Isa Shamim
Introduction
The bilateral relationship between India and the United States has, over the decades, evolved from distant diplomacy to strategic engagement. During the presidency of Donald Trump (2017–2021), this relationship entered a particularly complex phase—marked by stronger defense cooperation on one hand and notable tensions in trade, immigration, and cultural discourse on the other. This essay seeks to explore the nuances of India–US ties during this critical period and examine their long-term implications as India repositions itself in the emerging world order post-2025.
In an era of shifting alliances and contested multipolarity, India’s foreign policy calculus has increasingly required it to maintain a delicate balance: preserving strategic autonomy while building dependable global partnerships. The Trump years were a litmus test for India’s diplomatic agility—testing its resilience, exposing its vulnerabilities, and shaping its trajectory in ways still unfolding today.
Framing the Middle Power Perspective
Much of India’s global engagement can be better understood through the lens of middle power theory. While it lacks the overwhelming economic or military might of traditional great powers, India has often leveraged its demographic strength, democratic values, and regional influence to assert itself on key global issues. During the Trump administration, this status was both an asset and a challenge.
On one hand, India was courted by the United States as a counterbalance to China, particularly in the Indo-Pacific. On the other, India had to manage the pressures of a transactional US foreign policy that often prioritized unilateral gain over shared global responsibilities. This duality—of being a partner yet constantly negotiating for respect and parity—defines much of India’s experience with the Trump White House.
A Defense Partnership Strengthened
Despite uncertainties in other sectors, defense cooperation between India and the US flourished. The signing of foundational agreements such as COMCASA (2018) and BECA (2020) marked a significant leap in military interoperability. Joint exercises, naval patrols in the South China Sea, and increased intelligence sharing all reflected a convergence of strategic interests.
Trump’s emphasis on the Indo-Pacific and the reactivation of the Quad (India, Australia, Japan, US) further aligned with India’s desire to ensure a free and open maritime region. For New Delhi, this alignment served as both a hedge against Chinese assertiveness and a reaffirmation of its role as a responsible regional stakeholder.
However, this military embrace was not without its contradictions. While Washington welcomed India as a defense partner, its reluctance to ease technology transfer restrictions and its criticism of India’s non-alignment on certain global issues exposed the limits of the partnership. Still, the Trump era set a strong foundation for deeper security cooperation in the future.
Economic Tensions and Trade Disputes
If defense ties were strengthened, economic relations faced strain. In 2019, the Trump administration revoked India’s preferential trade status under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), citing market access issues. Tariffs on Indian steel and aluminum followed, and India responded with retaliatory duties on US goods.
These disputes underscored a fundamental difference in priorities. The Trump administration viewed trade through a zero-sum lens, demanding concessions without fully considering India’s domestic economic and political constraints. Meanwhile, India struggled to explain that reforming agricultural subsidies or opening its dairy market—key US demands—required more than technocratic adjustments; they were socially and politically sensitive matters.
While negotiations continued, the tone remained combative. The shift from a development-oriented trade partnership to a transactional, often unpredictable dynamic marked a key departure from earlier administrations. Trust—an essential ingredient in diplomacy—suffered as a result.
The H-1B Dilemma and People-to-People Friction
Perhaps the most emotive aspect of the bilateral strain during Trump’s term was immigration. The administration’s restrictions on H-1B visas, widely used by Indian IT professionals, struck a personal and economic chord. Indian tech companies faced uncertainty, families were impacted, and a sense of being unwelcome began to surface.
This policy move affected more than just temporary work visas—it threatened a key bridge of people-to-people connectivity that had, for decades, underpinned US–India ties. For a nation that sends a large number of STEM graduates and tech talent to the US, the move felt regressive and disproportionately punitive.
Despite lobbying efforts by Indian diplomats and US – based advocacy groups, the Trump administration remained unmoved, reinforcing the perception that immigration policy had become a political tool rather than a reflection of mutual interest.
Cultural Disagreements and Sovereignty Concerns
In what might seem peripheral but was symbolically significant, Trump’s insistence on India opening its dairy market to US exports created tensions. Indian restrictions on foreign dairy—rooted in religious and cultural concerns over cattle slaughter—were dismissed in Washington as protectionist.
