“Now we will start a new method from Delhi on July 20 for restoration of statehood. Let the BJP tell us whether we will have to go to Trump and hold a dharna outside the White House. Until then, we will keep knocking on the doors of the national capital.”This is what Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah said at a public rally in Jammu on July 12. His message was unmistakable: “If we can’t get an assurance on the restoration of statehood from the national capital, should we then have to go to US President Donald Trump for it? We will hold protests outside the White House.”With these remarks, Omar appealed to Prime Minister Narendra Modi to fulfil his commitment to restore Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood. References to Trump, however, soon began to disappear from the media narrative after the BJP dismissed Omar’s remarks as an attempt to ‘internationalise’ the issue.Illustration: Pariplab ChakrabortyFrom then on, no one in the ruling party or the loyalist media seemed willing to connect US President Donald Trump with Omar’s demand for the restoration of statehood. Instead, the BJP filed a Rs 100 crore defamation suit against Omar over his allegation that National Conference MLAs were being offered Rs 20 crore to Rs 30 crore, along with ministerial posts, if they defected from the party.The lure of cash has always been part of Operation Lotus. Similar allegations have surfaced in recent attempts to engineer defections in West Bengal and Maharashtra. The price of a defection appears to have been highest in Maharashtra, where Sanjay Raut claimed Shiv Sena (UBT) MPs were offered as much as Rs 50 crore to defect. The alleged going rate in West Bengal was Rs 40 crore. And, of course, every defection comes with a package that includes freedom from Enforcement Directorate/Central Bureau Investigation harassment, a ministerial berth and more.Take the case of Mamata loyalist Madan Mitra. This week, he resigned from all his positions in the Trinamool Congress and joined the rival Ritabrata faction, a day after the ED initiated action against his wife and son.Amit Shah, after all, is not one to rest on his oars.§But why did references to Trump suddenly vanish from the media narrative? Sections of the media had initially highlighted Omar’s remarks as page-one news. His decision to invoke US President Donald Trump while demanding the restoration of statehood was the highlight of his address at the public rally. Yet, much of the loyal media soon played it down.It is, after all, highly unusual for a chief minister to take his case against the Union territories to the White House. Such a move would be untenable under the constitution and established international practice. Had Omar actually attempted to do so, the government could have dismissed him from office and even dragged him to court under sedition laws.Besides, as chief minister, Omar knew he would almost certainly have been denied a passport to visit the US.Was it a slip-up amidst angry outbursts or a shrewd move aimed at the dangerous liaison between the two authoritarians? Whatever the truth, the Modi establishment was quick to sense the adverse implications. The regime moved swiftly to put a halt to references to Trump in the mainstream media. Presumably, a noisy media campaign would have drawn the White House’s attention and might have provoked unpredictable comments from Donald Trump.Mehbooba Mufti added more grist to the Kashmir mill by asking the National Conference to include the restoration of Article 370 in its list of demands. She urged Omar to convene an all-party meeting, with the participation of civil society members, to evolve a common roadmap for the restoration of constitutional rights.For a while, it appeared that things were going out of control. A day after Omar’s remarks about Trump, a social media post purportedly by the US president surfaced, hailing the chief minister’s demand for statehood. The post mimicked Trump’s trademark style and the usual White House format. But, to New Delhi’s great relief, it turned out to be fake. Initially, even Omar had given the post a guarded welcome.The post on X had said, “Let’s bring back Statehood and make Jammu and Kashmir GREAT AGAIN! Believe me, nobody restores better than me…except maybe Omar in J&K,” the AI-generated fake Trump post read.§Trump was always eager to engage India and Pakistan and take credit for settling the Kashmir dispute. During his first term as president, he said in 2019 that he was willing to mediate on Kashmir if both India and Pakistan agreed. He made the offer during Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan’s visit to the White House. Trump also claimed that Modi himself had asked him to play the role of mediator.Trump repeated the offer more emphatically in mid-May last year, saying he was willing to help India and Pakistan find a solution to the Kashmir dispute if both sides accepted his mediation.Those were the days when Trump went around boasting about having resolved all the world’s major conflicts. His State Department spokesman promptly hailed him as the world’s “peacemaker”. However, Trump’s offer of mediation was rejected by India, which reiterated its long-held position that Kashmir is beyond the scope of third-party mediation.New Delhi now fears that Trump could seize upon the Kashmir issue if the chief minister’s remarks gain traction in Washington. For the Mo-Shah regime, this would be an avoidable irritant at a time when it is striving to secure a two-thirds majority in Parliament, which it considers crucial to consolidating a stable authoritarian matrix.Earlier this year, New Delhi was thrilled when Trump said he would visit India “sometime in the near future”. The possibility was signalled during the G7 summit. The Indian side eagerly awaited the visit in the hope of improving bilateral ties.Modi was among the first leaders to visit the White House following Trump’s return to office in January. He called Trump a “great friend”, and the two pledged to double US-India trade to $500 billion by 2030.“The ‘friendship’ Modi thought he had with Trump was ultimately a dysfunctional dalliance, defined by Modi’s effusiveness and Trump’s ruthless self-interest. The bromance is over. Personal chemistry cannot override the cold math of global interests,” Salil Tripathi wrote in Time last year.Trump wants to bring manufacturing jobs back to the US, while Modi’s “Make in India” campaign is, in part, a pitch to American firms to relocate from China to India. Modi’s approach is simply incompatible with Trump’s “America First” policies. India is also profoundly miffed by Trump’s sudden tactical tilt towards Pakistan. In June, he hosted the Pakistani army chief at the White House.Tailpiece: Servitude: Narendra Modi, Trump claimed, always addressed him as “Sir”. “When he came to me to complain about the delay in the delivery of Apache helicopters, Modi asked me, ‘May I meet you, sir?’” Trump recalled.Without denying Trump’s claim, the external affairs ministry’s spokesperson merely said that “both leaders addressed each other with mutual respect.In an age of fractured mandates, personality cults and transactional alliances, P. Raman brings clarity to India’s shifting political equations. With Realpolitik, the veteran journalist peers beneath the slogans and spin to reveal the power plays, spectacle, crises and insecurities driving India’s politics.