spat

Islamabad, Pakistan – Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned the top United States diplomat in Islamabad on Wednesday, hours after US Ambassador to India Sergio Gor described Indian-administered Kashmir as “an important part of India” during his first visit to the territory.

Islamabad rejected the remark and reasserted Kashmir’s status as disputed territory.

The visit by Gor, who also serves as President Donald Trump’s special envoy for South and Central Asia, was the first standalone trip by a serving US ambassador to Indian-administered Kashmir since 2019, and the first since India stripped the territory of its autonomy that year.

His remarks were made publicly, alongside Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, adding to Islamabad’s irritation.

The episode also comes at a delicate moment for Washington’s ties with both South Asian rivals, as Pakistan courts Trump’s administration more closely than it has in years, and as the US tries to balance that relationship against its strategic partnership with India.

So, what exactly did the US ambassador say, why has it caused such offence, and does it change anything? Al Jazeera explains.

What did the US ambassador say?

Sergio Gor, a 38-year-old former Trump aide who was confirmed as US ambassador to India in January, spent two days in Srinagar and Ladakh this week.

After meeting Abdullah in Srinagar, he told reporters he was thrilled to be visiting “an important part of India” for the first time.

He also said Washington was reconsidering its “do not travel” advisory, citing improved security under Abdullah’s administration.

The advisory at the moment places Jammu and Kashmir at a “Do Not Travel” level, citing terrorism and civil unrest, though it exempts the eastern territories of Ladakh and Leh.

Islamabad’s response came the same Wednesday evening. The Foreign Ministry summoned Charge d’Affaires Natalie Baker, who currently heads the US mission in the country.

The ministry lodged what it called a “strong demarche”, rejecting the “characterisation of Indian-administered Kashmir as a ‘part of India’” and reasserting it as an internationally recognised disputed territory awaiting final disposition under United Nations Security Council resolutions.

The statement called Gor’s remarks factually incorrect and said they negated Washington’s longstanding position on the dispute.

It also thanked Trump for his offer – made after India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire ending their four-day war last year – to help resolve the Kashmir question, urging Washington to keep its public language consistent with that position.

Why does Kashmir trigger such a reaction?

Kashmir is a Himalayan region claimed by both India and Pakistan since British colonial rule ended in August 1947.

India and Pakistan each administer part of the territory but claim it in full and have fought several wars over it.

A UN Security Council resolution passed in 1949 called for the territory’s final status to be decided by a plebiscite, which has never been held.

In June, European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas signed a joint statement with Pakistan’s foreign minister in Islamabad that bracketed Kashmir alongside the war in Ukraine and called for its resolution “through dialogue and diplomacy”.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs rejected the reference, saying those with no standing in the matter should refrain from commenting on it.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has drawn similar protests from Delhi at least twice after voicing support for Pakistan’s position on Kashmir.

Trump himself triggered a dispute in 2019 when, during a meeting with then-Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan, he claimed Prime Minister Narendra Modi had personally asked him to mediate on Kashmir. Modi’s government swiftly denied the account in parliament.

For Pakistan, US language on Kashmir’s disputed status is an important external validation of its effort to internationalise the issue.

For India, meanwhile, any suggestion that Kashmir remains open to outside mediation cuts against the foundation of its position.

What has the US position been, historically?

The US has officially maintained that Kashmir is disputed and its status should be settled between India and Pakistan, taking into consideration the wishes of the Kashmiri people.

American officials have repeated some version of “our policy has not changed” across successive administrations, including in 2019, when a senior US diplomat told Congress that India’s move had not altered Washington’s view of the Line of Control as a “de facto” boundary.

Formally, Washington has avoided recognising sovereignty over the territory for either country.

A major turning point came in 1999, when President Bill Clinton told Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif that Pakistani forces would have to withdraw from Kargil in Indian-administered Kashmir, following the fighting there between the two countries in the region.

Analysts widely saw the episode as the beginning of Washington’s tilt towards Delhi.

But after the two countries’ most intense clash in decades last year, Trump claimed credit for the ceasefire and offered to “work with you both” on a Kashmir “solution”.

Pakistan welcomed the offer and nominated Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize. India rejected suggestions of US mediation, saying the ceasefire had been reached through direct military talks.

