The violent crisis between India and Pakistan It is precisely the kind of international emergency that would once cause a complete diplomatic effort of the US to calm the spirits and prevent a wider war.

But this last conflict for the Cashmere And beyond that, the controversial area with a Muslim majority can be a test for the Trump government, according to CNN.

The US president Donald Trump held on Tuesday a passive initial attitude for conflicts caused by a terrorist attack against Indian tourists, for which New Delhi accuses Pakistani -backed fighters. “It’s a shame,” Trump said. “I just hope it ends quickly.” On Wednesday, he went a little further, offering his good services without showing much excitement to get involved. “I’m doing well with both, I know both very well and I want to see them find them,” Trump said. “I hope they can stop now. … If I can do something to help, I’ll be there. “

Foreign Minister Marco Rubio has come into contact with top officials India and his Pakistan In recent weeks – and after India’s bumps deep in Pakistani on Tuesday, according to the State Department. But there is so far no indication of an expanded US attempt to coordinate international mediation or crisis management.

This may be partly due to the fact that the time for diplomacy is not yet awaited, as everyone expects a escalation on both sides. While Pakistan’s claim that he has shot down five Indian aircraft may indicate that he has made his answer, the country’s leaders have pledged to counteract the Indian military installations.

The US reaction will be closely monitored in the coming days because the second Trump government has thrown the US foreign policy manual in the trash, leaving a gap where the US leadership once operated.

Trump has little interest in creating international alliances and activating the US alliances to pursue common goals. He is more willing to demonstrate US economic and military power to manipulate smaller nations for the benefit of America and does not see much difference between allies and opponents in his close worldview.

While Trump has released peace into a cornerstone of his new term, his efforts to deprive global hot points, as wars in Ukraine and Gaza are raging, have made little progress. Meanwhile, his claim that Houthi rebels in Yemen have pledged to stop attacks on international shipping after US air raids has not yet been verified.

Trump’s diplomatic pressures on Ukraine and Israel’s war in Gaza, led by the infinite diplomatic envoy Steve Whitkov, also contained trading efforts to get financial or other advantages for the US. He pushed the Kiev government to sign an agreement on the exploitation of rare land. At the same time, Trump envisioned the removal of the Palestinians from Gaza – in an act that would be equivalent to a neo -colonial act of ethnic cleansing – so that the United States could build “the Riviera of the Middle East”. There are no obvious monetary or other advantages for the US in Kashmir that could get Trump’s attention.

Successful worldwide US peacekeeping efforts in the past – including President Jimmy Carter’s effort to achieve peace agreements between Israel and Egypt and the end of the war in the former Yugoslavia by President Bill Clinton – In the last three months there has been no indication that Trump has been motivated to organize a similar strategy over time in any existing conflict, let alone in South Asia.

The Royal United Services Institute of London’s Royal United Services Institute told CNN that the US had played a leading role in the freezing of Cashmir crisis, including in 2000, 2008 and 2019, but may not be so eager. “We now have a White House president who says he doesn’t want to be the police officer of the world,” said Willsey-Wilsey, a former British diplomat. “And it is also probably more sympathetic to the (Indian) Prime Minister (Narendra) than the Pakistanis.”

Why Washington always tried to end violence in Kashmir

Kashmir is an area in the northwest of Indian subcontinent and borders with Afghanistan, China, India and Pakistan. Both India and Pakistan claim all of them and each controls a sector separated by a tense border, known as a control line. China controls a third piece of Kashmir.

The wick for decades of conflict was put on Britain’s colonial power in the late 1940s, which divided India into two separate nations: modern India, which is mainly Hinduist, and Pakistan with a Muslim majority. Since then, opponents have fought three wars for Kashmir. During the last quarter of the century, there were also many smaller skirmishes and rejuvenations for the area.

In the most worrying case, Clinton intervened in Kargil’s clash in 1999 amid concerns to the US intelligence community that the war could expand and become a devastating nuclear conflict between two forces that had recently tried both. In recent years, Pakistan and India have mitigated nuclear rhetoric even in times of tension for Kashmir. And as they become more mature nuclear forces, fears of a devastating war with weapons of mass destruction have been reinforced.

However, Washington had the thought that preventing the deterioration of the Kashmir conflict deserves the attention of the US. This happened to the first Trump government, when then Foreign Minister Mike Pompeo intervened to relieve the confrontation between opponents over Kashmir six years ago. “I don’t think people know how close how close the India-Pakistan rivalry has come to develop into a nuclear conflict in February 2019,” Pompeo wrote in his memoirs, entitled “Never Give an Inch”.

People are now holding their breath for the next possible escalation for cashmere. India justified its rocket attacks on Pakistan Cashmir -controlled and Pakistan itself, claiming that it was hitting terrorist camps after attacking mainly Hindu tourists who died at least six people in the controlled man.

https://www.skai.gr/news/greece/pyrayliki-epithesi-apo-tin-india-stous-31-oi -Nekroi-tou-pakistan. Pakistani Prime Minister Sechbaz Sarif warned in a national profession that “maybe they thought we would retreat, but they forgot that … this is a brave nation.”

The possibility of further escalation from India will increase if it believes it must respond to Pakistan’s new attacks. Political motives for this are reinforced because the terrorist attack and the loss of Indian aircraft are a personal defeat for Monty. CNN confirmed the downing of an Indian French -made aircraft.

A new crisis in a world that is changing

In addition to the reservation of the Trump government to play a traditional global US leading role, there are other reasons why the diplomatic strategies of the past can be less effective in a more fragmented and unstable world order.

One of the impact of Kargil’s 1999 crisis was to bring the United States closer to India, an increasingly powerful, contemplative and rich nation. Every government has since followed Clinton’s example. And Trump is personal and politically close to Monty.

The shocking nature of the attacks on unarmed tourists on Kashmir has also caused a sympathy for India – not only in Washington – and the feeling that it has the right to defend itself, even if there are hesitation in much of the world about the suppression of Modi against Muslims. Pakistan has denied hosting terrorist camps from which the attacks were designed.

In the meantime, the US’s ability to put pressure on Pakistan has declined after the end of the difficult alliance of countries in the war against terrorism and with the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. Pakistan has now fully returned to its long -standing policy with China, which means that each of the southern Asian opponents has a superpower as an ally.

“There is no doubt that there has been a change in US attitude in recent years,” Milan Vaishnav, director of the South Asia program at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told CNN. “India is one of the most important strategic partners for the US, and the importance of Pakistan … has really diminished. I think the US expectation is that Pakistan will retaliate. And then they hope that at that point both sides will be able to save the pretexts and find an exit. “

In the absence of Washington, mediation could begin in the Middle East. Qatar, for example, has played a key role in the efforts to mediate and release hostages between Israel and Hamas. But the Qatar government – like Pakistan, a state with a Sunni Muslim majority – expressed its condolences and condemned the attack on the Indian cashmere. The Press of India, who can play an incendiary role at such times, said a phone call by Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim al -Thani to Monty, which was considered a calculated contempt for the government in Islamabad.

Meanwhile, Qatar Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulraman bin Jasim al -Thani had separate telephone conversations with India Foreign Minister and Prime Minister Pakistan Sarif. The Qatar Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement that the country has “full support” in all regional and international efforts to resolve issues between India and Pakistan.

Wilsey-Wilsey argued that Pakistan’s financial supporters, including the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, were able to impose self-restraint on Islamabad as Pakistan is in the midst of a deep economic crisis.

But if the situation does not deteriorate much, international efforts to end the crisis are unlikely to be under the leadership of the US.