logo
Commentary: Howdy Modi and Namaste Trump were high points. It's been downhill for US-India ties since

Commentary: Howdy Modi and Namaste Trump were high points. It's been downhill for US-India ties since

CNAa day ago
SINGAPORE: In 2019 and 2020, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and then-US President Donald Trump took the stage together in front of roaring rallies in packed stadiums in their respective countries, holding hands and seemingly best friends forever.
The 'Howdy Modi' rally in Houston attracted over 50,000 attendees, and the 'Namaste Trump' event in Ahmedabad drew more than 100,000.
But that was during Mr Trump's first term as president.
Now deep into his second term, Mr Trump is more emboldened in the exercise of raw transactional power. And the US' rosy relationship with India, once touted as the strategic partnership of our time, has abruptly hit the rocks.
The unravelling is not to be underestimated; it combines a clash of both geopolitical and domestic interests that will be hard to reconcile, and endangers decades of painstaking diplomatic work.
'I AM READY TO PAY THE HEAVY PRICE': MODI
The first signs of strain in their bromance were already visible during Mr Modi's visit to the US in February.
Although Mr Trump said he was thrilled to welcome 'his friend' Mr Modi back to the White House, he did not hesitate to publicly rebuke India's "unfair, very strong tariffs", calling them a "big problem".
After months of negotiations, by July a trade deal was supposedly ready. Instead, President Trump slapped a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods – and then an additional 25 per cent as punishment for New Delhi's continued purchase of Russian oil.
The sticking point was not just Russian oil – which may not have been as big an issue if Mr Trump had succeeded in getting Russia and Ukraine to agree to a ceasefire deal he had promised his base. It was India's reluctance to allow market access for American agricultural and dairy produce.
It is a fact that India needs internal market reforms; even as the economy grows at over 6 per cent, unemployment and underemployment remain chronic. Yet opening up agriculture and dairy to foreign competition would be untenable politically. Mr Modi faces a legislative election in Bihar, a largely agricultural state, in November.
India will never compromise on the interests of farmers, fishermen and dairy farmers, said Mr Modi last week. 'I know personally, I will have to pay a heavy price for it, but I am ready for it.'
As India celebrates its 79th year of Independence on Friday (Aug 15), many in the strategic community in New Delhi are rethinking the country's equation with the US following the tariffs, plus the notoriously mercurial president's recent jibe about India's 'dead' economy.
Likewise in Washington DC, hardline America First ideologues with a binary view of the rest of the world that leaves little latitude for empathy are uncomfortable with precisely the strategic autonomy that India has been pursuing, in the shape of continued ties with Iran and, more importantly in this case, Russia.
Mr Trump also insists he was instrumental in stopping the limited but intense clashes in May between India and Pakistan – a claim India denies. Mr Trump followed up with a two-hour private lunch with Pakistan's military chief Asim Munir at the White House. These events have left a sour taste in New Delhi and inflamed nationalistic public sentiment in India.
Mr Munir returned to the US last week to attend a black-tie dinner for the retirement of General Michael Kurilla, the commander of US military forces in the Middle East. There, he spoke of a new dimension in US-Pakistan relations, and almost casually warned of nuclear war.
HARDENING POSITIONS ON BOTH SIDES
Certainly, the US-India relationship has historically not been entirely rosy, even though there is some fundamental ideological convergence; India and the US are both liberal democracies in recent years trending towards the illiberal.
The US security establishment has long danced with Pakistan, in part to try to balance China's influence in that country. This has historically rankled India.