Such episodes reflected the limits of empathy in the Trump-era White House. They also emphasized how even seemingly minor trade issues could inflame broader debates about cultural respect and national sovereignty. For India, this reaffirmed the importance of negotiating from a position of dignity, not dependency.
Strategic Implications Post-2025
Looking ahead, India’s challenge will be to build on the strategic gains of the Trump years while mitigating the lingering mistrust. The Biden administration’s return to multilateral diplomacy provides a window for renewed collaboration—but India must also prepare for a future where the US role in global affairs may be less consistent.
India should continue to diversify its defense partnerships, invest in self-reliance under initiatives like “Aatmanirbhar Bharat,” and strengthen forums like the Quad and BIMSTEC. Equally, reforming domestic sectors—such as data governance, trade transparency, and labor mobility—will enhance India’s attractiveness as a strategic partner.
Perhaps most importantly, India must continue asserting its identity not just as a balancing power but as a shaping power—one that contributes ideas, solutions, and leadership in a world grappling with crises from climate to cyber security.
Conclusion
The Trump presidency was both a test and an opportunity for India–US relations. Defense ties deepened, but trade and immigration disputes exposed friction points. Through it all, India demonstrated the poise of a middle power—engaging with the world’s most powerful democracy without losing sight of its own interests and values.
As 2025 and beyond beckon, the lessons of the Trump era should inform India’s diplomacy: that strategic autonomy, cultural confidence, and multilateral engagement are not mutually exclusive, but essential pillars of a resilient foreign policy.
References
- Ayres, A. (2018). Our Time Has Come: How India is Making Its Place in the World. Oxford University Press.
- Madan, T. (2020). Fateful Triangle: How China Shaped US-India Relations During the Cold War. Brookings Institution Press.
- Schweller, R. (2018). “Three Cheers for Trump’s Foreign Policy.” Foreign Affairs.
- Gupta, K. (2018). “India’s Foreign Policy and Economic Diplomacy.” Indian Journal of Public Administration.
- Mohajan, H. (2017). “Research Methodology.” Munich Personal RePEc Archive.
- The Economic Times. (2020). “India retaliates with tariffs after US GSP withdrawal.” Retrieved from https://economictimes.indiatimes.com
- Pant, H. V., & Bommakanti, K. (2019). “India’s National Security Strategy: Imperatives and Challenges.” Observer Research Foundation Occasional Paper No. 227. Retrieved from https://www.orfonline.org
- Chaudhuri, R. (2021). “India’s Middle Power Moment: A New Path in the Indo-Pacific.” Chatham House Research Paper. Retrieved from https://www.chathamhouse.org
- Jaishankar, S. (2020). The India Way: Strategies for an Uncertain World. HarperCollins India.
- Singh, A. (2020). “India, the Indo-Pacific and the Quad: Navigating Strategic Interests and Partnerships.” Center for Strategic and International Studies. Retrieved from https://csis.org
- Tellis, A. J. (2017). “Balancing without Containment: An American Strategy for Managing China.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Retrieved from https://carnegieendowment.org
- Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. W. W. Norton & Company.
- Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. Public Affairs.
- Edström, H., & Westberg, J. (2020). “The Defense Strategies of Middle Powers: Competing for Security, Influence and Status in an Era of Unipolar Demise.” Comparative Strategy, 39(2), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/01495933.2020.1718992
- Brzezinski, Z. (1997). The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Basic Books.
- Aggarwal, V. K., & Kenney, M. A. T. (2023). Great Power Competition and Middle Power Strategies: Economic Statecraft in the Asia-Pacific Region. Springer.
About the contributor: Isa Shamim is a fellow at DFPGYF Diplomacy, Foreign Policy & Geopolitics Youth Fellow at IMPRI and is the Director of Crescent International School -Dhanbad(CBSE Affiliated Senior Secondary School), leading initiatives in curriculum development, pedagogical innovation, and educational leadership.
Disclaimer: All views expressed in the article belong solely to the author and not necessarily to the organisation.
Read more at IMPRI:
China’s monopoly over rare-earth and India’s magnetic opportunity to counter it
The Double-Edged Sword: Unpacking the Geopolitics of Our Green Energy Future
Acknowledgment: This article was posted by Bhaktiba Jadeja, visiting researcher and assistant editor at IMPRI.
