India pauses plans to buy US arms
India had been planning to send Defence Minister Rajnath Singh to Washington in the coming weeks for an announcement on some of the purchases, but that trip has been cancelled, two of the people said.
Trump on Aug 6 imposed an additional 25% tariff on Indian goods as punishment for Delhi's purchases of Russian oil, which he said meant the country was funding Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
That raised the total duty on Indian exports to 50% — among the highest of any US trading partner. The president has a history of rapidly reversing himself on tariffs and India has said it remains actively engaged in discussions with Washington.
One of the people said the defence purchases could go ahead once India had clarity on tariffs and the direction of bilateral ties, but "just not as soon as they were expected to."
Written instructions had not been given to pause the purchases, another official said, indicating that Delhi had the option to quickly reverse course, though there was "no forward movement at least for now".
Post publication of this story, India's government issued a statement it attributed to a Ministry of Defence source describing news reports of a pause in the talks as "false and fabricated". The statement also said procurement was progressing as per "extant procedures".
Delhi, which has forged a close partnership with America in recent years, has said it is being unfairly targeted and that Washington and its European allies continue to trade with Moscow when it is in their interest.
Reuters is reporting for the first time that discussions on India's purchases of Stryker combat vehicles made by General Dynamics Land Systems and Javelin anti-tank missiles developed by Raytheon and Lockheed Martin have been paused due to the tariffs.
Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had in February announced plans to pursue procurement and joint production of those items.
Singh had also been planning to announce the purchase of six Boeing P8I reconnaissance aircraft and support systems for the Indian Navy during his now-cancelled trip, two of the people said. Talks over procuring the aircraft in a proposed $3.6 billion deal were at an advanced stage, according to the officials.
Boeing, Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics referred queries to the Indian and US governments. Raytheon did not return a request for comment.
Russian relations
India's deepening security relationship with the US, which is fuelled by their shared strategic rivalry with China, was heralded by many US analysts as one of the key areas of foreign-policy progress in the first Trump administration.
Delhi is the world's second-largest arms importer and Russia has traditionally been its top supplier. India has in recent years however, shifted to importing from Western powers like France, Israel and the US, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute think-tank.
The shift in suppliers was driven partly by constraints on Russia's ability to export arms, which it is utilizing heavily in its invasion of Ukraine. Some Russian weapons have also performed poorly in the battlefield, according to Western analysts.
The broader US-India defence partnership, which includes intelligence sharing and joint military exercises, continues without hiccups, one of the Indian officials said. India also remains open to scaling back on oil imports from Russia and is open to making deals elsewhere, including the US, if it can get similar prices, according to two other Indian sources.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
Pakistan, India should talk before it is too late
Listen to article A dove by obsession, I had been campaigning for peace inside-out. Hoping to see serenity in the region has led me to be part of the yesteryears rubbing of shoulders of Who's Who from the civil society under the Track2.5 informal intellectual meddling, between Pakistan and India. I just tried to push the envelope through my intangible journalistic input. Those days are now mere footnotes in history, and the evolving relationship between the two countries is one of hate and otherness. Unfortunately, it has little or no room for any accommodation. Perhaps, Napoleon Bonaparte was unheard of in this part of the world who believed that one has to live with geography, and ignoring the ground realities of neighbourhood is tantamount to disaster. It's now years that Pakistan and India are in an uneasy peace, and are not talking. Their diplomatic interactions are at the lowest ebb, rather infructuous. Missions on either side of the divide are without High Commissioners for years, and are being run on an ad hoc basis with no care and concern for those who might be in need of instant consular assistance. That's a callous approach towards their respective citizens. Issuance of visas to divided families and genuine travelers in exigency is a cumbersome task. State-centrism