Additionally, Mr Trump sees the growing BRICS group as a threat especially to the hegemony of the US dollar. He also seems fixated on cementing a legacy with the Nobel Peace Prize; for good or bad, it is not possible to separate the personal from the political in the case of Mr Trump.
The India-Pakistan episode, with New Delhi cold to his ceasefire claims, may have left a sour taste for him as well.
Meanwhile, domestic politics are hardening positions on both sides. Mr Trump was voted to power for a second time by a base that wants to revert to what it widely sees as core American values – white, conservative, patriarchal, Christian – and the country remains bitterly divided. Mr Modi's base largely sees its core value as a conservative and inherently strongly patriarchal Hindu identity.
But the US-India relationship is also much more broad-based than it was during the Cold War. Shared concerns about an assertive China have helped nudge them closer.
The US-India Civil Nuclear Agreement of 2008 was a significant turning point. The four-member Quad brings together Japan, Australia, and the US with India in a loose arrangement. The annual joint naval exercise Malabar hosted by India includes US, Japanese, Indian and Australian naval forces.
Mr Trump's unpredictability has begun to revive doubts. Old contentious issues - Pakistan, trade and Indian protectionist tariffs with one eye on its vulnerable farmers, and of course Russia - are back on the table, wrapped in the heightened rhetoric of nationalism.
In this new environment, some storms even if they pass can be imprinted in public memory.
In India in particular, doubt and distrust of the US will linger in the public mind even when Mr Trump is no longer in office. That means the US, while valued as a hedge against China, may go back to being at arm's length, at least publicly, even as strategic security and military cooperation will quietly continue.
TOUCHY RELATIONSHIPS
In a recent essay in Foreign Affairs, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace scholar and former US official Ashley J Tellis - one of the architects of the 2008 civil nuclear cooperation agreement - argued that instead of pushing for 'multipolarity', Indian leaders should align more closely with the US given that, among other things, India can only hope to fend off China with American backing.
It is a compelling argument and has triggered much debate in New Delhi and Washington DC. There is a counterargument, however - that India's geopolitical environment is complex, volatile and not easily understood by the West. With neighbours ranging from friendly to unstable to hostile, India feels it must hedge. It cannot, and will not, disengage or diminish its relationship with Russia.
And though China has backed Pakistan, India and China are also beginning to mend relations after a low point in 2020 when they clashed at Galwan on their Himalayan border. Mr Modi is due to visit Tianjin on Aug 31 for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit, where he will meet Chinese President Xi Jinping.
To be sure there are issues that could torpedo the touchy relationship – the succession of the Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama looms large – so there are likely to be limits to India-China detente. Nevertheless, Chinese state media has been playing up Mr Modi's upcoming visit.
One may have to wait until the annual Quad summit, to be hosted by New Delhi in the last quarter of this year, to gauge whether India and the US can return to the comfort zone of the first Trump, and subsequent Joe Biden administrations. Whether Mr Trump attends will be a key indicator.
Meanwhile however, ironically for the US, recent developments reinforce precisely what India believes – that it is too big to be pushed around, and it cannot depend on the US but needs to be multi-aligned, as one pole in a multipolar world.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi to visit India from Aug 18, China's foreign ministry says
Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi to visit India from Aug 18, China's foreign ministry says

