Speaking at an Asia Society gathering in New York shortly after the United Nations General Assembly closed, External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar delivered a rare public critique of Washington’s approach toward New Delhi. He labeled the United States’ recent trade maneuvers as “self-centered” and argued that America’s lack of empathy on India’s long-standing terrorism challenges is straining the partnership.
Trade friction escalates amid new tariff regimes
The United States remains India’s biggest trading partner, with bilateral merchandise exchange hitting $149.1 billion in 2025. Yet the flow is heavily skewed: India enjoys a surplus of roughly $58.4 billion. Jaishankar warned that “countries should not be so self-centred that they make decisions in a vacuum and claim no intention to make anyone’s life difficult.” He cited the fallout from the Iran-Ukraine wars as a reminder that global supply shocks must not ignore basic needs.
Negotiations for a comprehensive trade pact have produced a “road-map” but no binding deal. The minister noted fundamental differences – India’s economy of small producers, farmers and factories versus the United States’ high-value, high-per-capita model – as a source of “complexity and patience.” The agricultural sector, traditionally protected to safeguard Indian farmers, emerged as a contentious point, with expectations of rapid progress clashing with on-the-ground realities.
Washington’s tariff policy added fresh turbulence. After the Supreme Court overturned broad Trump-era tariffs in February, the administration introduced a new 10 percent global tariff and, more dramatically, a law authorising up to 100 percent tariffs on nations that purchase Russian oil – a provision that directly threatens India, whose imports include Russian energy. Jaishankar warned that “the 100 percent tariff is a deal-breaker” and could force India to reassess its outreach.
Terrorism remains a non-negotiable red line
Beyond economics, Jaishankar highlighted cross-border terrorism as a core grievance. He said India “has been subjected to a kind of terrorism that stems from a neighbour’s deliberate, conscious policy over many decades,” implicitly referring to Pakistan. The minister argued that Washington’s insufficient appreciation of this threat “creates a problem” for bilateral ties.
The issue resurfaced after a May-last-year clash in Kashmir, where an armed assault killed 26 civilians and triggered a four-day skirmish between India and Pakistan. President Donald Trump proclaimed a cease-fire, claiming personal intervention, a narrative that India found offensive. While Islamabad embraced Trump’s overtures – even nominating him for a Nobel Peace Prize – New Delhi felt sidelined, perceiving Washington’s focus on Pakistan as a “self-centered” policy that ignored India’s security concerns.
Domestic pressure and shifting diplomatic tone
Jaishankar’s forthrightness also mirrors internal challenges faced by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. With state elections looming and opposition accusing the government of yielding to U.S. pressure, Modi’s recent phone call with Trump was described by the minister as merely “productive” a stark departure from earlier references to the American president as a “good friend.”
Retired diplomat Ajay Bisaria explained that India has moved to a more public stance because “the public sentiment is that the US is bullying India and India has been silent.” He added that the looming 100 percent tariff could “scrutinise all Indian efforts to reach out to the US.”
Analysts such as Chietigj Bajpaee of Chatham House observed that the “shine has come off” the bilateral relationship after initial optimism about a second Trump term. Nonetheless, both sides have not abandoned the idea of a reset; the completion of a trade agreement remains a critical watch-point. Harsh Pant, vice-president of the Observer Research Foundation, summed up the mood: “Everyone is waiting him out. President Trump has little respect for conventions and norms of inter-state behaviour.”
In the social-media age, Jaishankar warned that diplomatic narratives are now shaped by public opinion as much as by official talks. He stressed that the “economics of mobility and the politics of mobility are at odds” – a nod to the tightening of the H-1B program under Trump, which has stirred domestic debate in India about skilled-worker migration.
By branding U.S. policies as “self-centered” and highlighting a lack of empathy on terrorism, India is openly challenging the status quo, hoping that a clearer articulation of its concerns will pave the way for a more balanced partnership.
