• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
Democracy
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Ashley J. Tellis"
  ],
  "type": "commentary",
  "blog": "Emissary",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Trump’s Disruptive 100 Days"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [
    "South Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "India",
    "United States"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Economy",
    "Global Governance",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}
Attribution logo
Modi and Trump on an orange background with a maze.

Photos by Getty Images

Commentary
Emissary

India Sees Opportunity in Trump’s Global Turbulence. That Could Backfire.

Even if New Delhi secures tactical gains, the strategic losses could be enduring.

Link Copied
By Ashley J. Tellis
Published on Apr 9, 2025
Emissary

Blog

Emissary

Emissary harnesses Carnegie’s global scholarship to deliver incisive, nuanced analysis on the most pressing international affairs challenges.

Learn More
Program mobile hero image

Program

South Asia

The South Asia Program informs policy debates relating to the region’s security, economy, and political development. From strategic competition in the Indo-Pacific to India’s internal dynamics and U.S. engagement with the region, the program offers in-depth, rigorous research and analysis on South Asia’s most critical challenges.

Learn More

This piece is part of a Carnegie series examining the impacts of Trump’s first 100 days in office.

The tumultuous 100 days after Donald Trump’s return to the U.S. presidency have been disruptive for the United States and the world. Despite New Delhi’s feigned optimism, U.S.-Indian relations have been disturbed as well. For a quarter century now, bilateral ties between Washington and New Delhi had been dramatically improving, as successive U.S. administrations—including Trump’s during his first term—wooed India in the context of the competition with China.

The embrace of India intensified during Joe Biden’s presidency, when New Delhi was viewed as an intimate collaborator in Washington’s efforts at confronting Beijing. Consequently, India’s domestic illiberalism and trade mercantilism were discounted as administration officials sought to build new partnerships in high technology, entice businesses diversifying from China to invest in India, and position India as a new manufacturing node to limit China’s industrial dominance. These goals aligned perfectly with India’s own ambitions to expand its national power, which had the virtue of—at least transitorily—aiding the United States to cement its geopolitical dominance and protect the liberal international order. 

Trump’s return has altered the traditional direction of U.S. grand strategy in dramatic ways. His administration’s striking contempt for the liberal order is now clear, but it is also accompanied by atavistic attempts at territorial expansionism, the imposition of “reciprocal” tariffs on U.S. trading partners, and confrontations with many U.S. allies worldwide.

In this environment, India has, first and foremost, sought to protect its past bilateral gains by seeking to mollify Trump through conciliatory public diplomacy. Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his senior aides rushed to Washington to meet the president in a highly choreographed display of bonhomie, attempting to reassure him that unlike many of his other national targets, India is neither a free-loading ally nor a foe and would be a valuable partner in his “Make America Great Again” efforts. Beyond lavishly congratulating Trump for attempting to end the Ukraine war, Modi even offered a cheesy public endorsement of MAGA with a twist intended to protect India’s equities—all intended to deflect the ravages of Trump’s new policies.

These policy changes matter for India. In a striking departure from the past, Trump’s behavior has underscored that he does not think much of India in the context of U.S. rivalry with China. His administration may have other ideas—which could surface in time—but for the moment, Trump is obsessed with correcting America’s trade deficits, which makes India a juicy target.

Recognizing this priority, Indian policymakers have moved in two directions: seeking to conclude an interim trade agreement that would hopefully mitigate Trump’s reciprocal levies (which now involve a 26 percent tariff on India), and offering assurances that India’s problematic nuclear liability law will be amended to permit U.S. nuclear reactor exports to India.

These solutions and others are driven by the imperative of protecting India’s relationship with the United States in the changed circumstances—a partnership that is vital both for India’s economic growth through continued access to the U.S. market and for geopolitical assurance in the face of India’s continued distrust of China. 

That Washington now shows little interest in protecting the international order also poses new challenges to India. Although its leaders sometimes discount the value of the existing system—mostly because it has not fully accommodated India’s status claims—they have moved quickly to bolster other international relationships as supplements to the United States.

India’s hedging amid the current uncertainties has assumed different dimensions, including efforts to conclude a free-trade agreement with the European Union and to strengthen ties with key European partners more generally; willingness to explore resuscitating ties with China; determination to preserve India’s traditional relationship with Russia; and persistent strengthening of ties with Australia, Israel, Japan, the wealthy Arab states, and the Global South. 

While Indian policymakers are astute enough to recognize that Trump’s disruptive policies could impose serious costs on New Delhi, they have nonetheless publicly touted the benefits of his disorder while seeking to exploit its opportunities. For example, the administration’s dismantling of the U.S. bureaucracy and its aversion to export controls have created new openings for India to acquire controlled technologies that were previously unavailable. Similarly, New Delhi views the United States’s attacks on its alliances and on international institutions as expanding the prospects for the emergence of multipolarity and, by implication, creating new space for India’s arrival as a great power.

But this expectation is illusory. The destruction of the liberal international order does not presage multipolarity but rather consolidates the bipolarity that will subsist amid increasing entropy in global politics. Trump’s policies will enhance the conditions for China’s continued rise, increase its legitimacy as a responsible power, and—by burdening India’s development prospects and damaging U.S. alliances along the way—undermine the countervailing forces that could coherently resist Beijing when needed. 

As a result, China will join the United States as a true great power, and despite not matching up fully, both nations will stand apart from the rest of the international system in terms of sheer capabilities for several decades to come. Whether this outcome really serves India’s interests remains to be seen, and even if New Delhi opportunistically secures some tactical gains as a result of Trump’s turbulence, the strategic losses it suffers could be enduring.

Read more from this series, including:

  • Saudi Arabia Has Outsized Influence in Washington. Can It Hold?
  • Russia Is Playing Along With Trump’s Hopes for a Rapprochement
  • Japan Is Trying to Be a Model Partner. Trump Is Pushing It Away.
Ashley J. Tellis
Former Senior Fellow
EconomyGlobal GovernanceForeign PolicyIndiaUnited States

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Emissary

  • People on a stage
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Dangerous Consequences of Treating Colombia Like Venezuela

    When democracies and autocracies are seen as interchangeable targets, the language of democracy becomes hollow, and the incentives for democratic governance erode.

      • Sarah Yerkes

      Sarah Yerkes, Amr Hamzawy

  • Soldier looking at a drone on the ground
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Are All Wars Now Drone Wars?

    From Sudan to Ukraine, UAVs have upended warfighting tactics and become one of the most destructive weapons of conflict.

      • Jon Bateman

      Jon Bateman, Steve Feldstein

  • Carney speaking on stage
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Carney’s Remarkable Message to Middle Powers

    And how they can respond.

      • +1

      Sophia Besch, Steve Feldstein, Stewart Patrick, …

  • Trump speaking on a stage
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Greenland Episode Must Be a Lesson for Europe and NATO

    They cannot return to the comforts of asymmetric reliance, dressed up as partnership.

      Sophia Besch

  • Trump speaking to a room of reporters
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Unpacking Trump’s National Security Strategy

    Carnegie scholars examine the crucial elements of a document that’s radically different than its predecessors.

      • Cecily Brewer
      • +18

      James M. Acton, Saskia Brechenmacher, Cecily Brewer, …

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.