Skip to main content

Trump’s tariff offensive and the strategic dilemma facing India

By Dr. Manoj Kumar Mishra* 
India will face tariffs of 25 per cent on its exports to the United States effective from August 7, as per an executive order issued by President Donald Trump. His displeasure is not confined to the high tariffs India maintains against the US; he also criticized New Delhi’s defence deals and energy purchases from Moscow, dismissed the BRICS forum of which India is a member, and even called India a “dead economy.” These statements raise an important question: is the tariff hike purely a trade measure, or does it reflect deeper strategic dissatisfaction with India’s approach to its relationship with the US?
Prominent American officials and strategic experts such as Ashley J. Tellis and Lisa Curtis argue that despite India’s economic liberalization since 1991 and its military modernization, including procurement of arms and technologies from major powers, it still lags far behind China on nearly all indicators of national power—and is likely to continue doing so for decades. Even with India's massive investments in emerging technologies, matching China’s superiority in fields like artificial intelligence, cyber and space technologies, and energy innovation remains a distant goal. These experts believe that India’s foreign policy, centered on multipolarity, leaves it vulnerable to Chinese assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific and South Asia. They contend that India’s approach ultimately helps reinforce the positions of China and Russia in the global order and undermines the US-led rules-based system. Therefore, they advocate that India abandon its long-standing policy of strategic autonomy and fully align with the United States through a tighter security framework.
While Indian experts highlight India’s growing alignment with the US through defence agreements and cooperation on critical technologies, US experts note India’s parallel engagements with Russia and even China. India continues to support Global South multilateralism, which often positions itself as an alternative to US-dominated institutions. According to American perspectives, India’s multi-alignment strategy dilutes US influence and obstructs efforts to create a more unified anti-China front.
India, however, sees pitfalls in aligning too closely with the United States. Such alignment could create moral or legal obligations to support US actions that contradict India’s own values or strategic interests. American foreign policy has often served its global ambitions without consistency in moral principles—supporting authoritarian regimes in Central Asia during the 1990s while promoting democracy in the Middle East during the Arab Spring, for instance. The US has also shown a double standard in its unwavering support for Israel, despite allegations of genocide in Gaza, while advocating for Ukraine’s sovereignty.
India’s stance on issues of war and peace is informed by its own developmental history, strategic limitations, and cultural values. Its continued dependence on Russian defence supplies and discounted oil imports is rooted in longstanding ties and current economic needs. Moreover, India’s foreign policy promotes coexistence with various systems of governance, making it unwilling to support American-style democracy promotion globally.
India also views the QUAD not as a formal military alliance but as a platform for broader cooperation. American policymakers may wish India to commit more strongly to its military aspects, but India remains wary of provoking China or escalating regional tensions. This caution has deep historical roots. India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, attempted peaceful coexistence with China through the 1954 Panchsheel Agreement, and even after the 1962 border war, efforts continued to normalize relations and maintain trade. India still believes peaceful coexistence with China is possible and fears that a tight alliance with the US could foreclose that option permanently.
President Trump’s “America First” approach, which sidelines long-standing partnerships, signals that India cannot expect to resolve the tariff issue merely by aligning more closely with the US. The larger divergence in values, interests, and strategic worldviews means that India must tread carefully, maintaining its autonomy while navigating an increasingly polarized global order.
---
*Senior Lecturer in Political Science, SVM Autonomous College, Jagatsinghpur, Odisha

Comments

TRENDING

The golden crop: How turmeric is transforming women's lives in tribal India

By Vikas Meshram*   When the lush green fields of turmeric sway in the tribal belt of southern Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, and Gujarat, it is not merely a spice crop — it is the golden glow of self-reliance. In villages where even basic spices once had to be bought from the market, the very soil today is yielding a prosperity that has transformed the lives of thousands of families. At the heart of this transformation is the initiative of Vaagdhara, which has linked turmeric with livelihoods, nutrition, and village self-governance — gram swaraj.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Was Netaji forced to alter face, die in obscurity in USSR in 1975? Was he so meek?

  By Rajiv Shah   This should sound almost hilarious. Not only did Subhas Chandra Bose not die in a plane crash in Taipei, nor was he the mysterious Gumnami Baba who reportedly passed away on 16 September 1985 in Ayodhya, but we are now told that he actually died in 1975—date unknown—“in oblivion” somewhere in the former Soviet Union. Which city? Moscow? No one seems to know.

Love letters in a lifelong war: Babusha Kohli’s resistance in verse

By Ravi Ranjan*  “War does not determine who is right—only who is left.” Bertrand Russell’s words echo hauntingly in our times, and few contemporary Hindi poets embody this truth as profoundly as Babusha Kohli. Emerging from Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, Kohli has carved a unique space in literature by weaving together tenderness, protest, and philosophy across poetry, prose, and cinema. Her work is not merely artistic expression—it is resistance, refuge, and a call for peace.

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Rajiv Shah  Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Authoritarian destruction of the public sphere in Ecuador: Trumpism in action?

By Pilar Troya Fernández  The situation in Ecuador under Daniel Noboa's government is one of authoritarianism advancing on several fronts simultaneously to consolidate neoliberalism and total submission to the US international agenda. These are not isolated measures, but rather a coordinated strategy that combines job insecurity, the dismantling of the welfare state, unrestricted access to mining, the continuation of oil exploitation without environmental considerations, the centralization of power through the financial suffocation of local governments, and the systematic criminalization of all forms of opposition and popular organization.

Echoes of Vietnam and Chile: The devastating cost of the I-A Axis in Iran

​ By Ram Puniyani  ​The recent joint military actions by Israel and the United States against Iran have been devastating. Like all wars, this conflict is brutal to its core, leaving a trail of human suffering in its wake. The stated pretext for this aggression—the brutality of the Ayatollah Khamenei regime and its nuclear ambitions—clashes sharply with the reality of the diplomatic landscape. Iran had expressed a willingness to remain at the negotiating table, signaling a readiness to concede points emerging from dialogue. 

False claim? What Venezuela is witnessing is not surrender but a tactical retreat

By Manolo De Los Santos  The early morning hours of January 3, 2026, marked an inflection point in Venezuela and Latin America’s centuries-long struggle for self-determination and independence. Operation Absolute Resolve, ordered by the Trump administration, constituted the most brutal and direct military assault on a sovereign state in the region in recent memory. In a shocking operation that left hundreds dead, President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores were illegally kidnapped from Venezuelan soil and transported to the United States, where they now face fabricated charges in a New York federal detention facility. In the two months since this act of war, a torrent of speculation has emerged from so-called experts and pundits across the political spectrum. This has followed three main lines: One . The operation’s success indicated treason at the highest levels of the Bolivarian Revolution. Two . Acting President Delcy RodrĂ­guez and the remaining leadership have abandone...

The price of silence: Why Modi won’t follow Shastri, appeal for sacrifice

By Arundhati Dhuru, Sandeep Pandey*  ​In 1965, as India grappled with war and a crippling food crisis, Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri faced a United States that used wheat shipments under the PL-480 agreement as a lever to dictate Indian foreign policy. Shastri’s response remains legendary: he appealed to the nation to skip one meal a day. Millions of middle-class households complied, choosing temporary hunger over the sacrifice of national dignity. Today, India faces a modern equivalent in the energy sector, yet the leadership’s response stands in stark contrast to that era of self-reliance.