Jauhar Saleem, Pakistan’s former foreign secretary and president of the Islamabad-based Institute of Regional Studies, told Al Jazeera that Gor’s remark should not be mistaken for a change in US policy.

“US policy on a question as consequential as Jammu and Kashmir cannot be read from an off-the-cuff formulation during a visit by a US ambassador posted in India,” Saleem said. “Any change in policy would be reflected in Washington’s formal statements, State Department language and, in fact, should be at the level of the White House.”

He said such lapses were not new.

“Sometimes ambassadors fall prey to what we call ‘localitis’, and in an attempt to please their hosts can make comments entirely out of line with their country’s stated policy, creating unpleasant situations,” he said. “This is a classic example and has therefore evoked an expected strong demarche from Pakistan’s Foreign Office.”

Saleem said Trump’s repeated offers to mediate between Pakistan and India, “which was not appreciated in New Delhi”, showed that Washington’s position remained unsettled at the top rather than shifting towards India. “I would actually expect a clarification from Washington soon,” he added.

Will it affect Pakistan-US ties?

Saleem, who summoned a US ambassador in Islamabad during his tenure as foreign secretary in late 2022 over what he called “a very objectionable remark” by then-President Joe Biden, said a demarche was not primarily a tool to punish Washington. Biden had described Pakistan as “one of the most dangerous nations in the world”.

“A demarche is not just made to increase the cost of a policy; rather it is made to press a point and ask for an explanation,” the former ambassador told Al Jazeera. “The US response was constructive [then], and will be in this case as well, I believe.”

He said the Pakistan-US relationship was too broad-based for one ambassador’s remark to unsettle it, pointing to Pakistan’s role as a peacemaker between the US and Iran, economic cooperation, counterterrorism, regional security, Afghanistan, defence cooperation, “and of course Pakistan’s relationship with the Trump administration itself”.

Tariq Rashid Khan, a Pakistani former military general and diplomat, described the episode as “issue-specific boundary-setting”.

Islamabad’s protest, he told Al Jazeera, signals that a close strategic partnership with Washington “does not mean acceptance of any position on Kashmir contrary to Pakistan’s stated position”.

“Kashmir remains an unfinished agenda of the 1947 partition, which is why even one sentence can become strategically significant,” he said.

For Saleem, the significance lies less in Gor’s specific words than in what any drift in language could set in motion.

“Jammu and Kashmir is not just a territorial dispute; it is an issue of national identity, legitimacy and security for Pakistan,” he told Al Jazeera. “Neither Pakistan nor India can afford to let the international community’s vocabulary on Kashmir drift even slightly, because both sides believe that language today can become precedent tomorrow.”

Aizaz Chaudhry, a former Pakistani ambassador to the US, told Al Jazeera he believed Gor’s remarks “might be his personal comments”, adding that the US position on the disputed territory is well known.

“Our demarche is only a reminder that the US envoy in Delhi must comply with the US position on the subject. The Kashmir dispute is a longstanding issue that must be resolved for the larger peace and stability of South Asia,” Chaudhry said.

The administration of President Donald Trump has cancelled the visa for Brazil’s ambassador in the United States, the latest sign of a deepening diplomatic rift between the two countries.

An anonymous US State Department official briefed reporters on Tuesday that Ambassador Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti’s visa had been temporarily revoked.

But Ribeiro Viotti was not being expelled from the country, the official added.

“The action was that the visa of a senior diplomat here was revoked or cancelled. That is not the same thing as kicking the person out of the country,” the official said.

The decision to revoke the visa was framed as backlash to Brazil’s decision to withhold approval for Trump’s ambassador to the South American country.

Should that approval be granted, the US official explained, Ribeiro Viotti’s visa would be returned. Until then, the official suggested she could remain in the US.

“It means that they are here but without a visa, and would have their visa restored if the balance is restored by giving agreement to our chosen ambassadorial nominee,” the official said.

The move comes after Washington expressed anger over Brazil’s failure to approve Trump’s choice for ambassador to Brazil, Danny Perez.

