A Strategic Sabotage: The Tariff Offensive and India’s Mismanaged Diplomatic Script
By Dr. Suresh Deman
Honorary Director, Centre for Strategic Affairs, London
And India—rather than resisting—played along with theatre and illusion.
From Houston to Ahmedabad: The Optics of Deference
While the visuals suggested a deepening bond, the reality was far harsher: Trump imposed punitive tariffs, threatened sanctions for oil purchases from Russia, and continued to pressure India to buy American defense hardware—all while quietly expanding his own business interests in Indian cities like Pune and Mumbai. The asymmetry was glaring, yet largely unchallenged.
Game Theory in Geopolitics: A Repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma
Trump’s tariffs, demands for defense deals, and threats of sanctions were consistent defections—moves that maximized U.S. gain at India's expense. India, instead of retaliating or leveraging multilateral forums, responded with continued cooperation, hoping to preserve long-term goodwill.
But in repeated games, if one player continues to defect while the other cooperates, it leads to a predictable outcome: the cooperating player is systematically exploited. India’s foreign policy, lacking credible retaliation mechanisms—like China’s critical mineral leverage—left it unable to shift the game dynamic. Trump was betting and bowling, while India was merely fielding, trying not to concede too many runs.
A Deal That Never Was
Trump’s negotiation style—“take my goods at 0%, buy my planes at 30%, invest in America, and shut up about sovereignty”—was not a diplomatic overture but an ultimatum. A deal under such conditions was structurally impossible. It was never about compromise; it was about coercion.
The Modi government, chasing photo-ops and slogans, misjudged this reality. Instead of recalibrating strategy, it continued the charade—burning diplomatic capital and public resources in a game rigged from the start.
Strategic Drift and Eroded Autonomy
India’s once-prized strategic autonomy has been slowly eroded. Its relationship with Russia—a historic pillar of foreign policy—has been reduced to transactional oil and arms deals conducted under U.S. scrutiny. Despite Russia’s willingness to develop new BRICS financial mechanisms and de-dollarised trade, India remained passive, hedging instead of leading.
Meanwhile, China—with its 40% savings rate, dominant state-owned enterprises, and aggressive diversification into Southeast Asia—has built the kind of strategic leverage India lacks. Xi Jinping’s outreach to Vietnam, Indonesia, and even Japan and South Korea shows a multipronged, long-term vision. India, by contrast, has clung to the hope that balancing multiple powers without making commitments would suffice.
U.S. Foreign Policy and Global Risk
The Trump-era U.S. foreign policy was a mix of isolationism and brinkmanship. Nuclear arms control treaties were discarded. Trade was weaponised. Allies were humiliated. This strategy—epitomised by the tariff blitz against India—elevated unpredictability into doctrine.
India, rather than asserting leadership in non-aligned nuclear diplomacy or WTO reform, largely capitulated—reaffirming its role as a rule-taker, not a rule-maker.
Diaspora Mirage and Partisan Traps
The Indian diaspora in the U.S., swayed by identity and visibility, offered vocal support to Trump, mistaking proximity for influence. Their blind loyalty, captured in Modi’s slogan in Houston, overlooked the structural damage Trump's policies inflicted on India’s economy and global standing. Diaspora euphoria replaced strategic clarity.
Institutional Breakdown: Where Is the Foreign Ministry?
Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar—once seen as the brain of Indian diplomacy—has been sidelined. India’s external affairs apparatus has become a stage for statecraft-as-spectacle. Strategic thinking has been replaced with PR management.
The absence of institutional checks and the over-centralisation of foreign policy in the Prime Minister’s Office has eroded India’s credibility. Allies are unsure, adversaries emboldened.
Silence Is Not Strategy
Since 2014, Prime Minister Modi has not held a single unscripted press conference. This isn’t just a political oddity—it’s a democratic liability. In moments of crisis, public accountability is not optional. As tariffs bite, supply chains strain, and alliances wobble, India needs clarity—not charisma.
A press conference is not a threat—it is a necessity. India’s electorate, business community, and global partners deserve real answers, not choreographed monologues.
Time for Strategic Reset
If India is to reclaim agency, it must shift gears:
-
End passive diplomacy: Recalibrate foreign policy toward Eurasia, diversify alliances, and leverage BRICS platforms to shape global norms.
-
Play strategically: Use multilateral forums like the WTO to challenge tariff aggression and trade coercion.
-
Build economic leverage: Invest in critical technologies and supply chains to reduce dependency and enhance bargaining power.
-
Restore institutional diplomacy: Empower professional diplomats and reduce personality-driven foreign policy.
-
Demand leadership accountability: The Prime Minister must face the press—and the people—with courage and transparency.
Final Reckoning: Speak or Be Sidelined
Trump’s tariff war was not about trade. It was about testing India’s resolve. India failed that test—not because of weak fundamentals, but because of weak strategy and silence.
In the repeated prisoner’s dilemma of global diplomacy, consistent cooperation without consequences for defection ensures permanent disadvantage. India must break that cycle—not with anger, but with clarity, cohesion, and courage.
The unipolar world is gone. What comes next will be defined not by slogans but by substance.
The time for the theatre is over. Prime Minister Modi must speak—not in applause lines, but in strategy.
Dr. Suresh Deman is Honorary Director at the Centre for Strategic Affairs, London. He has served as a consultant to UNEP and UNCTAD and writes on global economics, diplomacy, and democratic governance.
No comments:
Post a Comment