The price India pays for Modi's American dream

If Narendra Modi loses power before completing his current term, one reason would be his failure to anticipate and arrest the bonfire lit by US President Donald Trump under that heap of sticks that currently passes for India–US bilateral relations. Just like the vishwaguru mirage, his political support base would also go up in smoke.

While Trump’s animus is personal—aimed at Modi—the collateral damage has unfortunately affected India. Trump seemed livid that Modi skipped meeting ‘phrend Doland’ during his US visit in September 2024. In February this year, Modi rushed to the White House in an attempt to ingratiate himself with the re-elected incumbent — in vain.

When Modi failed to acknowledge the US president’s role in brokering a ceasefire between India and Pakistan after military hostilities in May, Trump’s ego and annoyance were aggravated.

On 12 August, US state department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said, “We had an experience with Pakistan and India when there was a conflict, one that could develop into something quite horrible… there was immediate concern and immediate movement with the vice-president, the president, and the secretary of state in addressing the nature of what was happening…

"We described the nature of the phone calls, the work that we did to stop the attacks, and to then bring the parties together so we could have something that was enduring. And it’s a very proud moment and a very good example of what secretary Rubio is committed to, of vice-president Vance in that, of course, case as well,… the top leaders of this nation [were] involved in stopping that potential catastrophe.”

Regardless of what any other official or even head of government says, in diplomatic circles a statement from the spokesman of a foreign ministry — in this case the US state department — is recognised as the official position of that country. In other words, Bruce’s clarification contradicts Modi-inspired spins that Trump has been lying.

Life after a bromance gone wrong

Modi’s admission of phone calls from Vance, while denying — to save his skin in India — that he succumbed to pressure from him, is a case of being economical with the truth. Accepting third-party mediation technically violates the Simla Agreement of 1972, which commits India and Pakistan to resolving their differences bilaterally.

Pakistan seized the opportunity created by Modi. By reigniting its age-old military relationship with the US, by thanking Trump profusely for terminating Operation Sindoor and by nominating him for the Nobel Peace Prize, Pakistan punctured the painstaking work done by India on bilateral relations with the US since 1991. This success it owes to the shallowness of the Modi–Trump equation.

More inconveniently for India, Bruce also revealed that a US–Pakistan counterterrorism dialogue took place recently in Islamabad. At which event, she added, “the United States and Pakistan discussed ways to enhance cooperation to counter terrorist threats”. In other words, far from the US looking at Pakistan as a state sponsor of terrorism, it has embraced it as an ally in combating terrorism “in all its forms and manifestations”. Modi’s words about Pakistan clearly fell on deaf ears in Washington.

The US is India’s biggest export market. A tariff of 50 per cent on Indian goods entering America is a body blow to the Indian economy. The Modi regime was caught completely unprepared.

After Trump’s erratic behaviour in his first term as president, other, more nimble-footed, nations began diversifying their exports. Such a contingency plan didn’t occur to Modi, wallowing as he was in the dream of an eternal bromance with Trump. It never dawned on him that his fawning would have zero effect on a ruthless Trump.

India diplomatic antics land it between a rock and a hard place

Meanwhile, talk of a thaw between India and China seems incredible. Have the Chinese vacated the territory they have occupied in eastern Ladakh for five years now? How can there be a normalisation in New Delhi’s dealings with Beijing in such circumstances?

In any case, China — Pakistan’s most trusted ally — will never be generous enough to compensate for India’s loss of exports to the US. Only the European Union — that too in the medium to long term — can do this; but Modi is nowhere near activating more robust economic ties with Brussels.

How can the world contain Trump?

So, Donald Trump met Russian President Vladimir Putin at a secure location in Anchorage, Alaska. It was a victory for Putin — the US ignored an International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant against him to host him on US soil. But the larger concern for the sensible world remains — how to tackle a problem like Trump?

Which American president hasn’t revelled in being called ‘the leader of the free world’ (a whopping misnomer for those who have consistently propped up autocratic rulers and military dictatorships). Trump is worse.

Authoritarian, if not quite fascist yet, his friends are far from being the standard bearers of liberal democracies: Vladimir Putin, Viktor Orban, Benjamin Netanyahu (who also stands accused of war crimes and genocide by the ICC), Brazil’s out-of-power Jair Bolsonaro and totalitarian China’s President Xi Jinping. As for North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, Trump said, “We fell in love!”

However, Trump realised that his summit with Putin would splatter egg on his face if he didn’t carry Europe with him. At a press conference on 11 August, he said in his usual off-the-cuff manner, “I get along with [Ukrainian President, Volodymyr] Zelenskyy, but you know, I disagree with what he’s done... very, very severely disagree. This is a war that should have never happened.” In other words, he blamed Zelenskyy for the war.

He then casually echoed his stance of the previous week by saying “there’ll be some land swapping going on”. This has been decoded as Ukraine having to trade its territory for peace with Russia. Russian troops currently control more than 20 per cent of Ukraine.

Prior to his exchanges with Putin, Trump held a video conference with European leaders, including Zelenskyy, and predicted, “The next meeting will be with Zelenskyy and Putin or Zelenskyy and Putin and me.”

It is doubtful if Putin will easily agree to a face-to-face with Zelenskyy. Russia’s aim appears to be to demote Ukraine’s status from sovereignty to suzerainty. With Trump eager to play on his team, Putin may think this is not an unrealistic goal.

The divide between Trump and Europe and consequently the crack in western solidarity vis-a-vis Russia has naturally been beneficial to the Kremlin. With China unlikely to desert him, a business boom between Russia and the US cannot be ruled out if Putin can make Trump dance to his tune.

Trump’s megalomania includes an obsession with winning the Nobel Prize. This makes him susceptible to forcing an unfavourable deal on Ukraine to call a truce with Russia. Without US support, Ukraine is vulnerable to conceding more in future than what Trump is demanding at present.

Europe, led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain, President Emmanuel Macron of France and Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany, opposes this. Backed by Canada and Australia, among others, it is determined to do whatever it takes to uphold Ukraine’s rights and resist Russia.

If Europe doesn’t endorse him, Trump will not have his way so easily. There is no prospect of a lasting resolution between Russia and Ukraine without the Europeans signing off on it.

Furthermore, to checkmate Trump’s trade warfare, it is not inconceivable that Europe will make adjustments with China. The international economic order is at stake. Political foes can become pecuniary friends to avert a potential meltdown.

(Ashis Ray can be found on X @ashiscray. More of his writing can be found here)