Perez is a Florida state representative and a Republican ally of Trump’s hawkish Secretary of State, Marco Rubio. He was nominated to the ambassadorship in June, but has yet to be confirmed by the full US Senate.

Media reports indicate that Trump publicly nominated Perez before reaching out to Brazil.

Sources inside the Brazilian government said this was considered a breach of protocol, and they intend to probe Perez’s nomination before issuing formal approval.

Without such approval, though, Perez will be unable to take up his post in the capital, Brasilia.

The tit-for-tat over the ambassadors is likely to ratchet up long-simmering tensions between Washington and Brazil, the US’s largest South American trading partner.

Last month, Brazil denied visas to officials from the US State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, after voicing concerns that the delegation intended to undermine the country’s election system. Brazil is set to elect its president in October.

Trump is considered a close ally of the Bolsonaro family, a powerful political dynasty on Brazil’s far right.

The US president’s first term overlapped with the presidency of Jair Bolsonaro, who was nicknamed the “Trump of the Tropics”.

His son, Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, is on the ballot this election season.

Both Trump and the elder Bolsonaro have used false claims of election fraud to dispute unfavourable election results.

Trump has also sought to boost the prospects of right-wing candidates across Latin America since the start of his second term, even threatening to withhold US funds depending on election outcomes.

With Latin America experiencing a shift rightwards, Brazil remains the largest country to be governed by a left-wing leader: President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. He has emerged as a vocal critic of Trump’s attempts to increase US influence in Latin America.

Lula defeated the elder Bolsonaro in the 2022 presidential elections, and he is seeking a fourth, non-consecutive term this October. Flavio Bolsonaro is his top rival.

Since being voted out of office, Jair Bolsonaro was sentenced to 27 years in prison for his role in an alleged plot to overthrow the 2022 election results.

Trump vocally rejected Jair Bolsonaro’s prosecution, which was recommended by Brazil’s Federal Police. Last year, the US president placed steep tariffs on Brazil, demanding that prosecutors end their case.

Though the tariffs were lifted, the US announced in July that it would impose 25 percent tariffs, this time accusing Brazil of unfair trade practices.

Brazilian authorities remain wary that the US might seek to influence the outcome of October’s presidential election in favour of Flavio Bolsonaro.

Lula formally launched his campaign bid on Sunday, framing the race as a question of national sovereignty – and the “future of Latin America”.

June 20 (UPI) — After a day of jabs on social media, President Donald Trump and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni are continuing to duke it out online.

On Friday, Italy’s foreign minister canceled a trip to the United States after Trump said that Meloni had “begged” for a photo with him at the G7 Summit in France last week. Meloni shot back with, “Neither I nor Italy ever beg.”

On Saturday morning, Trump posted on Truth Social: Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni asked, over and over, for a picture with me during the G-7 meeting in France. She is doing poorly in Italy with her level of popularity, possibly because she turned down the United States of America, a Country that truly loves and protects Italy, when it came to denying Iran from obtaining or developing a Nuclear Weapon (But so did NATO, for that matter!). She wouldn’t even let us use Italy’s landing strips or runways, a great logistical inconvenience, and this despite the fact the U.S. contributes hundreds of Billions of Dollars a year to protect Italy, and other “so-called” NATO Allies. Now, after the United States defeated Iran militarily, she wants to be friends again in order to get her ‘numbers up.’ No thanks!!!”

Meloni responded on Instagram in English.

“President Trump, these constant, unprovoked attacks are senseless. As for my popularity, being your friend certainly has not helped it, nor does it depend on my relationship with you. My popularity depends on my ability to defend Italy’s national interest, and that is exactly what I have always done,” the prime minister wrote.

“That is also what I did regarding the American military bases in Italy. Their use is governed by agreements that we have always respected, and that cannot be violated as long as I’m prime minister. Italy remains a sovereign nation.

“In any case, my popularity is none of your concern. I suggest you focus on yours,” Meloni said.

Under the post, she wrote in Italian, “My response to Donald Trump’s latest post concerning me. But I will not revisit the subject, because I still believe in Western unity and do not believe this is a spectacle worthy of our task.”

Meloni, a conservative politician, has befriended Trump since he took office for his second term. She was the only European leader to attend Trump’s inauguration last year.