{"id":4012,"date":"2026-03-08T19:16:22","date_gmt":"2026-03-08T19:16:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/iranians.global\/news\/?p=4012"},"modified":"2026-03-08T19:44:16","modified_gmt":"2026-03-08T19:44:16","slug":"did-trump-really-resolve-six-conflicts-in-a-matter-of-months-we-spoke-to-the-experts-to-find-out","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/iranians.global\/news\/did-trump-really-resolve-six-conflicts-in-a-matter-of-months-we-spoke-to-the-experts-to-find-out\/","title":{"rendered":"Did Trump really resolve six conflicts in a matter of months? We spoke to the experts to find out"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Rachael Jolley, International Affairs Editor, The Conversation<\/strong><\/a> <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

The US president, Donald Trump, claims to have \u201csolved six wars in six months\u201d<\/a>. To work out if there was any substance to his claims, The Conversation international affairs editors Sam Phelps and Rachael Jolley interviewed six academic experts on those regions to find out what Trump actually did, and whether it made a difference.<\/em><\/p>\n

India-Pakistan armed conflict in May 2025<\/h2>\n

Natasha Lindstaedt, a professor in government at the University of Essex, said that Trump<\/a> and his secretary of state, Marco Rubio<\/a>, have both claimed that they were able to broker some kind of peace deal between India<\/a> and Pakistan, and that the US got directly involved in delivering peace.<\/p>\n

\u201cBut this has been denied by India and Pakistan. They\u2019ve rejected it, and they claim that it was resolved between themselves. We don\u2019t have any way of really verifying it.\u201d<\/p>\n

India and Pakistan don\u2019t tend to agree on a lot, but they tend to agree on the idea that Trump was not the reason for some kind of end of hostilities on May 10, and that it was reached bilaterally with no third party intervention, she said.<\/p>\n

They were very clear that they reached an agreement on May 7 with no third party intervention, she said.<\/p>\n

She added: \u201cTrump sees himself as a peacemaker, a deal maker. This is part of his identity, and he\u2019s leaning into this, hoping that people are going to believe it.\u201d<\/p>\n

Verdict: Trump\u2019s claim doesn\u2019t stand up<\/strong><\/p>\n

Thailand-Cambodia border dispute in July 2025<\/h2>\n

Petra Alderman, manager of the London School of Economics and Political Science\u2019s Saw Swee Hock Southeast Asia Centre, said Trump\u2019s intervention in the Thailand-Cambodia conflict<\/a> helped push the two countries towards a ceasefire. But, in her view, long-term prospects for peace are by no means guaranteed. <\/p>\n

\u201cThis is a multi-layered conflict that combines territorial, nationalist and dynastic grievances. At its heart is a colonial legacy of disputed border territories that have historical significance to both countries and have been used to stoke nationalist sentiments in Cambodia as well as Thailand.\u201d<\/p>\n

Alderman said Thailand was initially resistant to any mediation of the conflict that claimed more than 33 lives<\/a> in four days and saw hundreds of thousands of people displaced. The breakthrough came when Trump phoned leaders of both countries, effectively threatening a suspension of trade talks. <\/p>\n

\u201cAs both countries have export-dependent economies, neither could have afforded Trump\u2019s \u2018liberation day\u2019 tariffs. Securing a trade deal with the US took precedence over the border conflict but did nothing to resolve its root causes. Future flare-ups are still possible.\u201d<\/p>\n

Verdict: Trump\u2019s claim stands up (for now)<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n
\"An<\/div>
\n An international team of military representatives observing the Thai-Cambodian border situation.<\/span>
\n Narong Sangnak \/ EPA<\/a><\/span>
\n <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

DRC and Rwanda\u2019s long-running conflict<\/h2>\n

Jonathan Beloff, a postdoctoral researcher at the department of war studies at King\u2019s College London, said the US-brokered peace agreement<\/a> between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) ignores the history of the two countries.<\/p>\n

Beloff argued Trump\u2019s claim<\/a> that the agreement ends 30 years of fighting is historically inaccurate. After the end of Rwanda\u2019s 1994 genocide<\/a> against the Tutsi, hundreds of thousands of Rwandans fled into eastern DRC. The refugees included elements of the genocide regime who wanted to finish their genocide.<\/p>\n

This led to the first Congo war (1996-97) and second Congo war (1998-2003). And while these wars have now finished, the DRC remains fractured with over 120<\/a> rebel groups. \u201cHowever, there have been periods of friendlier relations between the two countries. Thus, the Congolese situation should not be seen as a single war but instead as several conflicts.\u201d<\/p>\n

A lack of governance and proper economic strategies in the DRC, Beloff added, is also a breeding ground for rebel forces. The agreement provides scant details about how to address these issues, which led to a recent breakdown in the Congolese negotiations with the M23 rebel group<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cFundamentally, Rwanda and the DRC were willing to have this relatively vague agreement to appease Trump, with at least the Rwandans sceptical of whether the Congolese will honour it. He did not end the war, but at best stalled the conflict for now.\u201d<\/p>\n

Verdict: Trump\u2019s claim is overblown<\/strong><\/p>\n

Kosovo-Serbia conflict averted in summer 2025<\/h2>\n

Stefan Wolff, a professor of international security at the University of Birmingham, said there have long been regional tensions between Kosovo and Serbia. \u201cTensions have recently escalated again, so it\u2019s far from a resolved situation.\u201d <\/p>\n

