New Delhi, India — At a New York event this week, India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar delivered a frank critique of Washington, saying it has been indifferent to India’s terrorism concerns, has grown closer to rival Pakistan, and has pursued self‑serving trade policies that disproportionately harm the Global South.
That shift signals a new bluntness in New Delhi’s handling of the Trump administration, analysts note, amid rising bilateral tensions.
For years, India has managed disagreements with otherwise friendly partners discreetly, away from the public eye. This was especially true with the United States, where ties have traditionally enjoyed broad bipartisan backing.
However, after months of strain, New Delhi is adopting a more openly critical stance toward Washington to cope with the volatility and unpredictability Trump brings to the White House.
The change also comes at a crucial moment for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who faces growing domestic pressure and opposition accusations of repeatedly yielding to US pressure. On Wednesday, Modi spoke by phone with Trump, describing the call as “productive”—a restrained characterization far removed from his earlier habit of calling the US president a “good friend.”
Chietigj Bajpaee, senior research fellow for South Asia at Chatham House, said Jaishankar’s comments “offer a frank assessment” of the current India‑US relationship. “Clearly, the initial optimism about a second Trump term has faded,” he told Al Jazeera.
India’s pain points
Jaishankar raised these friction points while speaking at an Asia Society gathering following the conclusion of the UN General Assembly in New York on Monday.
“When I step back and examine the India‑US relationship, I see that many countries have experienced a tougher partnership with the United States,” he remarked. “That may not be comforting, but it is the reality.”
Trade
Trade has emerged as a major flashpoint. The United States is India’s biggest trading partner, with bilateral goods trade hitting $149.1 billion in 2025, yet the balance favors India, which enjoys a $58.4 billion goods surplus.
Jaishankar began by observing: “Nations ought not to be so self‑absorbed that they make decisions in isolation and then claim, ‘I didn’t mean to cause you trouble.’”
He was partly alluding to the economic fallout from the wars in Iran and Ukraine, stressing that “sound common sense” must protect the basic needs of all countries.
He then turned to the India‑US trade talks, which have produced a roadmap toward an agreement but not a final deal. “Beyond the per‑capita disparity, the differences in production structures and societal makeup between India and the United States are profound,” he noted.
The agricultural sector has been one of the most contentious issues, as India has kept its market largely shut for decades to protect its farmers. “The expectation that it could open quickly clashed with the far more intricate reality on the ground,” he said, adding that “there is broadly an understanding on the trade agreement.”
At one stage, India faced some of the highest tariff rates levied by the Trump administration. After the US Supreme Court invalidated Trump’s broad tariffs in February, his team pivoted to other measures, including a new 10 percent global tariff. Earlier this month, Trump signed legislation allowing the United States to impose tariffs as high as 100 percent on nations such as India that buy Russian oil.
Jaishankar pointed out that these shifts have produced “bumps in the relationship over the past year,” and added that concluding the deal “would help improve ties.”
Ajay Bisaria, a former diplomat who has served as high commissioner to Canada and Pakistan and as ambassador to Poland, told Al Jazeera that, regarding Washington, “India has chosen to speak out more openly because of mounting public criticism and the perception that the United States is bullying India while New Delhi has remained silent.”
Bisaria warned that the impending 100 percent tariff on India, set to take effect in under a month, “could become a deal‑breaker for the relationship.” He added, “If it is implemented, all of India’s outreach efforts toward the United States would come under intense scrutiny.”
‘Terrorism’
Trade is not the sole source of tension. A major rupture flared in May last year when India entered a four‑day conflict with its rival Pakistan after armed militants attacked Indian‑administered Kashmir, killing 26 civilians.
India was sidestepped when President Trump announced a ceasefire, asserting that he had warned both nations of economic consequences if they continued fighting. For New Delhi, Kashmir remains a strictly bilateral issue with Pakistan, leaving no space for third‑party mediation.
Nonetheless, Trump has repeatedly claimed credit for brokering that crucial ceasefire — most recently at the UN General Assembly in New York — which stopped the war between two nuclear‑armed neighbors. India has objected to those assertions.
Conversely, Pakistan’s leadership has courted Trump, lavished him with praise, and even nominated him for a Nobel Peace Prize. As a result, Islamabad’s ties with Washington have warmed, much to New Delhi’s chagrin.
For India, Jaishankar stressed that “terrorism remains a particularly important issue.”
“Few nations have endured the type of terrorism we face from a neighbor, pursued as a deliberate, conscious policy over many decades,” Jaishankar said, pointing to Pakistan.
“When an issue that matters so deeply to us lacks sufficient understanding, appreciation, or empathy, problems arise,” he said, noting that India’s core concerns are “not fully appreciated” by its partner, the United States.
“New Delhi’s shift toward a more candid tone with Washington is a lesson drawn from experience,” said Bisaria, the former diplomat. “After the ceasefire episode, attitudes hardened and the situation deteriorated further.”
Harsh Pant, vice president of the New Delhi‑based Observer Research Foundation, observed that “the Trump administration’s fixation on Pakistan, while overlooking India’s sensitivities, has fostered the feeling that New Delhi must begin to voice its concerns.”
“When leadership fails to show reciprocity, strategic calculations shift and disputes are brought into the open,” Pant told Al Jazeera, referring to Jaishankar’s remarks.
Domestic Pressure
Indians have been the primary beneficiaries of the U.S. H‑1B program, which permits employers to hire foreign workers with specialty‑skill training. However, under Trump, the program has come under attack, with Washington raising barriers and fees for applicants amid growing criticism from supporters of his MAGA agenda.
“For years, cross‑border mobility was viewed as an economic advantage. Today, the economics of mobility clash with its politics, at least in certain circles,” Jaishankar said, referencing Trump’s anti‑immigration stance.
