Trump is aiming for Pakistan-style compliance from India, but his plan is not working

Economic Times

8 hours ago

Synopsis
Amidst rising tensions, the US-India trade relationship faces turbulence as Trump's administration imposes tariffs, allegedly to pressure India on geopolitical issues like Russian oil imports. India views these actions as an infringement on its sovereignty, resisting demands to compromise on agriculture, patent laws and military sourcing.
India's refusal to play a compliant role, unlike Pakistan, frustrates Trump. "Trump wants a vessel like Pakistan. India refuses to behave like one." That blunt assessment from Ajay Srivastava, founder of the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI), captures the essence of the US-India trade saga: it's less about economics than geopolitics. While headlines focus on tariffs and trade deficits, the underlying story is about power, leverage and sovereignty. Speaking to Economic Times, Srivastava explains, "Washington expects compliance, and India is not yielding."
Trump, who is set to meet Russian leader Vladimir Putin on Friday at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska, has long framed tariffs as a tool to 'fix trade deficits,' but India's case suggests a different motive.
On August 7, the US announced it would raise tariffs on Indian goods from 25% to 50%, citing Delhi's purchase of Russian oil. India called the move 'unfair' and 'unjustified,' with the new rate set to take effect on August 27. The White House framed the tariffs as a way to cut Russia's energy revenues and pressure Vladimir Putin toward a ceasefire. With this increase, India becomes the most heavily taxed US trading partner in Asia, joining Brazil which faces similar steep tariffs amid tense bilateral relations.
The economic stakes for India are high. In 2024, India exported $87 billion worth of goods to the US. According to US Census Bureau data for May 2025, imports from India stood at $9.43 billion, while US exports to India were $3.82 billion, resulting in a US goods trade deficit, or an Indian surplus, of roughly $5.6 billion. If the 50% tariffs remain in place, nearly all of India's annual exports to the US could become commercially unviable. Meanwhile, the US continues to run a $45.7 billion goods trade deficit with India, yet these tariffs disproportionately affect Indian exports compared with goods from other countries.For Srivastava, the message is clear: 'Trade deficit is just for the namesake. It's about forcing countries to fall in line with a geopolitical agenda.' India imports roughly 20% of its GDP in goods, spanning petroleum, machinery and electronics, yet Washington appears less concerned with trade imbalances than with pressuring India to compromise on sovereignty.Agriculture and dairy have emerged as key sticking points in India-US trade talks, which collapsed earlier this month. On August 7, Prime Minister Narendra Modi declared, 'India will never compromise on the well-being of its farmers, dairy producers and fishermen.' New Delhi has consistently resisted US pressure to open these sectors, arguing that doing so would threaten millions of small farmers. Historically, India has kept agriculture largely off the table in trade agreements to safeguard domestic communities.According to Srivastava, US demands extend far beyond tariffs: opening government procurement, diluting patent laws that could make medicines costlier, limiting future digital taxes, and shifting military sourcing to the US. 'Even if we open agri and dairy, no trade deal will happen with this. Not a trade issue. They want you to open your government procurement, dilute patent laws, commit to never charge digital tax in future, buy military from the US, the list is endless,' he says.He adds, 'Trump imposed 50% tariffs on Brazil partly over politics and partly because Brazil asked Twitter to remove anti-Brazil content. Records show India generates even more such requests, so he could use that as an excuse too. He can conjure unlimited reasons to impose tariffs if he's unhappy. My sense is he doesn't want a partner in India, he wants a vassal. India refuses to play that role; it insists on an equal partnership. That's the basic problem.'The US approach to Russian oil imports is uneven. China, Russia's largest crude buyer, faces no comparable tariff threats, while India is under heavy pressure. 'Even if the US demanded zero imports from Russia, India's imports would fall anyway due to economic circumstances,' notes Srivastava. European and US bans on petroleum products derived from Russian crude are already reducing India's imports, independent of Washington's pressure.This selective approach reflects a broader pattern in US trade policy. Brazil, for example, faced a 50% tariff despite running a surplus with the US, largely over political disagreements including its stance on Venezuela and former President Bolsonaro. Venezuela itself is under secondary sanctions for buyers of its oil, though some firms, like Chevron, have received exemptions. These cases suggest that political alignment often outweighs economic considerations.Trade between Russia and the US has dropped roughly 90% since the Kremlin's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, though last year the US still imported $3 billion worth of Russian goods, according to the US Bureau of Economic Analysis and Census Bureau. Meanwhile, the European Union, a partner in sanctions against Russia, imported $41.9 billion (36 billion euros) of Russian goods in 2024, Eurostat data shows.While the US pressures India to cut Russian oil imports, market forces and global regulations are already reshaping trade flows. Europe and US bans on petroleum products ensure India's imports will decline regardless of Washington's actions. Srivastava cautions, however, that the US may find new reasons for tariffs, keeping India under continuous scrutiny.India has built a buffer against such pressures. Exports constitute roughly 20% of GDP, compared with 90% for Vietnam, a country far more vulnerable to US-imposed shocks. 'Vietnam will suffer more. We will suffer, but we will absorb it properly. Country will bounce back. All we need to do is not to surrender,' Srivastava notes.Domestically, US consumers will also feel the impact of tariffs. About 90% of prescriptions in the US rely on generics imported from India. While the total trade value may be under $10 billion, disruption affects the majority of prescriptions, potentially raising prices significantly. Companies may eventually source alternatives over three to four months, but the immediate effect is inflationary.'Indian exports will suffer, but we need to consider whether it's better to endure this and use it to push delayed reforms, like diversifying exports, rather than falling into a bad deal. This isn't really about trade; it's about surrendering sovereignty,' Srivastava adds.For Srivastava, Trump's broader strategy is political theatre. 'Basically, he wanted to hit China. He couldn't, so he has to show his domestic voters that he is a big man, that a bully can show strength by hitting someone. He couldn't hit China, so let's hit India, that's the only thing.'With China, Trump launched a trade war over the large trade deficit, but Beijing hit back by restricting supplies of critical materials, he noted. 'India hasn't used those levers, which is why Washington expected Delhi to yield immediately.'India's refusal to play a compliant role, unlike Pakistan, frustrates Trump. At the same time, India maintains strategic autonomy, engaging with Russia on defence, limiting deep Chinese investment to marketing and distribution, and managing relations with the US on equal footing. 'We are a big country, big economy, and so we have to have workable, good relations with everyone, without being in anybody's camp,' Srivastava explains.Even pre-Galwan, Chinese investment has been superficial. 'China doesn't invest in deep manufacturing. They will not supply any technology. They will invest in marketing of cars, garments, two, $5 billion here and there, but we don't want that. So we have to evaluate very carefully,' he says.'We can have targeted strategic relationships, like with Russia for defence, but moving closer to China is complicated. There's the border dispute and a $100 billion trade deficit,' he adds.India's export-oriented economy, diversified supply chains and robust domestic market allow it to absorb short-term shocks while resisting long-term concessions. 'All we need to do is not enter into any relationship that costs us the medium or long term,' Srivastava says.The takeaway is clear: Trump's tariffs are less about trade and more about leverage. Every tweet, every tariff threat, every demand is a political signal designed to demonstrate strength to domestic voters. 'Every day he abuses us on Twitter. That shows India has entered his mind,' Srivastava notes.India's response emphasises sovereignty, resilience and strategic foresight. "Trade deal is not a trade deal. It's about bargaining for your sovereignty. And India is not bargaining."