Why a Trump envoy’s Kashmir visit has led to US-Pakistan 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.

Key points

• Kashmir is a Himalayan region asserted by both India and Pakistan since British colonial rule concluded in August 1947.
• 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.
• His remarks were created publicly, alongside Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, adding to Islamabad's irritation.
• Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has drawn similar protests from Delhi at least twice after voicing backing for Pakistan's position on Kashmir.
• A UN Security Council resolution passed in 1949 pressed the territory's final status to be decided by a plebiscite.

Meanwhile, the visit by Gor, who additionally 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.

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, the episode additionally comes at a delicate moment for Washington's ties with both South Asian rivals.

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?

After session Abdullah in Srinagar, he stated to journalists he was thrilled to be visiting "an important part of India" for the first time.

He additionally stated Washington was reconsidering its "do not travel" advisory, citing improved security under Abdullah's administration.

Though it exempts the eastern territories of Ladakh and Leh, the advisory right now places Jammu and Kashmir at a "Do Not Travel" level, citing terrorism and civil unrest.

Islamabad's response came the same Wednesday evening. The Foreign Ministry summoned Charge d'Affaires Natalie Baker. This person at present heads the US mission in the country.

For context, 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.

Meanwhile, the statement called Gor's remarks factually incorrect and remarked they negated Washington's longstanding position on the dispute.

It additionally thanked Trump for his offer – produced after India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire ending their four-day war last year – to support resolve the Kashmir question, urging Washington to keep its public language consistent with that position. Why does Kashmir trigger such a reaction?

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

Meanwhile, a UN Security Council resolution passed in 1949 pressed the territory's final status to be decided by a plebiscite. It 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 pressed 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.

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

For Pakistan, US language on Kashmir's disputed status is an significant external validation of its effort to internationalise the problem.

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?

Notably, 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 individuals.

When a senior US diplomat informed Congress that India's move had not altered Washington's view of the Line of Control as a "de facto" boundary, american authorities have repeated some version of "our policy has not changed" throughout successive administrations, including in 2019.

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

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

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 asserted 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 discussions.

Jauhar Saleem, Pakistan's former foreign secretary and president of the Islamabad-based Institute of Regional Studies, informed 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 remarked. "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 remarked 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 remarked. "This is a classic example and has therefore evoked an expected strong demarche from Pakistan's Foreign Office."

Saleem remarked Trump's repeated offers to mediate between Pakistan and India, "which was not appreciated in New Delhi", demonstrated that Washington's position remained unsettled at the top rather than shifting towards India. "I would actually expect a clarification from Washington soon, " he continued.

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, remarked 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 informed Al Jazeera. "The US response was constructive, and will be in this case as well, I believe."

He remarked 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 informed 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 remarked.

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

In short, why a Trump envoy's Kashmir visit has led to US is the central thread here, and readers can expect follow-up reporting as the picture becomes clearer.