“That perception certainly poses a problem,” the minister added.
Domestic pressure is now catching up with New Delhi. “Modi faces growing domestic pressure, with key state elections looming next year amid rising anti‑incumbency,” said Bisaria. “It means the government cannot afford to appear to be yielding to U.S. pressure.”
Pant noted that migration‑related issues affect India’s general public, given its huge population. For years, those links made the United States “an attractive partner for a large segment of Indians.” Today, he said, “those same factors are turning into a drag on the bilateral relationship.”
“Public opinion in India is shifting noticeably against the United States, and I believe the government is now voicing that negative sentiment openly,” Pant said.
‘Waiting out Trump’
When Trump embarked on his second presidential term, many in New Delhi’s strategic circles were optimistic about bilateral ties, recalling his warm personal rapport with Prime Minister Modi during his first term.
However, the situation deteriorated over the following months.
Nevertheless, Bajpaee of Chatham House said that, despite the growing rift between the United States and India, “both sides remain committed to revitalizing their relationship.”
He noted Jaishankar’s observation that India is not being uniquely targeted; instead, the decline in India‑US ties mirrors the Trump administration’s transactional, unpredictable, and often erratic foreign policy, he told Al Jazeera.
“This dynamic could provide a pathway toward an eventual reset. A major indicator to watch is the conclusion of a bilateral trade agreement,” Bajpaee added.
For New Delhi, Pant said the situation now amounts to “waiting Mr. Trump out.” He added, with a chuckle, that India is far from alone in that line.
“Everyone is waiting for him to leave office. President Trump shows little regard for the conventions and norms that govern state‑to‑state interaction,” Pant said. “How does one engage with such a figure?”
Also Read
- National Bank of Pakistan Shares Show Steady Movement Today
- Matryoshka Sales, Russian War Financing, and a Belarusian Network Across European Churches Recent years have seen Belarusian nuns from the Saint‑Elisabeth Convent in Minsk offer matryoshka dolls, religious icons and honey at French churches and cathedrals. While the sisters frame these sales as charitable activity, they openly support Russia’s war effort in Ukraine and have participated in collections for Russian soldiers. The convent operates an orphanage caring for approximately two hundred children who have been abandoned owing to physical or mental disabilities. Additionally, sisters run a shelter located thirty kilometres from the mother house that provides aid to the homeless, alcoholics and drug addicts. In May 2023 the diocese of Paris announced a parallel “exhibition and sale” at Saint‑Léon, showcasing icons, handmade crafts, honey and herbal teas. Later that year the sisters offered their goods at the Celtic Orthodox Church in Saint‑Dolay, Brittany, holding the stall for several weeks during the summer—a setup later examined by Ouest‑France. During the summer the convent maintained a temporary booth in Les Sables‑d’Olonne near Nantes on France’s Atlantic coast, prompting an investigative report by Ouest‑France that highlighted ongoing fundraising activities for Russian forces. Continent‑wide network The convent’s outreach began in the late 1990s and early 2000s, when sisters travelled unplanned routes, stopping at parishes, festivals and Christmas markets throughout Europe and asking permission to sell their products. In exchange, they were welcomed to charitable events. Since 2022 the convent has been engaged in dedicated fundraising campaigns that finance vehicles and equipment intended for the Russian military. These monetary flows are channeled through various entities and retail outlets that form part of a broader organizational structure. Vehicle and drone financing The StopSEM project, created by Christian Vision, tracks donations to Russian servicemen and has collected documentation of such operations. Some campaigns involve the network‑funded purchase of at least seven military vehicles for moving personnel and evacuating the wounded, as well as drones that were supplied through the same channel. When approached by the Polish‑based outlet Vot Tak in 2023, Sister Alexandra affirmed that her group was indeed supplying requested equipment to the army. Conversely, Vassilevitch reports that the convent actively encourages vulnerable individuals—such as former prisoners—to join the Russian forces, framing their narratives around heroic sacrifice to contrast with ordinary despair. A priest decorated by Putin Archpriest Andrei Lemeshonok, the spiritual father of the convent, has regularly defended Russia’s intervention. Beginning in 2022 he proclaimed that the monastery itself had become a “combat unit.” In May 2025 he was honoured by Vladimir Putin with the Pushkin Medal, a national distinction recognising support for the Russian language and culture abroad. At the Kremlin ceremony Lemeshonok likened his vocation to a pilgrimage toward Golgotha, emphasising a nationalistic sense of purpose. Question over visas Despite continued fundraising trips to France, external scrutiny rose. In 2023 the pastor of Les Sables‑d’Olonne, Father Antoine Nouwavi, initially refused to host the sisters after learning of their anti‑Ukrainian advocacy. He permitted their return after receiving correspondence from Mother Superior stating that accusations of weapons shipments were unfounded and that proceeds went solely to charitable goals. Nevertheless, the priest admitted he lacked the ability to guarantee the final destination of the donations. Christian Vision has alerted French church officials to the convent’s activities. Following Vassilevitch’s analysis, the organisation reported a steep decline in the willingness of other European congregations to accept the nuns. Other European nations have adopted tighter measures: Sweden’s church formally advised parishes to cease housing the nuns, and their stalls were either banned or shutsded down in Poland, the United Kingdom and Switzerland. In Germany, a Bundestag member called for an independent probe into the sect’s operations. Vassilevitch highlights the difficulty Belarussians face in obtaining Schengen visas as a sign of growing suspicion. The French Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded generically, saying it possessed no additional information on the matter.
- Trump’s Nobel Odds Fade, But His Influence Casts Long Shadow Over 2025 Peace Prize Selection
- Amazon Stock Pays $0 in Dividends. Here’s Why Long-Term Investors Should Own It Anyway.