India - US Tariff and Relations | News + Updates

[Vkdindian1]

You might still have to confront China but with less USA support,

What support did USA give? It sold military equipment that we bought from them and what we could afford. No free lunches for us unlike Pakistan got in the name of War on Terror. And is getting for F-16s even now.
Rafales aren’t adequate. India vs China is similar situation that Pakistan has with India. In a full fledged confrontation, India would fight for survival not for winning. We don’t need to match them one to one on anything. We need to create deterrence.
And it is in s**t state right now.

India needs both China and US. We haven’t delinked with them inspite of whatever issues we have or had with them. We will keep importing what we need and won’t take any knee jerk decision that would be bad for us.

Whatever, be the case has there been any major impact of US tariffs on India? Many Pak posters are mighty heartbroken due to Indian economy still doing well. I have only one thing to say - I told you so

 

[Vkdindian1]

Some of this is down to British white people having a unique "guilt complex" towards Indian origin folk, as if something is owed to your lot after "partition" already brought you far more than was ever earned.

British empire stole Trillions from us. We assure you that we will milk it back to the last drop.

Our diaspora is well entrenched and in much better position of strength unlike many others from South Asia. If they lean towards India more than others than it is but natural. No guilt here.

 

[Master Chief]

British empire stole Trillions from us. We assure you that we will milk it back to the last drop.

Our diaspora is well entrenched and in much better position of strength unlike many others from South Asia. If they lean towards India more than others than it is but natural. No guilt here.

Will enjoy discussing this with you on some other thread!

 

[r3alist]

What support did USA give? It sold military equipment that we bought from them and what we could afford. No free lunches for us unlike Pakistan got in the name of War on Terror. And is getting for F-16s even now.
Rafales aren’t adequate. India vs China is similar situation that Pakistan has with India. In a full fledged confrontation, India would fight for survival not for winning. We don’t need to match them one to one on anything. We need to create deterrence.
And it is in s**t state right now.

India needs both China and US. We haven’t delinked with them inspite of whatever issues we have or had with them. We will keep importing what we need and won’t take any knee jerk decision that would be bad for us.

Whatever, be the case has there been any major impact of US tariffs on India? Many Pak posters are mighty heartbroken due to Indian economy still doing well. I have only one thing to say - I told you so

You are going into overdrive to completely miss the point. The Indian economy has been improving for a while so it would be strange to suddenly find a place for angst on this.


A substantive relationship with the USA will need India to pivot decisively and meaningfully towards posturing against China, strategic altruism is over.

That should be clear

You will of course still have a relationship with America, you will still be important but the world has changed, just to give you the heads up...

As things are, your incoherent and insufficient military is not living up to the size of your nation and aspirations so you will lose out, you will lose out in terms of having less geopolitical capital to play all sides as you have been able to do previously.
America is clearly going protectionist so why would it offer you huge manufacturing, in China will not.

You cannot toggle between once acting as an indispensable global nation, dependent on others for advanced technology growth, insisting you belong on the top table but actually militarily you cannot or will not make your presence more meaningful.

After all , why did you stop your operation if no one compelled you.

You cannot detach the military from the economic with the USA going forward, the USA is as we can see finding ways to capture resources and dollars, they do not want India to remain in brics, they want India to detach from Russia, they have already got trade deals with other important Nations, China wants a chunk of your territory, good luck finding a middle ground, what do you have to bargain with, what are you willing to do

 

[Vkdindian1]

A substantive relationship with the USA will need India to pivot decisively and meaningfully towards posturing against China, strategic altruism is over.

That was never on offer. India has never played anybody’s proxy and is unlikely to start now. Thats why India hasn’t allowed any external forces to operate out of India. Previous US administrations understood this and accepted this equation. Has Trump understood this or not isn’t known because he has been doing erratic stuff with many nations. His current actions are being assumed to be with those concerns. Has he said it? No.

As things are, your incoherent and insufficient military is not living up to the size of your nation and aspirations so you will lose out

There is no incoherence here. Indian forces are doing what they need to. As I said, they aren’t under anyone and not need validation from anyone.

