Trump's confrontational India strategy is bound to fail, with or without a deal

Editor's note: Ankit Prasad is a CGTN biz commentator. The article reflects the author's views and not necessarily those of CGTN.

The US's 25 percent additional punitive tariffs against India for buying and allegedly "profiteering" from Russian oil came into force on August 27, taking the overall tariff to 50 percent and marking a nadir in India-US ties that few could have imagined when Donald Trump returned to the White House this January. It's hard for many to digest just how dramatically the scenario has shifted as compared to just weeks earlier when the US president had been hinting regularly at a trade deal being imminent.

How close that deal was and why it fell through are up for debate but India's acceptance of its prospects being dashed has been hastened by the various statements and accusations emerging from Washington. That a US president and his administration would now seek to blame the Russia-Ukraine conflict on India is an indication of how lopsided and outlandish the American side's logic has become.

Many believe, perhaps correctly, that the Russian oil argument is just a deception, and the real motive is to strong-arm India and secure more favorable trade terms. The precision and passion, respectively, with which Trump's Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and the aforementioned Navarro speak about India's own tariffs back this claim up. Bessent says India has been "recalcitrant" in trade negotiations, while Navarro has called India the "Maharaja" of tariffs. Everything we've heard from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi so far has also hinted at a trade deal motive.

In India there is a famous saying that aptly describes the entire American situation: "Kahin pe nigahen, kahin pe nishana", meaning "Eyes locked here (looking at Russian oil), target over there (at trade concessions)." But can the Trump administration's unorthodox and provocative negotiation tactics, i.e. The Art of the Deal, possibly pay off in India's case?

READ | India-US trade turmoil: When a bargain becomes an extortion

Of late, and simultaneously as the additional tariffs were imposed, Bessent and Navarro each made what are being seen as back-handed attempts at reconciliation. Bessent said to Fox News that "at the end of the day we (India and the US) will come together," while expressing frustration with lengthy negotiations and mocking India's Rupee. Navarro, on the other hand, told Bloomberg that Modi is a great leader and India is a mature democracy, but it should "act like one." Back in India, tongues were set wagging by a German newspaper FAZ's claim, since echoed by Japan's Nikkei Asia, and widely reported by Indian media, that Prime Minister Modi was refusing US President Trump's calls.

By all accounts, it appears the situation has the potential for fluidity, as neither side has closed the doors to negotiations, though the most recent round has been delayed. The two sides did hold an intercessional 2+2 meeting of defense and foreign affairs officials, while the FBI and India's CBI coordinated to take down a call-center scam syndicate, meaning trade and tariffs haven't claimed the gamut of ties as collateral. But while the Trump administration may favor this hot-and-cold style of dealmaking, it has left no clear off ramp for the Indian government. The reason for this is that in India now, a trade deal with the US is no longer just an economic issue, it is a political hot potato.

Trump, whose popularity in India had plummeted following his repeated claims of mediating an India-Pakistan ceasefire in May, did himself no favors by declaring the Indian economy "dead". Those remarks were widely and hotly debated in the colorful Indian political media. India's Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi firmly agreed with Trump in his initial reaction, but his Congress party has since changed tack to cornering Narendra Modi over his failed relationship with the US president, signaling the "dead economy" barb didn't have the intended response from the public. Modi and his BJP party have meanwhile thrown the databook at their critics, arguing that India's economy is more vibrant than ever.

Perhaps most significantly, Modi has used the tussle with the US to pivot India's economic motives and also catalyze the foreign policy shifts that had begun during last year's BRICS summit in Kazan. In his annual Independence Day speech, Modi made a fervent pitch for self-sufficiency. Less than two weeks later, from the soil of the home state he shares with Mahatma Gandhi (no relation to Rahul Gandhi) Modi raised a pitch for "swadeshi" or "Made in India" goods. His references to the volatility with the US have been in his trademark style — i.e. with no direct mentions but leaving nobody in any doubt about whom he's talking about.

This week, the Indian prime minister will travel to China for the first time since 2018 for the SCO Summit, marking another forward step following the events of Kazan. This follows Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi's successful visit to New Delhi earlier this month where a number of consensuses were reached, including issues on border disputes, direct flights, rare-earths trade, tunnel machines and more. Next year, India will be the host of the BRICS and has already received support from China.

The Trump administration's actions — from the repeated claims on the India-Pakistan ceasefire to blaming and punishing India over the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and from declaring the Indian economy "dead" to all the other disrespectful statements — perhaps represent something it did not count on. It may or may not succeed in forcing India to make trade concessions, but in a country where state elections are extrapolated to gauge the "national mood" every 6-8 months, it certainly has succeeded in earning the ire of the common Indian and accentuating the arguments of the country's strategic autonomy hawks. And they have long memories.