The US will regret throwing India under the bus
thestar.com.my -- Saturday, August 16, 2025, 11:24:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Categories: U.S.–China Relations, U.S.–Russia Relations, Trade Policy & Tariffs
Broken bromance: Modi and Trump shaking hands in the Oval Office at the White House in February. -- TNS
US president Donald Trump has thrown India under the bus. After months of affronts and barbs, Washington now treats New Delhi more as foe than friend, undermining a relationship that several American administrations - including Trump's first - tried to strengthen, not least to contain China in the Indo-Pacific. Instead, India will now distance itself from the United States and draw closer to Russia and even China.
By diplomatic standards, the deterioration has been abrupt. Contrast the vibe between Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on two occasions this year. In February, Modi visited Trump in the White House, and the pair looked like two populist peas in a pod. Gushing about his MAGA (Make America Great Again) host, Modi pledged to Make India Great Again and promised that "MAGA plus MIGA becomes a mega partnership."
Fast forward to recent days, as Trump first slapped a draconian tariff of 25% on India, then doubled that to 50% (to take effect later this month) as punishment for India's ongoing imports of Russian oil. "I don't care what India does with Russia," Trump taunted. "They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care." (India's economy is in fact booming.) Nothing about this sounds mega.
Trump's ire against India is "mystifying" and "shortsighted," Lisa Curtis at the Center for a New American Security said. She's worked for almost three decades to deepen the relationship between the US and India, most recently on the National Security Council in Trump's first term. Like his Democratic predecessor and successor, Trump at that time also wanted to enlist the world's most populous democracy as an ally to help resist the looming autocratic axis of China and Russia.
During the Cold War, India remained proudly "non-aligned" but bought its weapons mainly from Moscow, whereas its arch-rival, Pakistan, mostly used American arms. In recent decades, though, these relationships inverted, with India nowadays buying more military kit from the US and other Western countries than from Russia, and Pakistan getting more weapons from China than the US. Other bonds between the US and India have also been thriving - just think of the Desi diasporas in Silicon Valley or academia, or the vice president's in-laws.
America and Curtis, had especially high hopes for a budding quasi-alliance among the US, India, Australia and Japan. Called the Quad, it seeks to deepen cooperation in the Indo-Pacific to manage and protect maritime commerce, undersea cables, critical minerals and much else. It never prevented India from also maintaining ties with Russia and China - within the so-called BRICS format, notably. But Washington envisioned the Quad evolving into another of America's "minilateral" alliances for mutual defence in Asia, with China in the role of bogey.
Events are taking a different turn. In May, a terrorist attack in Kashmir sparked the latest clash between India and Pakistan. Worried about escalation between the two nuclear powers, the Trump administration urged both sides to stand down, which they eventually did. Then the narratives diverged.
Trump repeatedly claimed full credit for being a peacemaker, even suggesting that he threatened India to make it climb down. Modi, and many Indians, were shocked. In previous crises, the US also calmed tempers behind the scenes, but India has always rejected official third-party mediation in its conflict with Pakistan.
Now Modi felt humiliated. His government took the unusual step of publishing the minutes of a call between Trump and Modi, clarifying that "at no point" was there any mediation by the US and that the ceasefire discussions "took place directly between India and Pakistan." Other Indian pundits were less diplomatic and almost poetic in their outrage over this "typical Trump overreach."
Trump wasn't pleased. He was all the more delighted, though, when Pakistan praised his peacemaking prowess and hinted that it would nominate the president for the Nobel Peace Prize he openly covets. Trump then hosted Pakistan's top military official - whom India considers the mastermind of the recent terrorist attack - for lunch, and Pakistan promptly made the Nobel nomination official. Subsequently, Pakistan also bargained down the new American tariffs on its goods from 29% to 19% - relatively meek next to India's rate.
None of this means that the US -Indian relationship is irredeemably broken. Trade negotiators are slated to meet again this month, and a deal remains conceivable. Still, Indians have taken note that Trump is cracking down hardest against India, a putative partner, for buying oil from Russia, and not on China, allegedly America's main adversary, which imports even more Russian oil. Nor are they thrilled about the surging deportations of Indians illegally in the US, the harassment of Indian (and all foreign) students on American campuses, and much else.
The Quad, meanwhile, still exists. Its foreign ministers met just the other day, and India will host a summit of the four leaders this fall. But Trump's attendance is now in doubt. "If the rhetoric remains acerbic, I have difficulty in seeing him going," Curtis told me. His former rapport with the Indian leader is gone, she added: "Prime Minister Modi is just not going to trust President Trump anymore."
That doesn't mean Modi will throw himself into the arms of Beijing - as my colleague Karishma Vaswani points out, India has other friends in Asia to help it keep an eye on China. But Modi is suddenly making plans to visit China for the first time in seven years, in what appears to be a diplomatic thaw. Meanwhile, the Russian president is arranging a trip to see Modi.
