US President Donald Trump (L) met privately with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine at St. Peter’s Basilica on the sidelines of Pope Francis’ funeral, Vatican, April 26, 2025
The US President Donald Trump is a lone ranger in international arena and a self-confessed practitioner of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s absolute maxim that ours is not an era of wars no matter the ‘casus belli’. He sets a high benchmark for himself and makes himself open to attack by hawkish opinion makers at home, although a staunch nationalist who puts American interests first regardless of their legitimacy.
Trump’s cabinet ministers do not necessarily subscribe to his bottom line, as the vitriolic, intrusive remark by the US’ Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, regarding the cascading tensions in India-Pakistan relations would suggest.
The stunning thing about Trump’s mindset is that he is also a man of convictions. Not many would know or choose to recall that this extraordinary person, decades before he actually waded into American politics and threw his hat on the presidential ring as an outlier, paid to New York Times a princely sum of $98,000 out of his (businessman’s) pocket to feature a one-page supplement at the dawn of the Ronald Reagan presidency espousing the hidden charms of a détente with the Soviet Union and offered his services as special envoy dedicated to that task.
The run-of-the-mill politicians may pontificate noble thoughts but do not practice them when the crunch time comes. On the contrary, strong convictions have a multiplier effect on Trump’s actions, which is what distinguishes his diplomacy so far. The image of his one-on-one with Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky at the Vatican on Saturday will remain etched in memory for a very long time to come.
In the chaotic international situation today as the world order is transitioning from one epochal era — nearly five centuries of western dominance — to another that is inchoate still, the temptation is always there for the US, as by far the single biggest military power on the planet, to leverage its prowess and coercive means to have its way. In fact, globalism and the neocon ideology of interventionism are still very much the principal current in the stream of consciousness of American elites, civilian and military, and is a bipartisan consensus too.
Tulsi Gabbard is not an exception; today’s papers have reported that another well-known neocon US think tanker on South Asia and a long-time security specialist on the South Asian region, Christine Fair, has echoed the very same “free hand to India” chorus. Unlike Gabbard who carries a Hindu name, Fair has actually done extensive work on the region and is credited with insights into Pakistan’s use of terrorists as state policy. “That’s the right message to send even if by accident. Why should the US bail out Pakistan by trying to restrain India? Pakistan has to be taught a lesson… by India,” Fair posted on X.
Suffice to say, on all three major vectors of the present international situation, Trump is reining in the US’ natural instincts for use of force — the Ukraine crisis, the situation around Iran and the Indo-Pacific devolving upon US-China relations. And that is already having a calming effect on international security.
Credit goes entirely to Trump for the backtracking by Russian President Vladimir Putin from the high horse he mounted on June 14 last year in his landmark speech at the foreign ministry in Moscow where he set forth certain impossible conditions for commencing dialogue with Ukraine, which included, amazingly enough, a summary withdrawal by Ukrainian forces from the territories they still held in Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts in the southeastern regions of their country!
Of course, Putin is a pragmatist but if he felt emboldened to make concessions it is at the astonishing sight of the smart power that Trump deployed to whittle down Zelensky’s obdurate stance by holding in front of the latter a chalice of poison accepting that Crimea is an integral part of Russia!
On the other hand, Trump has scattered the hare-brained scheme of the UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron for the creation of a ‘coalition of the willing’ for deployment in Ukraine as a bulwark against Russia. In political terms, Trump crushed at one stroke the resistance from Europe to his peace plans for Ukraine and asserted the US’ leadership.
Most important, Trump forced Zelensky (and his European backers) to see the writing on the wall that the choice is between travelling on the pathway that he is opening through peace talks or inviting his country’s annexation by Russia. And in this entire enterprise, not a volley of shots was fired by the Pentagon.
When it comes to the Iran nuclear issue and China, Trump is quintessentially adopting the same approach. Although in the case of Iran, high-pitched rhetorical flourishes continue — which Iran habitually ignores as bluster — all reports suggest that the negotiations have gained traction.
This is reflected in the remark by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi after the third round of negotiations with the US special envoy Steve Witkoff in Muscat on Saturday. Araqchi said, “I am satisfied with the progress of the negotiations and their pace. They are proceeding well and remain satisfactory.” Importantly, he weighed in that “It was quite evident that both sides were serious and entered the talks with determination. This creates an atmosphere that gives us hope for progress in the negotiations.”
Nuclear experts from two sides and the IAEA are likely attending the next round of talks. Araqchi acknowledged that some “very serious” differences and some other not-so-serious differences still exist but, the point is, “The past experiences help us to make our progress easier and faster, but I believe that so far, our progress has been good.”
Equally, the US and China are tiptoeing toward the negotiating table. The paradox is, the dramatic standoff on tariffs helped the two sides to peer into the abyss and realise that they don’t like what they are seeing. Trump has conceded that high tariff is not to the advantage of either side and has exuded confidence that a balanced deal is within the realms of possibility going forward. Meanwhile, notably, there has been no belligerent display of assertion of ‘freedom of navigation’ in the waters around Taiwan by the US Navy since Trump returned to the Oval Office.
In all three cases — Ukraine, Iran and China — Trump is also looking for generating business opportunities for the US economy. In fact, Russia and Iran have already voiced at the highest level of leadership their interest and openness to developing mutually beneficial economic partnerships with the US if only their relations are normalised. Indeed, China can’t be far behind, either, once the dust settles down.
The most profound outcome of Trump’s diplomatic odyssey could be its impact on the global situation. While it is too early to speak of a ‘butterfly effect’, eventually, such a phenomenon is to be expected. Arguably, Trump’s intervention must be a welcome thing. There should be no false pride over third party mediation when protagonists are patently unable to settle their longstanding differences and resultant tensions threaten international security.
If Putin can see the reasonableness of Trump’s mediation, can Modi be far behind? In the 21st century, it is unrealistic to try to impose solutions unilaterally. Conversely, if the ‘lone superpower’ and an ancient ‘civilisation power’ can show the humility to take the mediation of a small country like Oman, it only underscores their self-confidence and order of priorities.
The negotiations over Ukraine and Iran nuclear issue testify to the correctness of Modi’s prophecy that ours is not an era of wars. Equally, its natural corollary is that solutions cannot be unilaterally imposed by nation states in the emerging world order in the 21st century.