has been in perpetual confrontation since the Pahalgam calamity. The subsequent four-day war in May has hardened their positions, and pundits of doom predict another showdown in weeks to come. India is not interested in a dialogue, despite Pakistan's overtures, even on issues of existential crisis. Efforts on the part of the world community to make them talk have hit snags. One such initiative was of President Donald Trump who, on the euphoria of his peace-making, offered to mediate between the two sides after he had brokered a ceasefire in their May duel. The offer has fallen on deaf ears in Delhi, irrespective of the fact that Islamabad was hoping to see light at the end of the tunnel. India's premise of hiding behind bilateralism when it comes to multilateralism is a ploy, and has hampered any headway in normalising relations to this day. To count a few irritants, Pakistan is facing a water embargo as Delhi unilaterally abrogated the 1960 Indus Water Treaty. The flow of water to the lower riparian state is now politicised, in contravention of International Law, and could be a prelude to another military brawl as it is a matter of life and death for 240 million subjects. Last but not least is the pestering mistrust wherein each side is blaming the other for cross-border terrorism footprints. The revoking, likewise, of Articles 370 and 35A on August 5, 2019, which granted special rights to the people of Jammu & Kashmir, has jeopardised ties, and nothing seems to be plausible until the same is rescinded by India. Pakistan's stance is that it violates not only bilateral conventions but also UN resolutions on the disputed state. Things have boiled down to such a misery that even Pakistan is now talking of pulling out of Simla Agreement, a landmark piece of bilateral understanding signed in 1972, as a disheartened rejoinder to India's suspension of IWT. Is there a way forward? For how long will this stalemate come to haunt not only regional peace and stability but also geo-economics that is going down the drain? Trans-regional multibillion dollar projects such as BRI, CPEC, CASA-1000 and TAPI are in doldrums. That is so because India and Pakistan are not at peace, and refuse to see from the same prism of commonality. SAARC and SCO too are victims of this bilateral bullfight. Less to talk of the India-Pakistan-Iran (IPI) pipeline that faced abortion owing to realpolitik. This disconnect at the state level has brought prospects of trade and connectivity to a naught, providing oxygen to hardliners who are out to capitalise on animosity. India as a responsible emerging power should be empathetic to its neighbours, especially Pakistan. It's high time for the brainy South Bloc in New Delhi to realise that making permanent peace with Pakistan is a sine qua non for its own rise and stability. The xenophobic attitude of India towards Pakistan is costing it dearly in a strategic sense, and the political currency that is being derived from it is immaterial for a billion-plus egalitarian Indians in the long run. India's enthusiasm to escort the United States as part of QUAD and contain China is rapidly backfiring. As a politically reshaped South Asia is emerging, it is putting India in a tight corner. Delhi has suffered a military setback with China in recent years, and saw its clout decimate at the hands of Pakistan too in its May 2025 expedition. Thus, the status quo that abhors each other has kept both countries in a state of confrontation for decades at the altar of its citizens. This is where a proactive role of civil society, intelligentsia and political parties is desired to come up with a narrative that is pluralistic and logical and one that leads from the front in normalising relations. That is what diplomacy is all about. Pakistan's civil-military leadership in 2022 had come up with a chronicle, wherein it was stated officially that Islamabad was willing to talk on all irritants, and the issue of Kashmir could wait for its turn. Likewise, the enthusiasm that was expressed by both the countries in realising Musharraf's Four-Point Plan – proposing softening of LoC; self-governance/autonomy but not total independence of Kashmir; demilitarisation of borders; and joint management and supervision by both the states – can be an ideal start even today. For that to happen, the populace of India must shun the creeping in of Hindutva in its state edifice and, likewise, Pakistan's political voices must assert themselves for realising their manifesto in foreign policy. As the BJP nurses a jaundiced attitude, other political entities of India especially the Congress, the Leftist, the Communists, the regional parties and the Dalits must rise for a cause of secure regionalism. These two course corrections are indispensable if peace has to take roots. It's time to talk it out unconditionally, and without any delay in all statesmanship. Otherwise, a few more decades will be consumed in abomination.