America's strategy for more than a decade has been to pull India closer into the Western and democratic orbit as a counterweight to its main autocratic rivals and adversaries. Whether the result of design, neglect or whim, Washington's turn away from New Delhi cannot be seen as anything other than counterproductive. -- Bloomberg Opinion/TNS
Sign Our PetitionThe recent shift in U.S.-India relations, particularly under President Trump's administration, illustrates a broader pattern of geopolitical maneuvering that often neglects the historical context and socio-economic realities at play. The article highlights a deterioration in what was once a burgeoning partnership, a relationship that was carefully cultivated by multiple U.S. administrations in an attempt to counterbalance China's influence in the Indo-Pacific region. Trump's abrupt antagonism towards India, exemplified by his imposition of crippling tariffs, showcases not only a failure in diplomatic strategy but also a significant misunderstanding of global interdependencies that have developed over decades.
Historically, India has occupied a unique position on the global stage, famously adopting a non-aligned stance during the Cold War while also maintaining crucial defense ties with the Soviet Union. This complex relationship with both superpowers allowed India to carve out a distinct identity, both politically and economically. The contemporary geopolitical landscape has seen a pivot towards the U.S., particularly in defense procurement, yet India has not abandoned its historical ties to Russia. This nuanced approach reflects India's desire for strategic autonomy, a principle that is often overlooked by Western policymakers who prefer a more rigid alignment of countries based on ideological lines. The current U.S. administration's failure to recognize this fact has led to a miscalculation that not only jeopardizes U.S. interests but also undermines India’s sovereignty.
Moreover, the article touches on the implications of a strained U.S.-India relationship for the Quad alliance, which includes Australia and Japan. This partnership was envisioned as a counterweight to China's rising power, emphasizing maritime security and economic collaboration. However, the effectiveness of such alliances is contingent upon the goodwill and mutual respect among member nations. By treating India as an adversary rather than an ally, the U.S. risks alienating a key player in this strategic framework. The Quad, instead of evolving into a robust defensive coalition, may become a source of friction, particularly if member states perceive the U.S. as unreliable or self-serving.
On a broader scale, the deterioration of U.S.-India ties also echoes concerns about American foreign policy's tendency to prioritize short-term gains over long-term relationships. This pattern has historical roots, as seen in U.S. interventions and alliances that have often disregarded the local contexts and desires of nations involved. When the U.S. resorts to punitive economic measures, it not only risks immediate backlash but also sows seeds of distrust that can last for generations. This approach can hinder collaborative efforts to tackle global challenges, including climate change, public health crises, and economic inequality, all of which require a more sophisticated understanding of international relations.
In conclusion, the current U.S. posture towards India serves as a cautionary tale about the pitfalls of a transactional approach to diplomacy. It underscores the necessity for a more holistic understanding of international relationships, one that honors historical ties and acknowledges the complexities of global interdependencies. For advocates of a more inclusive and equitable foreign policy, this situation presents an opportunity to advocate for a renewed commitment to diplomacy rooted in mutual respect and cooperation, rather than coercion and punitive measures. Engaging in conversations about the importance of historical context, empathy, and nuanced diplomacy will help challenge the simplistic narratives often put forth by those who favor a more unilateral approach to foreign policy.
The deteriorating relationship between the United States and India, particularly under the Trump administration, highlights a troubling trend in American foreign policy that has historically oscillated between engagement and isolation. For decades, the U.S. has viewed India as a crucial partner in countering the influence of China in the Indo-Pacific region. The recent tariffs imposed by Trump on Indian imports, especially in light of India's continued engagement with Russia, signify not just a breakdown in diplomatic relations but also a liability for American interests in a multipolar world. As we analyze this shift, it’s vital to understand the historical context that has shaped U.S.-India relations and how these dynamics could inform our actions moving forward.
Historically, India adopted a non-aligned stance during the Cold War, choosing to navigate its relationships with both superpowers without fully aligning with either. However, as geopolitical landscapes shifted, India's relationship with the U.S. began to warm in the late 20th century, particularly following the end of the Cold War. The growth of the Indian economy and its democratic values made it an attractive ally for the U.S., especially as both nations sought to contain the rise of China. The Quad alliance, comprising the U.S., India, Japan, and Australia, was conceived as a strategic partnership to enhance security cooperation in the region. The recent tariffs and Trump's overt hostility, however, signify a profound miscalculation that could push India closer to its historical allies, such as Russia and China, fundamentally altering the balance of power in Asia.
What can we, as engaged citizens and advocates for a more cooperative foreign policy, do about this? First, it is crucial to advocate for a more nuanced understanding of international relations that emphasizes diplomacy over punitive measures. Engaging with right-wing perspectives can provide a platform for dialogue, encouraging them to consider the broader implications of alienating a democratic ally like India. By framing the conversation around mutual economic and strategic benefits, we can appeal to a sense of pragmatism that transcends partisan divides. Highlighting the risks of isolationist policies, such as the potential for India to pivot toward authoritarian regimes, can create a compelling argument for re-engaging with and supporting our allies.