Please also understand that military might doesn’t come in isolation. It follows economic might. No pure security state is taken seriously because they can’t do s**t till a war starts. While, economic powers can keep playing games 24 x 7 x 365. Pure security states keep struggling with day to day survival. There are plenty of examples all around.

You cannot toggle between once acting as an indispensable global nation, dependent on others for advanced technology growth, insisting you belong on the top table but actually militarily you cannot or will not make your presence more meaningful.

Who decides on those parameters? No one. Each one has to carve a place for themselves and the route is via economy. And India is arriving. No one can stop it.

After all , why did you stop your operation if no one compelled you.

Did someone force you? Why do you assume that India was also forced because you were forced?

India never intended for a full fledged war. Had it been intended that way then force projection would have been done in the same manner. So, please spare this thread from chest thumping drama that has been going on on that thread.

You cannot detach the military from the economic with the USA going forward, the USA is as we can see finding ways to capture resources and dollars, they do not want India to remain in brics, they want India to detach from Russia, they have already got trade deals with other important Nations, China wants a chunk of your territory, good luck finding a middle ground, what do you have to bargain with, what are you willing to do

India has followed a certain path on geopolitical stage. It has evolved and become more pragmatic over the years. Few decades back, principled alliances were forged and many nations were shunned for military rule, dictatorship etc etc. Jaswant Singh made a pivot and decided to view each one independently. Thats how India decided to improve relations with US inspite of deep rooted suspicions due to US role in 1971 war. But, it has never put all eggs in one basket. We have maintained adequate space to make a change if required. That’s how US forces never put a foot on our soil. Trump has validated that policy. As far as China goes, it is a rising star and is the next hyper power. But that is still some time away.

Many people assume that subservience to US/China is the only way to survive.

No, it is not. So, it is my word against yours.

Let’s wait for a decade and we would know.

 

[Owaiz]

@r3alist bro

Your lack of relevancy in military affairs is a big reason why America is downgrading your importance economically,

You have misread the Indo-US relationship, having analysed it from the prism of US-PAK relations. It is primarily an economic relationship, not a military one. From a military point of view, all that US needs from IND is friendly neutrality i.e. that it shouldn't be militarily aligned to PRC or RUS. The reason is simple. IND isn't a worthwhile military power and will be of little use to US.

On the other hand, US PAK relationship is primarily a military one, not an economic one. US needs PAK military support for attaining its geopolitical objectives- the two Afghan wars (1979-90 and 2001-21) being key examples. The reason being PAK military's undisputable strategic nous. Economically of course PAK is no use at all to US, unless the copper and REE turn out to be substantial.

In short horses for courses. IND for economic benefits, PAK for military prowess.

Regards

As of now, the US is not deriving much economic benefits from India, at least based on the yardsticks that the Trump administration uses. Most US exports would be uncompetitive in India, even if India were to remove all import restrictions. That is why the supposedly unprecedented concessions that India is offering on trade have not been enough to move the needle. The only significant exceptions are energy, weapons and agriculture ( as the world's most populous country). These are also all strategic sectors that are linked to national security, which is why India has been so recalcitrant in making concessions. So, it would be an oversimplification to characterise the relationship as purely an economic one.

 

[Master Chief]

"India, however, said on Friday that the characterisation of the discussions between Delhi and Washington in the remarks made by Lutnick was "not accurate".

"India and the US were committed to negotiating a bilateral trade agreement as far back as 13 February last year. Since then both sides have held multiple rounds of negotiations to arrive at a balanced and mutually beneficial trade agreement. On several occasions, we have been close to a deal," foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters.

He added that Modi and Trump had spoken on the phone eight times last year, covering "covering different aspects of our wide-ranging partnership". "

BBC's Cherylann Molan.

So according to India, the statement from Lutnick was "not accurate". However, in the following text, nowhere has the Indian side denied the content of Lutnick's statement. Nowhere has India stated categorically that the events described by Lutnick were falsified.

On the contrary, after stating "not accurate", (which will no doubt satisfy the usual crowd of sycophants as a "rejection of US claims"), the Indian side has simply restated the general context that "talks were ongoing and at times we were close to a deal".

Getting very interesting for the casual observer.

But for Indians, is this really the dumbed down state of your nation?

