POLITICS

Trump Claims Tariffs Ended India-Pakistan Conflict, International Reports

PUBLISHED Feb 19, 2026, 12:18 PM ET

Read, Watch or Listen

Media Bias Meter

Sources: 8

Center 87%

Right 13%

Sources: 8

Washington — President Donald Trump said Thursday that he threatened 200 percent tariffs to halt last summer's fighting between India and Pakistan and credited his warnings with ending that conflict. India has denied third‑party intervention. Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif attended the Board of Peace and praised Trump's mediation. Secretary of State Marco Rubio met Shehbaz to reaffirm cooperation. On Friday the US Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that the IEEPA does not authorize such tariff duties, limiting legal basis for similar presidential actions. Based on 7 articles reviewed and supporting research.

By Najma A. | JQJO News

Timeline of Events

Last summer: Reports referenced significant India‑Pakistan clashes during the previous summer.
May (as described by Trump): He said he warned leaders he would impose tariffs if fighting continued.
19th February 2025: Trump repeated the tariff claim at the inaugural Board of Peace in Washington.
19th–20th February 2025: Pakistan PM Shehbaz Sharif attended and praised Trump's role; Rubio met Shehbaz.
20th February 2025: US Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that IEEPA does not authorize presidential tariff duties.

News Intelligence

Tariffs can impact your wallet. If Trump had imposed 200% tariffs, goods from India and Pakistan could have cost more. The Supreme Court ruling limits such presidential actions, potentially protecting your pocketbook. Keep an eye on tariff news.

Media Bias

Articles Published:: 8
Right Leaning:: 1
Left Leaning:: 0
Neutral:: 7
Distribution:: Left 0%, Center 88%, Right 13%

Who Benefited

The Trump administration and the Board of Peace gained international attention as leaders, including Pakistan's prime minister, attended and publicly engaged with the initiative.

Who Impacted

India's government faced public contradiction when President Trump claimed third‑party intervention, and New Delhi publicly denied any external mediation.