Moreover, it is essential to foster greater public awareness about the complexities of international trade and diplomacy. This can be achieved through educational campaigns that elucidate the potential dangers of protectionist policies and the benefits of robust international partnerships. Workshops, community forums, and social media initiatives can serve to inform and empower constituents about the consequences of the current diplomatic trajectory. By equipping individuals with the knowledge to articulate these issues, we can create a more informed electorate that can hold policymakers accountable and advocate for a foreign policy that prioritizes alliances based on shared democratic values.
Additionally, we must encourage our elected representatives to pursue policies that support multilateralism and strengthen international coalitions. This can be accomplished by calling on them to champion legislation that fosters economic ties with India and promotes cultural exchanges. Advocating for increased funding for educational programs that foster understanding between our nations will create a foundation for long-term cooperation. By demonstrating that constructive engagement with India aligns with American interests, particularly in countering authoritarianism globally, we can build a compelling case for a policy shift.
In conclusion, the current schism between the U.S. and India serves as a critical reminder of the importance of maintaining strategic partnerships in an increasingly complex global landscape. As citizens, we carry the responsibility to advocate for diplomacy, education, and multilateralism. By engaging with diverse perspectives and fostering informed dialogue, we can work toward policies that reinforce the bonds between democracies and counter the rise of authoritarianism. As we move forward, it is imperative that we leverage our voices to reshape the narrative surrounding U.S.-India relations, ensuring that cooperation remains at the forefront of our foreign policy agenda.
Analyzing the current diplomatic tensions between the United States and India provides us with an important opportunity to engage in advocacy and grassroots action. Here’s a detailed list of ideas on what we can personally do about this situation, including specific actions, petitions, and contact information for key officials.
### What Can We Personally Do About This?
1. **Educate Yourself and Others:** - Stay informed about U.S.-India relations and the impacts of U.S. foreign policy. - Share articles, analyses, and discussions in community groups or social media platforms to raise awareness.
2. **Engage in Advocacy:** - Join local or national organizations that focus on U.S. foreign policy to amplify voices calling for diplomatic engagement rather than antagonism.
3. **Petition for Policy Change:** - Start or sign petitions that advocate for a more constructive foreign policy towards India, emphasizing mutual respect and collaboration.
4. **Contact Elected Officials:** - Write letters or emails to your congressional representatives expressing your concerns about U.S.-India relations and encouraging them to promote diplomatic solutions.
5. **Participate in Local Events:** - Attend or organize town hall meetings, discussions, or forums on foreign policy to engage community members and local leaders in dialogue.
### Exact Actions You Can Personally Take
1. **Petition Example:** - **Petition for Diplomatic Engagement with India:** - You can create a petition on platforms like Change.org or Care2. Focus on urging Congress to prioritize constructive dialogue and cooperation with India. - Share the petition widely through social media and community networks to gather support.
2. **Contacting Elected Officials:** - **Write to Your Representatives:** - Identify your representatives using [House.gov](https://www.house.gov/) or [Senate.gov](https://www.senate.gov/). - Draft a letter or email highlighting the importance of maintaining strong relations with India. Here’s a template to guide you:
``` Dear [Representative’s Name],
I am writing to express my concern regarding the recent deterioration of U.S.-India relations under the current administration. As a citizen, I believe that fostering strong diplomatic ties with India is crucial for both countries, particularly in facing global challenges such as economic instability and the rise of authoritarianism.
I urge you to advocate for policies that promote cooperation, mutual respect, and constructive engagement, rather than punitive measures that may alienate a key ally.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address] [Your Email] ```
- **Key Contacts:** - **Senator Dick Durbin (IL)** - Email: [www.durbin.senate.gov/contact](https://www.durbin.senate.gov/contact), Mailing Address: 230 S. Dearborn St., Suite 3900, Chicago, IL 60604 - **Representative Pramila Jayapal (WA)** - Email: [jayapal.house.gov/contact](https://jayapal.house.gov/contact/), Mailing Address: 1904 3rd Avenue, Suite 510, Seattle, WA 98101
3. **Join Advocacy Groups:** - **Organizations like The India Project or the Center for American Progress** often have campaigns focused on U.S.-India relations. Joining their newsletters or becoming a member can provide updates on actions you can take.
4. **Social Media Advocacy:** - Utilize platforms like Twitter or Facebook to campaign for better U.S.-India relations. Tagging relevant politicians and organizations can increase visibility. - Example Tweet: “Strong U.S.-India relations are vital for global stability. Let’s advocate for diplomacy over tariffs! #USIndiaRelations”
5. **Attend Public Meetings:** - Look for local events or forums discussing U.S. foreign policy. Engaging in discussions can help mobilize community support and influence local leaders.
By taking these actions, you can contribute to fostering a more constructive and mutually beneficial relationship between the United States and India. Engaging with these issues at a grassroots level is essential for pushing back against detrimental policies and promoting a more inclusive and diplomatic foreign policy agenda.