The buoyant optics surrounding the arrival of Ambassador-designate Sergio Gor in New Delhi have briefly revived hopes that India–US relations might regain the steady upward momentum of the past quarter century. Yet, beneath the diplomatic smiles lies a more unsettling reality: the relationship appears stalled, caught between shifting global power equations and the transactional worldview of the second Trump presidency.
Why the optimism around Gor’s arrival matters
Sergio Gor’s public enthusiasm, coupled with signals that a long-negotiated bilateral trade agreement is “ready”, created expectations in South Block that a breakthrough might be imminent. For India, concluding such a deal would symbolise continuity in economic engagement despite political uncertainties in Washington. However, statements attributed to US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick suggest that President Donald Trump is waiting for a direct, deferential outreach from Prime Minister Narendra Modi—a posture that raises uncomfortable questions for Indian diplomacy.
Trump’s negotiating style and the problem of “cards”
Trump’s worldview is overtly transactional. In his own framing, international politics resembles a card game where leverage, not goodwill, determines outcomes. In this schema, China alone appears to hold a strong hand, owing to its dominance over rare earths, magnets, and critical supply chains. This asymmetry explains Trump’s deferential tone towards President Xi Jinping and his openness to a prospective “grand bargain” with Beijing.
For India, the implication is stark: supplication without leverage risks not accommodation, but marginalisation. Recent experiences of several European allies underscore how quickly respect can erode in such interactions.
Taiwan, China, and the hollowing of the Indo-Pacific idea
Trump’s remarks suggesting that Taiwan’s fate is largely for China to decide—tempered only by his claim that he would be “unhappy” in the event of an invasion—signal a potential dilution of US commitments in East Asia. This posture unnerves US allies like Japan and casts doubt on the credibility of the broader Indo-Pacific strategy, within which India has been a central pillar.
The likely casualty of this shift is the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, or Quad. Gor’s casual remark that a Trump visit to India may happen only in a “year or two” reinforces the perception that the Quad no longer figures prominently in Washington’s immediate priorities.
From momentum to malaise in India–US relations
For nearly 25 years, India–US ties followed a broadly upward trajectory, cutting across party lines in both capitals. That arc now appears flattened. Rhetorical reassurances from the US embassy and symbolic gestures—such as India’s belated inclusion in the US-led Pax Silica initiative—have not offset deeper strategic drift.
Compounding this is the growing hostility faced by Indian-Americans and expatriates in the US, which risks generating reciprocal anti-American sentiment in India and further complicating bilateral management.
What still holds the relationship together
Despite the chill at the strategic level, functional cooperation remains resilient:
- Defence and military-to-military engagement continue largely unhindered.
- Counter-terrorism coordination remains strong.
- Scientific and technological collaboration is intact.
India’s large market and its role as a critical source of high-end manpower for US technology giants constitute a form of leverage. Trump’s dependence on the tacit support of these companies may be one of the few factors that restrains a sharper downturn.
Misplaced assumptions after Trump’s return
Trump’s inauguration in January 2025 was initially welcomed in New Delhi, buoyed by assumptions of ideological affinity and personal rapport. Prime Minister Modi’s early visit to Washington, and the prompt meeting of Quad foreign ministers convened by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, seemed to confirm continuity.
Those assumptions have since unravelled. Speculation that Trump felt personally slighted—over the lack of acknowledgment of his claimed role in India–Pakistan de-escalation or the absence of a Nobel Peace Prize nomination—may explain some irritants. But such pique is at best a trigger, not the underlying cause.
The deeper driver: shifting global power balances
The real source of change lies in structural geopolitics: the relative decline of US power vis-à-vis China and Washington’s attempt to recalibrate its global role. A Cold War 2.0 appears increasingly likely, though unlike the earlier version, it will blend confrontation with selective collusion between the two superpowers.
In such a world, India cannot rely on assumptions of automatic strategic convergence with the US.
What to note for Prelims?
- Quad (India, US, Japan, Australia) and its objectives.
- Indo-Pacific strategy and its relevance for India.
- US–China competition and rare earth dominance.
- Role of Indian diaspora in India–US relations.
What to note for Mains?
- Critically analyse the changing trajectory of India–US relations in the context of global power shifts.
- Discuss the implications of a diluted US Indo-Pacific commitment for India’s strategic autonomy.
- Examine how India can leverage economic and technological strengths amid great power rivalry.
- Assess lessons from the Cold War for India’s contemporary foreign policy choices.