India and Pakistan agreed with an immediate ceasefire on Saturday (10), interrupting the worst fighting in decades between the neighbors who have nuclear arsenal as the attacks seemed to be leaving control.
Although US President Donald Trump and claimed the authorship, India and Pakistan presented contradictory reports on the extent of US involvement in the agreement.
A few hours after the announcement, raising questions about its duration.
How did the truce come about?
Just before 9am (Brasília time), 17h in India and Pakistan, Trump announced the ceasefire in a publication on the social network Truth Social.
“After a long night of US-mediated negotiations, I am pleased to announce that India and Pakistan have agreed with a total and immediate ceasefire,” Trump said, congratulating leaders from both countries for “using common sense and great intelligence.”
Soon after, the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, said that India and Pakistan not only agreed with a ceasefire, but also “started negotiations on a large set of issues in a neutral location.”
Rubio said the ceasefire occurred after he and vice president JD Vance spent the last two days talking to high employees from both countries.
A minute later, Pakistan confirmed that the ceasefire came into force immediately. Indian confirmation came soon after.
The Ministry of Information in India stated that the agreement was prepared “directly between the two countries”, minimizing US involvement and contradicting Trump’s statement. The ministry also stated that “there was no decision” to maintain new negotiations.
Pakistani authorities praised Washington.
“We thank President Trump for his leadership and proactive role for peace in the region,” said Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.
A Pakistani source familiar with the negotiations told the CNN that the US – and Rubio, in particular – were fundamental for the realization of the agreement, drawing a panorama of negotiations that were in doubt until the confirmation of the truce.
Divergent reports
It should not be surprised that these rivals have presented contradictory reports on how ceasefire was achieved.
According to analysts, India, which is considered a superpower on the rise, has long resisted international mediation, while Pakistan, strongly dependent on external aid, tends to welcome it.
“India has never accepted mediation in any dispute, either India-Pakistan or India-China, or any other,” said Dr. Aparna Pande, a researcher for India and southern Asia at the Hudson Institute.
“Pakistan, on the other hand, has always sought international mediation, so they will praise it,” he added, saying that it is “the only way to press India to discuss and resolve the dispute in Caxemira.”
The fighting before Saturday ceasefire were marked by allegations, counterattacks and misinformation on both sides. Now that the conflict has been interrupted, both sides are intensifying their efforts to shape perceptions about what the fight has achieved and how it ended.