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
Advantage China, Pakistan
Listen to article "Virtually alone in the world, Pakistan seems to have played its cards right with President Donald Trump," says Bloomberg. The same day The New York Times published an article to explain how Indian relationship took an ugly turn with the US, under Trump. The NYT headline sums up the situation like this: "India's Modi left soul-searching after failed courtships of Xi and Trump." This was quite spectacular given India became the darling of the US in recent years as successive administrations in Washington saw New Delhi as central to its strategy to contain China. But developments of the past few months have threatened to unravel the years of investment in the relationship. Trump is unpredictable as we all know, yet few would have imagined he would publicly ridicule his "best friend" Modi. What went wrong with them? There were different explanations. But the seeds of discord were sown in September last year when Prime Minister Modi was on a visit to the US. Biden was still at the helm as lame duck President and elections were only a few months away. Trump then announced that his "great friend" Modi would join him at a public rally. But Modi never turned up. It was reported that Modi was planning to meet both Presidential candidates. However, his meeting with Kamala Harris, the Democrat candidate, was cancelled at the last minute. Modi's aide advised him not to meet Trump as this would send a wrong signal. Also, Indians thought Trump might not have great chances to make it to the White House. So, Modi played safe and bet on Kamala, who has Indian heritage. But election results proved otherwise. Trump returned to the White House with a thumping majority, sweeping swing states. Modi already knew that he rebuffed Trump's invitation. Therefore, in order to control damage, he rushed to the White House and was among the first few leaders who had a meeting with Trump. On the face of it, everything seemed fine. But discussions behind the scenes were not pleasant. According to media reports quoting Indian officials, Trump treated Modi with disdain. He pressured him to buy US weapons and oil. Modi came to the White House in order to mend ties with Trump and request him to exempt India from trade tariffs and other restrictions. But Trump in a joint press conference later dismissed those demands, termed India as the biggest exploiter in trade with the US. That was the first indication that the Howdy-Modi era was over. Back home, critics started questioning Modi's ill-timed visit to the White House. As Trump was preparing to upend the eight decades' old global trade order, another military standoff in South Asia was brewing after the April 22 Pahalgam attack. Initially, the US showed little interest, saying it was a matter between the two neighbours. When India launched missile strikes deep inside Pakistani mainland, Pakistan responded befittingly. In a matter of few minutes, Pakistan shot down 6 Indian fighter jets including the French-made Rafale. That shook the world as to how Pakistan with a weak economy and many vulnerabilities took on the bigger neighbour. The Trump administration soon began to realise that the situation was heading towards an all-out war. Then the US got directly involved and eventually brokered a ceasefire. Pakistan publicly acknowledged Trump's role while India was adamant the truce happened as a result of bilateral efforts. Pakistan's befitting response raised its profile in Washington and other western capitals. Trump, who brands himself as peacemaker, wanted to take the credit. In an unprecedented move, he invited Pakistan's Army Chief to the White House for luncheon meeting. If reports are to be believed he wanted to invite Modi too probably to arrange a meeting with General Asim Munir. Modi refused, dealing a fatal blow to their much-touted friendship. India is now scrambling to safeguard its interests. India has reached out to China for this purpose. Meanwhile, the fast changing geostrategic situation has handed great advantage to both China and Pakistan.
Business Recorder
4 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Trump says to move homeless people ‘far' from Washington
President Donald Trump said Sunday that homeless people must be moved 'far' from Washington, after days of musing about taking federal control of the US capital where he has falsely suggested crime is rising. The Republican billionaire has announced a press conference for Monday in which he is expected to reveal his plans for Washington – which is run by the locally elected government of the District of Columbia under congressional oversight. It is an arrangement Trump has long publicly chafed at. He has threatened to federalize the city and give the White House the final say in how it is run. Trump demands new US census excluding undocumented immigrants 'I'm going to make our Capital safer and more beautiful than it ever was before,' the president posted on his Truth Social platform Sunday. 'The Homeless have to move out, IMMEDIATELY. We will give you places to stay, but FAR from the Capital,' he continued, adding that criminals in the city would be swiftly imprisoned. 'It's all going to happen very fast,' he said. Washington is ranked 15th on a list of major US cities by homeless population, according to government statistics from last year. While thousands of people spend each night in shelters or on the streets, the figure are down from pre-pandemic levels. Earlier this week Trump also threatened to deploy the National Guard as part of a crackdown on what he falsely says is rising crime in Washington. Violent crime in the capital fell in the first half of 2025 by 26 percent compared with a year earlier, police statistics show. The city's crime rates in 2024 were already their lowest in three decades, according to figures produced by the Justice Department before Trump took office. 'We are not experiencing a crime spike,' Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser said Sunday on MSNBC. While the mayor, a Democrat, was not critical of Trump in her remarks, she said 'any comparison to a war torn country is hyperbolic and false.' Trump's threat to send in the National Guard comes weeks after he deployed California's military reserve force into Los Angeles to quell protests over immigration raids, despite objections from local leaders and law enforcement. The president has frequently mused about using the military to control America's cities, many of which are under Democratic control and hostile to his nationalist impulses.