Straits Times

time21 minutes ago

  • Straits Times

Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi to visit India from Aug 18, China's foreign ministry says

Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox BEIJING – Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi will visit India from Aug 18 to Aug 20, China's foreign ministry said in a statement on Aug 16 , for talks about a disputed border in the Himalayas. This is only the second such meeting since a deadly clash in 2020 between Indian and Chinese troops at the border. Relations between the two Asian giants have been thawing since an agreement in October 2024 on patrolling their Himalayan border, easing a five-year standoff that had hurt trade, investment and air travel. Relations were further boosted in recent weeks amid new tensions in India-US ties after decades of progress , analysts said, as US President Donald Trump imposed a 50 per cent tariff on Indian exports to the United States – one of the highest levels among Washington's strategic partners. The long-time rivals China and India are quietly and cautiously strengthening ties against the backdrop of Mr Trump's unpredictable approach to both. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is set to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping at the end of August when he travels to China – his first visit in seven years – to attend the summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, a regional security bloc. REUTERS

The Boon Tat Street killing that continues to make Singapore rethink justice
The Boon Tat Street killing that continues to make Singapore rethink justice

Independent Singapore

time24 minutes ago

  • Independent Singapore

The Boon Tat Street killing that continues to make Singapore rethink justice

SINGAPORE: In 2017, the heart of Singapore's Central Business District was the scene of a killing that stunned lunchtime crowds — and later, split public opinion. Tan Nam Seng, a 69-year-old semi-retiree and founder of a successful shipping business, stabbed his 38-year-old son-in-law, Spencer Tuppani, three times in the chest at a Telok Ayer coffee shop. The incident was caught on CCTV, witnessed by passers-by, and ended with Tan calmly waiting for the police to arrive. As the details emerged in court, the story — and public sentiment — changed dramatically. A family and a business entwined Tan founded TNS Shipping in 1974, building it into a family-run enterprise. His three daughters worked for the company, and in 2005, his eldest daughter, Shyller, married Tuppani, who soon became a director and later CEO of the firm. Tuppani was credited with saving the company from collapse during the 2008 financial crisis, even selling personal assets to keep it afloat. By 2016, the business had recovered, and he brokered its sale for S$9 million. But the sale left Tan with only about S$450,000 for his shares — a sum that fueled deep resentment. Soon after, Tan discovered that his son-in-law was having an affair and had fathered two children with another woman, while still living under the same roof as his wife and in-laws. The family's private life was unravelling amid custody disputes, workplace suspensions, and public knowledge of the affair. Tan became convinced that Tuppani was manoeuvring to remove his daughters from the business and take full control. By mid-2017, Tan's mental state had deteriorated. He suffered from major depressive disorder, ruminating obsessively about his daughter's well-being and feeling powerless to protect his family. Sleep eluded him. Conversations failed. Meetings were avoided. On July 10, fate and fury collided. Spotting Tuppani at lunch, Tan retrieved a 22cm knife from the office pantry, walked to the coffee shop, and stabbed him three times in the chest. As Tuppani stumbled, Tan followed, stopping others from helping, and even kicking him twice before laying down the knife and waiting for the police. Three years later, Tan pleaded guilty to culpable homicide, the charge reduced in light of psychiatric findings that his depression, as a result of a tumultuous few years, had significantly impaired his judgment and impulse control — in the end, he was sentenced to eight-and-a-half years in prison. His jail term was backdated to the date of his arrest. With the usual one-third remission, The Straits Times reported in 2020 that he was expected to be released in about two-and-a-half years' time. Online, a wave of compassion emerged. Netizens acknowledged the taking of a life while also understanding the chain of betrayals and perceived injustices that had driven Tan to the edge of sanity. One particularly striking reflection read: 'Relying on official justice to be served by the institutions of the State is a social construct… I realised that recovery was not possible by legal means. And he could not rely on the State. The fact that he stood and waited for the Police says a lot. He was prepared to stand by his act… This case is an example of how to think and act without adhering to social constraints but do justice where the organs of government can't.' While most agreed that killing can never be condoned, many recognised that Tan's act came from a place of desperation and a human response to a system that, in his eyes, had failed him. Tan's case marks a notable moment in Singapore's legal history where mental health was weighed heavily in sentencing for a violent crime. Mental health continues to be a prevalent concern as many citizens are in the midst of battling rising stress levels, long work hours, a sleep deprivation crisis and the costs of living. The sentencing acknowledged that while the act was deliberate and deadly, it was also shaped by a mind besieged by illness. Tan passed away on Aug 10 at the age of 77. Many netizens were comforted by the reminder that the law is not immune to compassion — and that public opinion can see shades of humanity even in the darkest acts.

Pressure on Russia must be maintained and increased over Ukraine war, Norway says
Pressure on Russia must be maintained and increased over Ukraine war, Norway says

Straits Times

timean hour ago

  • Straits Times

Pressure on Russia must be maintained and increased over Ukraine war, Norway says

Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox Russian President Vladimir Putin (right) and US President Donald Trump following their meeting at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska, on Aug 15. OSLO - Russia must face more pressure over its war in Ukraine, Norway's foreign minister said on Aug 16, following a summit in Alaska between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin the day before. 'We must continue to put pressure on Russia, and even increase it, to give the clear signal to Russia that it must pay the price (for its invasion of Ukraine),' Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide told reporters in Oslo. The talks in Alaska showed that the Russian president is not looking for peace and wants to weaken Western unity, Czech Defence Minister Jana Cernochova said on Aug 16. 'The Trump-Putin talks in Alaska did not bring significant progress toward ending the war in Ukraine, but they confirmed that Putin is not seeking peace, but rather an opportunity to weaken Western unity and spread his propaganda,' she wrote on X, adding that the West must continue supporting Ukraine. REUTERS More to come.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store