That denials aren't even proper denials any more, but instead are loosely disguised statements of non-commital or even acquiescence?

Do Indian officials really think their electorate are that stupid?

 

[Owaiz]

US Commerce Secretary, New Delhi give differing accounts of breakdown in India trade talks​

https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-us-trade-deal-stalled-after-modi-did-not-call-trump-lutnick-says-2026-01-09/

Frankly, with a few exceptions like Marco Rubio, who seems to possess at least some integrity, Trump and most members of his cabinet have a talent for exaggeration and making things up. I would believe the account coming from almost all other world leaders over that coming from the Trump administration.

 

[Owaiz]

What support did USA give? It sold military equipment that we bought from them and what we could afford. No free lunches for us unlike Pakistan got in the name of War on Terror. And is getting for F-16s even now.
Rafales aren’t adequate. India vs China is similar situation that Pakistan has with India. In a full fledged confrontation, India would fight for survival not for winning. We don’t need to match them one to one on anything. We need to create deterrence.
And it is in s**t state right now.

India needs both China and US. We haven’t delinked with them inspite of whatever issues we have or had with them. We will keep importing what we need and won’t take any knee jerk decision that would be bad for us.

Whatever, be the case has there been any major impact of US tariffs on India? Many Pak posters are mighty heartbroken due to Indian economy still doing well. I have only one thing to say - I told you so

It is true that the Indian economy's macro indicators have held up so far after the US tariffs were imposed, but it does not mean they have not had major impacts. The Modi government provided a major fiscal stimulus through tax cuts and exports have yet to feel the full brunt of the tariffs because of some export orders being sticks, exporters eating the cost in the short-run to maintain the relationship in the hope that tariffs would soon be rationalised and also transshipment of some exports. As this momentum fades, Indian exports will face the full brunt of the high tariffs unless a deal is reached soon. Moreover, there is already empirical evidence that labour intensive export focussed sectors of the Indian economy are already adversely affected. While the Modi government has done a good job of absorbing the impact, it can't keep cutting taxes and the marginal return from deregulation / structural reforms will also diminish over time.

 

[Owaiz]

"India, however, said on Friday that the characterisation of the discussions between Delhi and Washington in the remarks made by Lutnick was "not accurate".

"India and the US were committed to negotiating a bilateral trade agreement as far back as 13 February last year. Since then both sides have held multiple rounds of negotiations to arrive at a balanced and mutually beneficial trade agreement. On several occasions, we have been close to a deal," foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal told reporters.

He added that Modi and Trump had spoken on the phone eight times last year, covering "covering different aspects of our wide-ranging partnership". "

BBC's Cherylann Molan.

So according to India, the statement from Lutnick was "not accurate". However, in the following text, nowhere has the Indian side denied the content of Lutnick's statement. Nowhere has India stated categorically that the events described by Lutnick were falsified.

On the contrary, after stating "not accurate", (which will no doubt satisfy the usual crowd of sycophants as a "rejection of US claims"), the Indian side has simply restated the general context that "talks were ongoing and at times we were close to a deal".

Getting very interesting for the casual observer.

But for Indians, is this really the dumbed down state of your nation?

That denials aren't even proper denials any more, but instead are loosely disguised statements of non-commital or even acquiescence?

Do Indian officials really think their electorate are that stupid?

It is easy for the media to do Monday morning quarterbacking. There is obviously some substance to what Lutnick said, because the same narrative was also being reported in the media at that time. However, there are also exaggerations and oversimplifications. If you recall, the first Asian country to announce a deal was Vietnam and it is actively reported that Trump had sprung conditions that had not been discussed by the negotiators and changed the tariff from the low teens to 20% at the last minute in the meeting with the Vietnamese leader who had not been involved in the intricacies of the negotiations. It is no secret that Modi is not an economist or someone who understands the intricacies of trade and he would have relied on the technical experts in the bureaucracy to deal withi the details. So, if Modi avoided the call with Trump, it was probably out of caution that a similar trick would be pulled on India. Hindsight is 20/20. While it may be factually accurate that Modi not getting on a call was the reason the deal was not done, it is not clear if the deal that India would have gotten if Modi had gotten on the call would have been the one that India has wanted and their trade negotiators had discussed.

