full and immediate” ceasefire between India and Pakistan. Pakistan’s foreign minister, Ishaq Dar says India and Pakistan have agreed to a ceasefire with immediate effect. India’s foreign secretary Vikram Misri also confirmed the ceasefire.

Washington D.C.: Vice President JD Vance on May 8, 2025, dismissed the idea of U.S. direct intervention in the ongoing military conflict between India and Pakistan, saying it was “none of America’s business.” He made the statement during an interview with Fox News, emphasizing that while Washington would support de-escalation through diplomacy, there was no question of any direct involvement.

“We’re not going to get involved in the middle of a war that’s fundamentally none of our business and has nothing to do with America’s ability to control it,” the Republican said, expressing hope that the conflict would not escalate into a major regional crisis or a nuclear confrontation.

While Vance’s comments were open to interpretation on both sides of the India-Pakistan border, his unequivocal statement reaffirmed the second Donald Trump administration’s stance on world affairs: the U.S. no longer sees itself as the world’s policeman and is not eager to intervene where there is little or no potential American benefit — monetary or otherwise — in Kashmir.

Although President Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Vance have expressed hope that the escalation following the April 22 massacre of Hindu tourists in Jammu and Kashmir does not spiral out of control, the U.S. has made no significant efforts to defuse the tension beyond a few diplomatic phone calls.

This marks a departure even from the first Trump administration, when the president offered to mediate over Kashmir in 2019, months after a deadly terror attack on an Indian security convoy and India’s retaliatory cross-border airstrike. India, however, rejected the offer, maintaining that the matter is strictly bilateral.

U.S. Has Historically Helped Defuse India-Pakistan Tensions

Historically, America has played a prominent role in defusing tensions between India and Pakistan. For example, the Bill Clinton administration worked to de-escalate the 1999 Kargil conflict and the 2001–02 standoff after the Indian Parliament attack. Even during Trump’s first term, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo intervened after the 2019 Pulwama attack.

President Nixon Opposed India During 1971 Conflict

However, not all U.S. administrations sided with India. During the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War, President Richard Nixon and his top aide Henry Kissinger supported Pakistani President Yahya Khan, ignoring Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s calls for international attention. Nixon’s motivation was to strengthen ties with China, then a close Pakistani ally, to counter the Soviet Union. Despite U.S. disapproval, India, backed by the Soviets, defeated Pakistan and helped establish Bangladesh.

Vance’s comments — notably made while he was visiting India when the Kashmir terror attacks occurred — may remind some of Nixon-era attitudes, though the motivations today are different. The current administration approaches foreign policy from a transactional, not moral, standpoint. Strategic goals, such as ambitions over Greenland, Panama, or Canada, are seen as more lucrative than distant conflicts.

Even in the Ukraine and Gaza conflicts, it is the opportunity for financial and strategic gains that keeps the Trump White House engaged.

Moreover, the U.S. no longer holds the same leverage over Pakistan, particularly after the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. Pakistan has deepened ties with both Beijing and Moscow. While Washington has grown closer to India in recent years, its focus remains on positioning India as a counterweight to China in the Asia-Pacific. As for India’s conflicts with Pakistan, the U.S. is unlikely to get involved — unless the crisis escalates dramatically.