But, he said, there was no indication either now, or in 2020 when Trump or his envoy, Richard Grenell, brokered the so-called Washington agreement<\/a>, of any real danger of violent escalation of the kind seen back in the 1990s<\/a> when a war broke out between the former Yugoslav republics. But overall, he added, none of the underlying issues between the two countries had yet been resolved. <\/p>\n

\u201cSerbia still has a lot of domestic problems, which goes back to the collapse of the train station of Novi Sad<\/a> and massive student protests and the heavy-handed crackdown by the Serbian government.\u201d So, he added, there were still a lot of different moving pieces in the region.<\/p>\n

Wolff felt that it was impossible to independently verify if Trump had done anything significant in 2025 to deescalate any kind of emerging conflict<\/a> between Kosovo and Serbia. However, \u201cit is true that he did get an agreement on the normalisation of economic relations between Kosovo and Serbia back in 2020\u201d. <\/p>\n

Trump signed bilateral agreements between the US and Kosovo and between the US and Serbia, which it was hoped to lead \u201ceconomic normalisation\u201d between the two Balkan states as well as increased religious freedoms and restitution of property.<\/p>\n

Wolff added: \u201cIf there really was something significant [in 2025], there would be more evidence.\u201d<\/p>\n

Verdict: the significance of any intervention is unclear<\/strong><\/p>\n

Armenia and Azerbaijan\u2019s 35-year conflict<\/h2>\n

Ayla G\u00f6l, a senior lecturer in international relations at York St. John University, said the US-brokered peace framework<\/a> between Azerbaijan and Armenia in early August marks a historic milestone in this 35-year conflict.<\/p>\n

\u201cOn paper, the draft deal offers a clear path to improved relations. But it has no concrete plan for the return of the over 100,000 Armenians who fled Nagorno-Karabakh in 2023.\u201d <\/p>\n

G\u00f6l added that demands<\/a> by Azerbaijan\u2019s president, Ilham Aliyev, for amendments to the Armenian constitution to \u201celiminate territorial claims against Azerbaijan\u201d could strengthen the Armenian opposition and derail the peace process<\/a>. <\/p>\n

The peace framework also includes a pact to develop a transit corridor through Armenia, connecting Azerbaijan to its exclave of Nakhchivan. The US will be given exclusive rights<\/a> to develop the route, which will be known as the Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity, for \u201cup to 99 years\u201d. This is a double-edged sword, says G\u00f6l.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Trump route could strengthen American security commitments in the region or create new geopolitical competition. It could, for instance, strain Armenia\u2019s relations with neighbouring Iran<\/a>, which views the transit corridor as a strategic threat.\u201d<\/p>\n

Verdict: peace deal not yet signed, but it\u2019s a start<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n
\"Donald<\/div>
\n Donald Trump joins hands with Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev and Armenian prime minister Nikol Pashinyan during a signing ceremony in the White House on August 8.<\/span>
\n Nathan Howard \/ EPA<\/a><\/span>
\n <\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Israel-Iran conflict summer 2025<\/h2>\n

Scott Lucas, a professor of international politics at University College Dublin, said that the question of who ended the Iran-Israel conflict<\/a>, which began in June 2025, should also be considered in terms of how it started.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe fact of the matter is that when the Israelis attacked Iran<\/a>, they effectively sidelined the US-Iran negotiations, which were ongoing. At that point, the Trump administration didn\u2019t object to the fact that their attempt to deal with Iran\u2019s nuclear programme had been completely undone by the Israeli assault. So to simply say that Trump ended the war between Israel and Iran ignores the whole 12 days and how that occurred.\u201d<\/p>\n

That Trump intervention, in which he told Israel\u2019s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to limit the strikes<\/a>, came only after the Iranians and Qatar<\/a> and the French<\/a> had all been involved in trying to deescalate the conflict. \u201cSo you can\u2019t claim credit for ending a war when you helped escalate that war in the first place,\u201d said Lucas.<\/p>\n

He added: \u201cThe Iranian regime didn\u2019t want a war with Israel, and right now they certainly do not want to go into confrontation with Israel. They\u2019re trying to regroup after a series of effective defeats for their position in the region, in Lebanon, in Syria, and to an extent in Iraq. So they\u2019re not spoiling for a fight, and they\u2019ve got serious domestic issues that are going to occupy them. The open question here is whether Netanyahu would go back and launch another attack on the Iranians.\u201d<\/p>\n

Verdict: An earlier Trump intervention could have avoided conflict<\/strong><\/p>\n

Overall, while clearly Donald Trump\u2019s second administration has achieved some positive results on the international stage, the US president\u2019s claim to have solved six conflicts in six months does not fully stand up.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

This article written by Rachael Jolley, International Affairs Editor, The Conversation<\/strong> and is republished from The Conversation<\/a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Rachael Jolley, International Affairs Editor, The Conversation The US president, Donald Trump, claims to have \u201csolved six wars in six months\u201d. To work out if there was any substance to his claims, The Conversation international affairs editors Sam Phelps and Rachael Jolley interviewed six academic experts on those regions to find out what Trump […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":179,"featured_media":4011,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"inline_featured_image":false,"fifu_image_url":"","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[117],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4012","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-editorials"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/iranians.global\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4012","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/iranians.global\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/iranians.global\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iranians.global\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/179"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iranians.global\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4012"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/iranians.global\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4012\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iranians.global\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4011"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/iranians.global\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4012"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iranians.global\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4012"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/iranians.global\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4012"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}