Opinion | Trump Has Miscalculated That India Is A Softer Target Than China

The Trump tariff of 50% on Indian goods, which officially went into effect on August 27, has cast a long shadow over one of the most important bilateral relationships in the world. Yet, even before its implementation, the mood in New Delhi toward Washington had already begun to sour. America's decision to impose punitive duties unveiled dramatically on 'Liberation Day' was followed by an additional 25% secondary tariff, bringing the total burden on Indian exports to among the highest in the world.

In India, these measures are widely perceived as being deliberately punitive rather than rational economic policy. Washington's justification, that the move was tied to India's continued purchase of Russian oil, has failed to convince policymakers or the public. Many in India point to China as a glaring contradiction, for it remains the largest buyer of Russian oil and yet faces no comparable penalty. On the other hand, if Trump's real goal was to reduce Moscow's revenue stream and end the Ukraine war, then targeting New Delhi does little to achieve that end. More fundamentally, the Trump administration seems to overlook that the Russia-Ukraine conflict is rooted in complex historical and cultural realities, not just economic factors. Even Trump, who once styled himself as the ultimate "dealmaker", has found little success in extracting concessions from Russian President Vladimir Putin. Despite high-profile engagements from the Alaska summit as well as repeated phone calls, the US under Trump has been unable to move the needle, let alone bring the war to an end.

Also Read | A "Secret" Xi Jinping Letter Was Key To Improved India-China Ties: Report

Misreading India's Leverage

The Trump administration's tariff decision reflects a broader miscalculation in its belief that India is a softer target than China. True, India's trade volume with the United States is far smaller than China's, leading Washington to perhaps assume that New Delhi could be pressured easily. But the consequences are proving to be far more political in nature than economic. What began as a trade dispute has now become a question of national pride and sovereignty for India. Tariffs are no longer seen as just market barriers but as instruments of coercion aimed at undermining India's autonomy. This sentiment has resonated strongly across the political spectrum in New Delhi and is increasingly shaping the domestic debate.

Perhaps, some context about China may be useful for the US. India's experience with China since the 2020 border clashes in Ladakh has left deep scars. Though both sides have since sought incremental rapprochement - particularly after October 2024 - the trust deficit remains high. Beijing has lost an entire generation of goodwill, backed by surveys that suggest that Indian youth overwhelmingly view China with suspicion. Rebuilding confidence may take decades. 

Against this backdrop, Washington enjoyed a far stronger foundation of goodwill. Over the past two decades, India and the US overcame Cold War mistrust and built a strategic partnership marked by defence agreements, technology sharing, and a strategic cooperation in the Indo-Pacific. As such, in stark contrast to China, Indian youth often saw the US as the most trusted global partner. 

The imposition of steep tariffs threatens to undo these gains now. Public opinion is shifting swiftly even among small and medium traders in India, who argue that the country should seek alternative supply chains and resist "arm-twisting" by any great power, including the United States.

The Tariff Trio

Within Washington, India's frustration has been directed particularly at a set of Trump advisers, such as Scott Besant, Peter Navarro, and Howard Lutnick, who are widely portrayed in Indian media as the architects of the tariff regime. Their rhetoric, often couched in aggressive language about opening India's markets and curbing Russian oil purchases, is viewed as a hostile campaign rather than constructive diplomacy. The public grandstanding by Trump himself and his tariff trio has had the opposite effect on New Delhi's stance. Both the Indian government and the wider public now seem united in a resolute position, in effect continuing the purchase of Russian oil and opening new doors in its relationship.

Also Read | "Using US Dollars To Buy Russian Oil": Trump Adviser's New India Tariff Rant

For India, the issue goes beyond economics. As a civilisational state with growing global influence, New Delhi resists the idea that it can be treated like a subordinate partner. The Trump administration's reliance on tariffs as a blunt instrument of foreign policy recalls a 20th-century playbook, one completely ill-suited to an era of multipolarity. America strong-arming another nation was a template of the last century. While tariffs may be a key arsenal in Trump's toolkit, it does not cut muster with large economies - less so with a civilisational state that is among the top five economies of the world with a northward future in sight.

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author