India–US relations in the 21st century evolved into a strategic partnership, with both countries cooperating in defence, counter-terrorism, trade, economy, people-to-people contact and international diplomacy. Built gradually over the last two decades, the relationship appeared strong across administrations in both countries. However, recent developments under Donald Trump’s second presidency have raised serious questions about its future direction. The signals coming from Washington are unexpected and, for many in New Delhi, deeply unsettling.
Unexpected developments
Three developments stand out. First, President Trump has shown visible warmth towards Pakistan. This is surprising, given the well-documented US frustration with Pakistan’s duplicity on terrorism in the past and its visible closeness to China. Second, the US has imposed steep tariffs, up to 50 per cent, on Indian goods, with no clear indication that a long-pending trade deal will be concluded anytime soon. Third, India has been openly targeted for its continued imports of Russian oil and defence equipment, despite New Delhi’s consistent explanation that these purchases are driven by India’s need for energy security and had the tacit consent of the Biden administration.
Together, these moves suggest a sudden shift from the stated US policy of stronger ties with India, the largest democracy and a partner in the Indo-Pacific region. It is evident that the relationship has transitioned from one of reciprocity to one of transactional pressure.
Reasons for change in US stance. Is Trump justified?
Most observers are confused by Trump's position, but there are a few things that could explain this reversal. Donald Trump has always looked at global policy from a narrow economic and political perspective. He cares more about trade deficits, domestic manufacturing, and elections than about long-term strategic balancing. India has a trade surplus with the US and has resisted opening certain sensitive sectors—something Trump sees as “unfair”.
Trump's stance on Russia fits with his general tough line on countries that do business with Moscow. He thinks that strategic partnerships should completely fit with US geopolitical goals. But this does not take into account India's security needs, its long history of relying on Russia for defence, or the fact that the world is now multipolar.
Is Trump justified? seems not, as is evident from the domestic opposition within the USA and the fact that India is yet to yield much on this account, while there is a risk of weakening a partnership that serves US interests in many ways.
Limited economic impact, but visible strategic implications
So far, the Indian economy has shown little visible damage. High GDP growth rates, stable foreign exchange reserves, and strong domestic demand indicate resilience, despite the fact that there has been an expected downtick in bilateral trade with the US, our largest trading partner.
The impact on other bilateral initiatives is noticeable as QUAD meetings have lost momentum, with fewer high-profile engagements and delayed coordination. Defence cooperation, though strong, also shows signs of caution.
Is there more to it than meets the eye?
There may be more going on than just the headlines. It is possible that the US might be reassessing the value of India as a strategic ally in the current geopolitical context. Many observers believe that these developments should be viewed as a reflection of Trump's personal views rather than as official US policy.
The Indian side has reacted with maturity and statesmanship, clearly outlining its core concerns regarding the trade deal. India has also indicated its desire to exercise autonomy and independence in its affairs, including with Russia, China, and other nations.
Way forward
India must continue to respond calmly and with pragmatism and without jingoism, keeping its national interests in the forefront. A US trade deal is crucial; India must address genuine concerns, if any, offering concessions where feasible. We must critically examine the economic benefits of importing Russian oil compared to the potential loss of trade with the US.
India’s policy of multi-alignment defines it as a neutral and mature democracy amongst the international community; hence, it is inviolable. This transcends our choices in trade, security, and diplomacy, as well as the acquisition of weapons and equipment. All our partners, including the US, must accept this aspect of our foreign policy. India also has to be prepared to pay for the cost that such strategic autonomy demands.
Conclusion
India–US relations are at a crossroads, where we are witnessing a phase of renegotiation shaped by unconventional leadership, domestic politics, and differing worldviews. Strategic partnerships like this mature not in smooth periods, but through friction and adjustment. If managed with patience and realism, the India–US relationship can emerge more balanced, respectful, and durable—true to the interests of both nations.
