India, the US, and The Pendulous Arc: A Quarter-Century of Swinging Partnership

India objected to these rules as they threatened to endanger the livelihood of its farmers who at the time constituted more than half of the country’s workforce as well as domestic grain subsidies designed to help feed India’s poor.

India wanted to be allowed to pay its farmers prices that exceed market rates for the crops that it was buying for its domestic food stockpiles, however, the US contended that the former was seeking concessions that were inconsistent with the spirit of the free trade discussions, which were basically aimed at reducing – not increasing– government intervention in the marketplace.

According to an US expert who had also previously served in the Obama administration during some part of this impasse between India and the US, this disagreement between the two countries was not just an obstacle to the reaching of the global trade deal but also threatened to jeopardize the future of India and the US’ bilateral economic partnership.

However, a compromise was reached which basically entailed an exemption for India’s expenditure on food reserves until the negotiations at the WTO regarding the food stocks of member countries were concluded with a simultaneous commitment to conclude these negotiations by 2017.

Other than that, there were also concerns in India about the US’ engagement with China under Obama administration, while in the US, there were concerns surrounding India’s oil imports from Iran.

However, the two countries worked together to ensure that their differences with and concerns about each other did not spiral out of control. 

Challenges To India-US Relations During First Trump Administration

What we are seeing in the second Trump administration could well be seen as a continuation of what can perhaps be categorised as consistent efforts by President Trump at restructuring India-US economic ties, particularly by correcting what he thinks is wrong in the bilateral trade between the two countries.

This is because, even during his first term as the US President, Trump had criticized India’s tariffs and terminated the latter’s designation as beneficiary developing country of the US’ Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) – trade preference program that promotes economic growth of developing countries through trade with the United States by eliminating duties on thousands of products from these countries.

Per the Office of the United States Trade Representative’s (USTR’s) press release at the time, India was terminated from GSP because of its failure to provide the US with equitable and reasonable access to its markets, which is one of the eligibility criteria established by the US Congress for GSP beneficiary country designation.

Other than that, Trump also expressed his dissatisfaction with India’s role in the reconstruction of Afghanistan.

“We appreciate India’s important contributions to stability in Afghanistan, but India makes billions of dollars in trade with the United States, and we want them to help us more with Afghanistan, especially in the area of economic assistance and development,” Trump had said in January 2019.

India is known to have spent over US$5 billion in reconstruction efforts inside Afghanistan since 2001, which includes rebuilding of schools, managing hospitals, improving transportation networks and helping the country’s Central Bank stabilise a war-torn economy and runaway currency. 

However, Trump dismissed these significant contributions of India in Afghanistan during a live broadcast of the opening hour of his cabinet’s meeting, and this was not received well in India.

Also, during the first Trump administration, a military skirmish had occurred between India and Pakistan following a terror attack by Pakistan-based terror organisation, Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) which killed 40 Indian armed forces personnel in the Pulwama district of India’s erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K).

The skirmish entailed a dog fight in which a Pakistani F-16 was downed by an Indian MiG-21 Bison, and the latter was downed by a Pakistani surface-to-air missile (SAM) with its pilot captured by the Pakistan Army.

Tensions were running high with India demanding the immediate release of its fighter pilot, Group Captain Abhinandan Varthaman – Wing Commander at the time – and reports of continuing exchanges of fire along the contested border between India and Pakistan. It was only after Pakistan announced the release of the captured Indian fighter pilot that things cooled down.

However, Trump, who at the time was in Vietnam in a summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, tried to pre-empt both India and Pakistan in announcing the cessation of hostilities as well as claimed the US’ role as an intermediary in negotiating this cessation.

While addressing a press conference at the end of this summit, Trump said that his administration “was trying to help both (India and Pakistan) out to see if we can get some organization and peace, and I think probably that’s going to be happening.” 

Again, this was not received well in India, who has consistently opposed any third-party mediation of its territorial dispute with Pakistan, and as if this was not enough, only a few months after this, Trump administration hosted Imran Khan in Washington DC, and while addressing a joint press conference with Khan, Trump said that India will be a big part of his conversation with Khan aimed at exploring ways in which the US can help intercede.

“I will say that we have a very good relationship with India.  I know that your (Pakistan’s) relationship is strained a little bit.  Maybe a lot.  But we will be talking about India; a very big part of our conversation today.  And I think maybe if we can help intercede and do whatever we have to do.  But I think it’s something that can be brought back together,” said Trump while addressing a joint press conference with Khan.

Challenges To India-US Relations During Biden Administration

One year into his term as a US President, Joe Biden faced was faced with a significant crisis in east Europe when Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022. The US, together with Europe, imposed sanctions on Russia.

The US’ allies in the Indo-Pacific, that is Australia and Japan, too joined into this sanctions regime, however, the Biden administration also wanted India which is a member of the QUAD – an important diplomatic partnership in the Indo-Pacific between the US, India, Japan and Australia – to join the sanctions regime.

Biden said as much while addressing a business forum in March 2022 by describing India’s stance on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as ‘somewhat shaky’ and referring to as an exception within the QUAD while noting how Australia and Japan have been strong in terms of dealing with Russia’s aggression.

India, on the other hand, could not risk jeopardising its time-tested partnership with Russia upon whom it has depended for decades for continuous supply of arms and ammunition, especially when it was engaged in a border stand-off with China.

Moreover, India, as a developing country with aspirations to lift several millions of its citizens out of poverty, could not pass up on the offer of buying heavily discounted Russian oil when its competitor China was doing it, especially considering the fact that the European nations themselves which were publicly criticising Moscow, were buying fuel from Russia for their energy needs.

Furthermore, in geopolitical terms, closer China-Russia ties could pose a significant risk to India’s security interests and therefore New Delhi cannot simply let Russia’s back be pushed against the wall named China, meaning India also needs to have Russia’s back in any which way it can, be that by buying discounted Russian oil even if it means sustaining Russia’s war time economy, or participating in multi-lateral groupings like BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO).

Other than the divergence on the issue of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, the India-US partnership also underwent another one of diplomatic rows during Biden administration’s tenure when a US court issued a summons to the Indian government regarding a civil suit filed by Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, an anti-India Khalistani terrorist living in New York city, alleging a plot to murder him.

The summons named several parties including the Government of India, India’s National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajit Doval, former R&AW (Research & Analysis Wing) chief Samant Goel, as well as a former Indian government employee by the name of Vikas Yadav and an Indian businessman Nikhil Gupta, both of whom had been charged by the Biden administration’s Justice Department for allegedly planning a failed assassination of Pannun.

India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) responded by stating that the charges levelled by the US Justice Department “are inquired by a high level committee” and labelling the summons by a US court in relation to the civil suit filed by Pannun as “completely unwarranted, unsubstantiated imputations”.

While the US State Department corroborated Indian government’s response by stating that an Indian delegation had met with an inter-agency team from the US’ Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Justice Department and State Department.

“They did inform us that the individual who was named in the Justice Department indictment is no longer an employee of the Indian government. We are satisfied with the cooperation,” the US State Department spokesman at the time, Matthew Miller said.

Also, India’s External Affairs Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar as well as US Ambassador to India at the time, Eric Garcetti maintained that India-US ties will not be impacted by this matter.

CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE