
India needs to find its own ‘Trump whisperers' to deal with the US tariff threat
While India will probably avoid the worst-case outcome, the level of surprise indicates that New Delhi lacks high-level advocates in Washington with the inside track. As a result, it is still struggling to grasp how US President Donald Trump makes decisions, or how he views both trade and the Indo-US equation. Until those inter-linked problems are sorted out, bilateral relations will continue to bounce between the highs of periodic direct contact by the two national leaders, and regular lows in between.
India's diplomatic and business communities continue to wonder how things went so wrong between the two governments in recent months. The answer to this question lies in New Delhi's struggle to adapt to Mr Trump's commercial (rather than diplomatic) approach to dealmaking.
The tariff threats to India come from two directions: the Russia-Ukraine war and the emergence of competition – as opposed to co-operation – between major trading powers facing the threat of tariffs from Washington.
The war in Ukraine is the more volatile of the two factors, with the Trump administration's policy veering from Moscow's point of view, then to that of Kyiv and Brussels, and now back to Moscow's following the US-Russia summit in Alaska last Friday. This latest swing is good news for New Delhi, as the threat of secondary sanctions for buying Russian oil is likely to recede at least temporarily. But even if (or more likely when) the pendulum swings again, it is unlikely that the US will be maximalist in its demands. Any rapid and major change in Indian oil purchases would put strains on global oil supply and send prices shooting up for American voters, something that no administration wants to see.
The battle between the EU and UK on the one hand, and Russia on the other, to influence Mr Trump on the war in Ukraine also provides an essential window into the challenges of diplomacy with the administration. Much has been made in commentary about the importance of top-level chemistry, and the natural advantage of strong leaders such as Russian President Vladimir Putin winning Mr Trump's respect and agreement. However, Russia's example goes to show why this just isn't enough.
Mr Putin's ability to effectively communicate Russia's perspective is extremely powerful. But the lack of any other interlocutors who can engage with Mr Trump as persuasively means that Moscow struggles to build momentum. In contrast, the EU and UK have found a range of 'Trump whisperers', people below the head-of-state level who understand the US President. It is these contacts who have managed to stay appraised of Mr Trump's ever-shifting priorities and perspectives and convince him of the relevance of their positions to those priorities. Until India can find its own Trump whisperers, the positive, can-do Trump-Modi personal equation will not be enough to keep the bilateral relationship on the rails.
The other half of the tariff threat is closely tied to this problem. Mr Modi's productive meeting with Mr Trump in February gave India's notoriously tough negotiators a sense of what it would take to craft an agreement that would satisfy both sides. But one of the Trump administration's greatest successes is that it has created competition rather than co-operation between countries facing the threat of US tariffs.
Over the course of the summer, the larger trade partners of the US – led by the EU and UK – showed a new willingness to cross their own previous red lines to make deals with Washington. Mr Trump seems to regard it as axiomatic that these developments shifted the baseline of expectations for all others who followed. In this view, it would be up to India (currently only the US's 10th-largest trade partner) to try to improve its offer and match the depth of concessions granted by the larger US trade partners.
Despite all this, India and the EU find themselves in a similar boat. The Trump administration does not view either entity to be dominant security actors in their regions (unlike say China, Russia or Israel). This magnifies his annoyance when they offer a narrative that contradicts his own – for example, the EU's constant reminders that Russia is the aggressor in the Ukraine war, or New Delhi's rejection of Mr Trump's claim that he mediated the end of the recent hostilities between itself and Pakistan earlier this year.
Similarly, the US President's anger with European and Indian trade surpluses with Washington is complemented by a lack of fear over their economic advantage. In contrast, Mexico, China and Canada have greater political leverage than the EU or India that goes beyond the sheer volume of trade with the US.
These exporters supply daily goods from food to energy and mid-to-low-range cars and phones that have a critical direct impact on the everyday lives of average American voters. Any trade war brings serious political costs for the Trump administration. Indian exports, on the other hand, range from engineering goods to gems and jewellery that do not carry the same risks. Neither do luxury European goods, whether cheese, wine or limousines. The one exception is India's supply of generic medications, which have become a cornerstone of American health care; a canny Mr Trump may extend a temporary waiver to generate pressure while avoiding backlash.
In short, the strength of India's hand in dealing with the Trump administration is fundamentally different than it looked at the start of the US President's second term, when the new rules of the power game were just beginning to emerge. But on the other hand, the European experience suggests that even a so-so hand can be played to great advantage once those new power rules have been understood and applied.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The National
27 minutes ago
- The National
New York appeals court throws out $464m civil fraud penalty against Donald Trump
A US court on Thursday threw out a $464 million civil penalty against President Donald Trump imposed by a judge who found he fraudulently inflated his personal worth, calling the sum "excessive" but upholding the judgment against him. Five judges of the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court said the fine "violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution", which prohibits excessive or cruel punishments and penalties. The panel was sharply divided, issuing 323 pages of concurring and dissenting opinions with no majority. Rather, some judges endorsed parts of their colleagues' findings while denouncing others, enabling the court to rule. Judge Arthur Engoron ruled against Mr Trump in February last year at the height of his campaign to retake the White House, which coincided with several active criminal prosecutions that the Republican slammed as "lawfare". Mr Trump celebrated the Thursday decision, calling the case a "political witch hunt". "A great win for America," he wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform. In a subsequent post, he wrote: "This was a Case of Election Interference by the City and State trying to show, illegally, that I did things that were wrong when, in fact, everything I did was absolutely correct and, even, perfect." When Mr Engoron originally ruled against Mr Trump, he ordered the mogul-turned-politician to pay $464 million, including interest, while his sons Eric and Don Jr were told to hand over more than $4 million each. The judge found that Mr Trump and his company had unlawfully inflated his wealth and manipulated the value of properties to obtain favourable bank loans or insurance terms. Mr Engoron's other punishments, upheld by the appeals court, have been on pause during Mr Trump's appeal, and the President was able to hold off collection of the money by posting a $175 million bond. Alongside the financial hit to Mr Trump, the judge also banned him from running businesses for three years, which the President repeatedly referred to as a "corporate death penalty". State Attorney General Letitia James, who brought the initial case, can now appeal to the state's highest court, the New York Court of Appeals. 'Plainly, her ultimate goal was not 'market hygiene' ... but political hygiene, ending with the derailment of President Trump's political career and the destruction of his real estate business," one of the judges, appointed by a Republican governor to the bench, wrote. "The voters have obviously rendered a verdict on his political career. This bench today unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business.' The civil fraud case was just one of several legal obstacles for Mr Trump as he campaigned, won and segued to a second term as president. On January 10, he was sentenced in his criminal hush-money case to what's known as an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction on the books but sparing him jail, probation, a fine or other punishment. He is appealing the conviction. And in December, a federal appeals court upheld a jury's finding that Mr Trump sexually abused writer E Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and later defamed her, affirming a $5 million judgment against him. The appeals court declined in June to reconsider. Mr Trump still can try to get the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. The President is also appealing a subsequent verdict that requires him to pay Ms Carroll $83.3 million for additional defamation claims.


Zawya
2 hours ago
- Zawya
Egypt, India discuss expanding economic, investment cooperation
Egypt's Minister of Investment and Foreign Trade Hassan El-Khatib met with Suresh Reddy, the Indian Ambassador to Cairo, to discuss ways to strengthen cooperation in trade and investment, as per a statement. The meeting also addressed opportunities to support future partnerships and reviewed issues of mutual interest. El-Khatib emphasized the depth of bilateral relations between Egypt and India, underscoring the importance of translating their longstanding cooperation into practical projects that serve both economies. He highlighted prospects for increasing Indian investments in the Egyptian market, enhancing trade exchanges, and opening new channels for cooperation between business communities in both countries. The minister outlined Egypt's investment potential across production and service sectors, citing the availability of skilled labor, engineering expertise, and competitive wages. He also pointed to Egypt's wide market access through numerous free and preferential trade agreements with major regional and global blocs. For his part, Reddy reaffirmed India's commitment to strengthening ties with Egypt, noting the historic relations between the two countries. He stressed the significance of Egypt as a regional industrial and export hub and as a key gateway to African markets. © 2025 All Rights Reserved Arab Finance For Information Technology Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (


Khaleej Times
2 hours ago
- Khaleej Times
India to play against Pakistan in Asia Cup, sports ministry confirms
Ending intense speculations amid media and public debates, the government of India announced on Thursday that the Indian team would play their Asia Cup match against Pakistan in Dubai on September 14. The Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports also clarified that India would continue to play Pakistan in any multi-team sports event, while reiterating that the ban on bilateral games between the two countries would remain in place. "Insofar as bilateral sports events in each other's country are concerned, Indian teams will not be participating in competitions in Pakistan. Nor will we permit Pakistani teams to play in India," the ministry's statement said. Indian media and opposition leaders demanded that the cricket board (BCCI) boycott the match against Pakistan amid the ongoing political tension following the deadly Pahalgam terror attack, which led to a four-day military conflict between the two countries in May. But the government statement on Thursday has cleared the Indian team to take on Pakistan in the high-voltage Asia Cup Group A match at Dubai International Stadium on September 14. "With regard to international and multilateral events, in India or abroad, we are guided by the practices of international sports bodies and the interests of our own sportspersons. It is also relevant to take into account India's emergence as a credible venue to host international sports events,' the statement said. "Accordingly, Indian teams and individual players will take part in international events that also have teams or players from Pakistan. Similarly, Pakistani players and teams will be able to participate in such multilateral events hosted by India.' With the ambitious goal of hosting the 2036 Summer Olympics, the Indian government has decided against bowing to public pressure with a practical step. In an interview with Khaleej Times last month, veteran Pakistani sports broadcaster Shahid Hashmi predicted that India would eventually allow the cricket team to play the Asia Cup match against Pakistan. 'It's in the International Olympic Committee (IOC) charter that you need to play and host every IOC member nation. So if you want to bid for the 2036 Olympics, but don't want to play cricket with Pakistan in an international event, it will have serious consequences for India's ambitions to host the Olympics,' Hashmi had said. India's Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports announced on Thursday that the country would follow all international sports protocols. "To position India as a preferred destination for hosting international sporting events, the visa process for sportspersons, team officials, technical personnel, and office-bearers of International Sports Governing Bodies shall be simplified,' the statement said. 'In respect of office-bearers of International Sports Governing Bodies, a multi-entry visa shall be granted on a priority basis for the duration of their official tenure, subject to a maximum period of five years. This shall facilitate their smooth movement into and within the country, in accordance with international norms. Due protocol and courtesies, as per established practice, shall be extended to the Heads of International Sports Governing Bodies during their visits to India." India, which was scheduled to host the 2025 Asia Cup, brought the tournament to the UAE due to the recent conflict with Pakistan. The tournament will get underway on September 9 and the final is scheduled for September 28. India and Pakistan are drawn in Group A with Oman and the UAE. In Group B, Afghanistan will clash with Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Hong Kong. The top two teams from each group will qualify for the Super Four Stage in this T20 event — a dress rehearsal for next year's Twenty20 World Cup. The Zayed Cricket Stadium in Abu Dhabi will host eight matches, while the Dubai International Stadium will stage 11 games, including the final on September 28. Meanwhile, the Pakistan team have already arrived here ahead of their tri-series against Afghanistan and the hosts UAE. The historic Sharjah Cricket Stadium will host the tri-series from August 29 to September 7, giving the three teams ideal preparation for the Asia Cup in Dubai and Abu Dhabi.