WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S.-India strategic partnership, long regarded in Washington as a pillar of stability in the Indo-Pacific, came under unusually sharp scrutiny on Wednesday as leading analysts warned lawmakers that the relationship is facing its most serious political and economic challenges in years.
In prepared testimony submitted ahead of a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on India, three prominent India specialists told the Subcommittee on South and Central Asia that despite deepening cooperation in defense, technology and maritime security, the partnership has been unsettled by tariffs, trade disputes and the Trump administration’s renewed outreach to Pakistan’s military leadership.
Sameer Lalwani of the German Marshall Fund said the United States views India as “a major power — and one of the most consequential in the 21st century — given our shared interests, democratic institutions, and visions of international order.” He said India is “poised to become a pole in the international system,” offering the United States strategic economic potential, technological scale and expanding military capability.
Addressing Indo-Pacific security, Lalwani said both countries “seek a multipolar Asia that checks the pacing challenge of China, and its attempts at coercion, military aggression, or geopolitical dominance.” India’s forward posture along the Line of Actual Control, he said, reflects its efforts “to defend its borders and deter further Chinese aggression or ‘salami-slicing’ incursions.”
He warned, however, that India-China relations remain “largely adversarial,” shaped by “economic coercion,” “violent border clashes in 2020,” and “recent battlefield collusion with Pakistan’s military campaign against India.”
Lalwani said India’s ties with Russia have narrowed to “hydrocarbons, nuclear energy, and conventional weapons,” with New Delhi now “decisively tilting toward America” in maritime security and emerging technologies.
Jeff Smith of the Heritage Foundation described the India-U.S. partnership as “one enduring success” amid two decades of turbulence in American foreign policy but said 2025 had been “challenging” for the relationship. He attributed the downturn to the administration’s tariff actions, an India-Pakistan confrontation in May and the political fallout from Washington’s outreach to Pakistan Army chief Asim Munir.
Smith said expectations were high following Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s February visit to Washington, but “three things then happened to derail this positive momentum.” These included the administration’s imposition of “25 per cent ‘liberation day’ tariffs,” India’s Operation Sindoor against Pakistan-based militants and a U.S. intervention that was portrayed domestically as equating India with Pakistan. A second tariff tied to Russian oil imports, he said, left “pro-American voices in New Delhi on the defensive.”
Dhruva Jaishankar of ORF America testified that bilateral progress is now “at a political standstill,” mainly because of disagreements over trade, tariffs and renewed U.S. engagement with Pakistan’s military leadership. He warned that this standoff “risks jeopardising mutually-beneficial cooperation on… trade, technology, energy, and defence cooperation” outlined earlier this year by President Trump and Prime Minister Modi.
On tariffs, he noted that “India was imposed a tariff of 25 per cent, which took effect on August 7,” followed by another 25 per cent tied to Russian oil purchases. With a Bilateral Trade Agreement largely negotiated but not announced, India now faces “among the highest” tariff levels applied to any major U.S. partner, a situation he said “prevents further opportunities at broadening and deepening the economic partnership.”
Still, Jaishankar stressed that cooperation has not halted across all domains. He pointed to the new “10-Year Defense Framework Agreement,” recent approvals for Javelin missiles and Excalibur munitions, and major joint exercises stretching from Diego Garcia to Alaska. Collaboration in space, AI and energy has also continued despite political strains. (Source: IANS)