 

[SoulSpokesman]

@Owaiz sb

That is an excellent summing up, sir and deserves a detailed response. Will revert later in the evening.

Regards

 

[r3alist]

That was never on offer. India has never played anybody’s proxy and is unlikely to start now. Thats why India hasn’t allowed any external forces to operate out of India. Previous US administrations understood this and accepted this equation.

Exactly, the world changes, let me just remind you this again, and sometimes other countries need to become more involved. If you do not wish to, you relegate yourself and that is just logical

There is no incoherence here. Indian forces are doing what they need to.

This is just self-referencing logic, India does what it needs to therefore it is inherently correct.

Please also understand that military might doesn’t come in isolation. It follows economic might. No pure security state is taken seriously because they can’t do s**t till a war starts. While, economic powers can keep playing games 24 x 7 x 365. Pure security states keep struggling with day to day survival. There are plenty of examples all around.

But then your military posturing is not commensurate to your current economic strength, in any case you are deluded if you think the world just Waits so you can grow in a linear fashion and then decide to throw your weight around when you think you have a good position. How naive. Actually Nations with more prowess will just see this as weakness or poor strategic decision making and fill in the void.

Let me give you a good example, you have turned all of South Asia against you and now you have a brand new front potentially in Bangladesh, Pakistan is still there, improving, and Turkey and China have filled the void.

So consequently, you will have to spend further money on your military to meet elevated threats. If your economic strength was what you thought it would be then the region would at least not be as hostile, I don't see how you can keep talking only about the economy when your region around you is stretching your military on this trajectory

Who decides on those parameters? No one

More powerful Nations do

Did someone force you? Why do you assume that India was also forced because you were forced?

The question is, why did you stop ? It is absurd to say you can attack military structures but then suddenly call it limited, no you lost your appetite.

Consequently, you revealed many weaknesses.

 

[r3alist]

It is true that the Indian economy's macro indicators have held up so far after the US tariffs were imposed, but it does not mean they have not had major impacts. The Modi government provided a major fiscal stimulus through tax cuts and exports have yet to feel the full brunt of the tariffs because of some export orders being sticks, exporters eating the cost in the short-run to maintain the relationship in the hope that tariffs would soon be rationalised and also transshipment of some exports. As this momentum fades, Indian exports will face the full brunt of the high tariffs unless a deal is reached soon. Moreover, there is already empirical evidence that labour intensive export focussed sectors of the Indian economy are already adversely affected. While the Modi government has done a good job of absorbing the impact, it can't keep cutting taxes and the marginal return from deregulation / structural reforms will also diminish over time.

Yes very well said, the situation is in flux and we could be surprised with a trade deal in the next week or months, India has some economic buffering but that cannot persist without showing in the macro numbers at some point.

 

[Master Chief]

It is easy for the media to do Monday morning quarterbacking. There is obviously some substance to what Lutnick said, because the same narrative was also being reported in the media at that time. However, there are also exaggerations and oversimplifications. If you recall, the first Asian country to announce a deal was Vietnam and it is actively reported that Trump had sprung conditions that had not been discussed by the negotiators and changed the tariff from the low teens to 20% at the last minute in the meeting with the Vietnamese leader who had not been involved in the intricacies of the negotiations. It is no secret that Modi is not an economist or someone who understands the intricacies of trade and he would have relied on the technical experts in the bureaucracy to deal withi the details. So, if Modi avoided the call with Trump, it was probably out of caution that a similar trick would be pulled on India. Hindsight is 20/20. While it may be factually accurate that Modi not getting on a call was the reason the deal was not done, it is not clear if the deal that India would have gotten if Modi had gotten on the call would have been the one that India has wanted and their trade negotiators had discussed.

Agreed. I can understand Delhi not trying to rock the boat any more than Lutnick already has. Time will tell if a patient approach actually works against Trump who is at present hyper-charged due to recent events and his own hubris. It may be quite some time before he comes to from this state of intoxication.

 

[Dark-Lord]

In short horses for courses. IND for economic benefits, PAK for military prowess

Funny part is Pakistan is weaker than India both militarily and Economically .