ince the start of the second Trump term, a debate has raged over the way American hegemony, globalisation and humanitarian concerns for civil society and progressive theses. Some scholars had believed that President Trump’s America First policies would spell the end of US supremacy. However, his administration is rebootinghegemony in distinctly American fashion, highlighting unilateralism, economic nationalism and selective global engagement.

The US-brokered ceasefire between India and Pakistan, announced on May 10,came after an escalation in which Pakistan gave India a spectacular nosebleed using missiles and drones to destroy India’s S-400 system, causing electronic jamming and downing five Indian jets, including three Rafales.

Trump’s trip to the Middle Eastalso stand out. But creating a new global normal shifts the moral compass of humanitarian work, civil society andthe progressive imagination at a staggering cost.

The US global hegemony under Trump- characterised byreferences to past military dominance, economic innovation and a principled commitment to democracy - is taking a new form. Coming after awar in which Pakistan achieved unambiguous military dominance, the India-Pakistan ceasefire demonstrates the extent to which he deploys American power to claim dominance in global issues.In doing so, he reframes hegemony as a self-interested one-way project.

Announcing US intervention after a “long night of discussions,” Trump announced a “complete and immediate cessation of hostilities” between India and Pakistan on May 10. This followed a bruising fast-paced war in which Pakistan militarily forced India into a corner, unleashing missiles and drone attacks that decimated India’s Russian-made S-400 air defense systems, the centrepiece of its defence network. Pakistan’s electronic warfarethwarted Indian Air Force operations and played havoc with the communication network all over the Indian Union and in Jammu and Kashmir.

Pakistan also downed five Indian aircraft, including three modern Rafale fighters, proving its air superiority and underscoring vulnerabilities in Indian militarycapabilities. Picking on terrorist establishments in Pakistan, India’s Operation Sindoor claimed over 70lives. Trump’s announcement of having negotiated the truce was denied by Indian leaders who claimed that it came about following direct military-to-military talks. That’s the point that Trump is making here: the US as the actor that decides the termson which a nuclear catastrophe in the making gets defused.

Economic leverage contributed to the achievement.During his Middle East visit, President Trump said: “I used trade to a large extent to do it … I said, fellas, let us negotiate. Let‘s trade a little. We’re not talkingabout a nuclear missile exchange here. Evenif India was snatching trade incentives, Trump’s narrative and Pakistan’s gratitude slot neatly into his economic nationalism where tariffs and trade policy are tools to make America great again. Prioritising economic coercion over multilateral diplomacy, in this way, itreimagines hegemony and positions the US as a global economic arbitrator in more than just military contests.

Under Trump the US hegemony and triumphant narrative characterised by military dominance, economic innovation and a principled commitment to democracy, is taking a new form.

The episode also highlighted the selective nature of President Trump’s diplomatic engagement. Having turned his back on the India-Pakistan conflict as “none of our business,” he sprang into action with Vice President JD Vance and Secretaryof State Marco Rubio when the situation seemed to demand it. Fuelled by Pakistan’s military power and nuclear arsenal, this transactional shift underscored a hegemony that engages internationally only when it serves US interests and burnishes Trump’s image as a dealmaker.

The ceasefire is historic, given the history of conflict between India and Pakistan. It will represent a profound shift in the regional power balance in ways that could erode American supremacy.

India’s defence blueprint was built around the S-400 surface-to-air missile systems, the loss of which uncovered glaringdeficiencies. Pakistan’s EW tactics, such as jamming of IAF operationsand communications, wrecked India’s coordination.

President Trump claimed that the truce “slowed a potential nuclear conflict” that would have affected “millions of people.” The ceasefire, tied as it was to Trump’s personal diplomacy, underscores the ad hoc nature of his foreign policy,even as it emphasises the role of the US as a global stabiliser.

In India, the ceasefire prompted an angry response; X postings suggestedthat the announcement by Trump hurt his standing with nationalists, who viewed Pakistan’s military gain as a national humiliation. In a bid to win diplomatic leverage through US mediation, Pakistan praised Trump’s “pivotal and paramountrole.”World leaders like Pope Leo and the European Union welcomed the de-escalation.

India has traditionally sought bilateral negotiation. Trump’s claim to having brokered the truce was in keeping with his desire to burnish his imageas a strong leader. Trump’s vision of US hegemony re-prioritises strategic andcommercial goals.

The ceasefire did not directly address thehumanitarian issue in Kashmir. Trump’sbroadforeign policy choices, eschewing human rights advocacy and assistance, can undercut US leadership in global humanitarian efforts. His emphasis on commerce and security could cede soft power to nations like China.

Trump’s Middle East tour and the trucehighlight the irony that redefined hegemony isalready a norm. World leaders and Trump’s supporters havelargely welcomed the ceasefire, which they have called a victory for his leadership. His royal act plays to the populist drift that is happening around theworld.

Like the US-brokered India-Pakistan truce andhis Middle East tour, Donald Trump’s second term is giving new definition to American hegemony through unilateralism, economic nationalism and selective engagement.