India-China relations may bloom amid tariff threats: Foreign policy is often a test of clarity amid confusion. India today faces such a moment. The rupture in ties with Washington, triggered by President Trump’s threat to double tariffs on Indian goods to 50 per cent, exposes the fragility of New Delhi’s so-called natural alliance with the United States. For years, the relationship was framed around shared values, economic cooperation, and the strategic goal of containing China. But when India acted in pursuit of its energy security by buying Russian oil, Washington’s reaction was punitive tariffs and sanctions threats.
The lesson is stark. American partnership remains transactional, shifting with the winds of domestic politics and short-term strategic calculation. For New Delhi, the choice is whether to persist with the mirage of American benevolence or recalibrate towards a more pragmatic, if difficult, India-China relations. On balance, cultivating a stable relationship with Beijing offers India greater strategic autonomy, economic resilience, and regional influence than chasing the uncertain promise of US friendship.
READ | GST reform puts state government finances at risk
The mirage of US friendship
It is easy to be seduced by Washington’s rhetoric of partnership. Successive administrations have hailed India as a vital ally, praised its democratic institutions, and endorsed its role as a counterweight to China. But beneath the warm words lies a harder truth: the US views India less as a partner in its own right and more as a convenient instrument in its larger rivalry with Beijing.
The Quad, framed as a coalition of democracies, is illustrative. While it has expanded cooperation in technology and maritime security, its central purpose remains China’s containment. The United States expects India to play the role of a strategic balancer in Asia, while offering little in return in terms of trade concessions or market access. Trump’s latest tariffs highlight this imbalance. When Indian actions diverge from Washington’s preferred script, the response is swift coercion, not patient dialogue.
Friendship built on such conditionality is fragile. To mistake it for a permanent anchor of Indian foreign policy is to court disappointment.
A case for pragmatic engagement with China
If the US has shown the limits of its friendship, China has demonstrated the resilience of pragmatic engagement. The past decade has been marred by mistrust: the 2020 Galwan clashes, Beijing’s support for Pakistan, and its Belt and Road ventures in South Asia. Yet, even amid hostility, trade and contact never ceased. And now, the two governments are cautiously rebuilding ties.
The October 2024 meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping in Kazan was the first substantive conversation between the leaders in five years. Since then, there has been a deliberate easing of restrictions. Pilgrimage routes to Mount Kailash have been reopened, visa processes have been simplified, and plans are underway to restore direct air connectivity. Just last week, Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s visit to New Delhi yielded agreements to reopen three historic trade routes across the Himalayas and to facilitate cross-border investment.
These steps are not cosmetic. Close India-China relationssymbolise a recognition in both capitals that hostility has costs, while cooperation delivers tangible benefits. For border communities in the Himalayas, the reopening of trade routes is an economic lifeline. For Indian exporters, the promise of a more predictable Chinese market is vital at a time when Western markets are closing their doors.
Economics dictates realignment
The argument for close India-China relations is not just diplomatic — it is economic. Bilateral trade has remained substantial despite tensions, reaching $136.2 billion in 2023. India imported $101.8 billion worth of goods, while exporting only $34.4 billion. The trade deficit of $67.4 billion is worrying, but it is also evidence of structural reliance. Indian industry depends heavily on Chinese inputs in electronics, telecom, chemicals, and pharmaceutical ingredients.
To believe that India can decouple from China at this stage is fanciful. Nor has the US stepped in to fill the gap. Far from granting India preferential access, Washington has raised barriers. Trump’s tariff threats now make Indian exports among the most penalised in the American market. In contrast, China has shown a willingness, however cautious, to explore steps that reduce regulatory hurdles and promote two-way investment.
Recent agreements to lift curbs on rare earth exports, ease business visas, and resume flights are modest but concrete. If nurtured, they can reduce India’s dependence on volatile Western supply chains and diversify its trade links. The pragmatic path is not to sever ties with China but to engage selectively, expanding areas of economic cooperation while managing political disputes.
Multipolarity, not alignment
India’s foreign policy tradition rests on the principle of non-alignment. It was never about equidistance but about strategic autonomy—the freedom to pursue national interest without being subsumed in another power’s rivalry. Today, that principle is more relevant than ever.
Aligning too closely with the US risks entangling India in a confrontational posture against China. That posture does not serve India’s core interest of stable borders, open trade routes, and economic growth. Instead, a constructive relationship with Beijing allows India to advance its vision of a multipolar Asia. As External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar rightly observed, the two nations share a responsibility to shape “a fair, balanced and multipolar world order.”
The upcoming Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Tianjin, where Modi, Xi, and Putin will meet, is an opportunity to strengthen that multipolar vision. India must seize it not as a sign of alignment with China, but as a reaffirmation of its independent role in shaping global order.
Managing differences responsibly
Rebuilding ties with China does not mean ignoring disputes. The Line of Actual Control remains tense, Chinese activity in the Indian Ocean continues, and Beijing’s ties with Pakistan will not loosen. But the choice is not between hostility and capitulation. It is between letting disputes define the relationship and learning to manage them responsibly.
India has done so before. Dialogue on river-sharing, agreements on cross-border pilgrimages, and even the compartmentalisation of trade despite border tensions are examples of managing differences while pursuing mutual gains. To expect Beijing to abandon Pakistan or to withdraw its Belt and Road projects is unrealistic. To refuse to engage until such changes occur is equally self-defeating.
The wiser path is to build guardrails around the relationship—confidence-building measures on the border, stronger crisis communication channels, and economic interdependence that discourages reckless adventurism.
Time for foreign policy realignment
India’s foreign policy must rest on realism rather than romanticism. The mirage of US friendship cannot be the foundation of national strategy. Instead, three principles should guide the way forward.
First, economic pragmatism must anchor diplomacy. India should deepen trade and investment ties with China, while pushing for greater access for its own exports. Decoupling is neither feasible nor desirable; diversification is the better option.
Second, strategic autonomy must be preserved. India should avoid becoming a cog in Washington’s containment strategy. Multipolarity demands cultivating ties with all major power centres—China, Russia, Europe, and ASEAN—without allowing any one to dictate terms.
Third, responsible diplomacy must shape India-China relations. India should continue border de-escalation talks and strengthen confidence-building mechanisms, while maintaining credible military deterrence. Compartmentalisation, not confrontation, is the path to stability.
India’s rise to great power status will not come by playing junior partner in Washington’s game against China. It will come by standing as an independent pole in a multipolar world—engaging with both Beijing and Washington, but charting a course dictated by national interest. The path forward is not easy, but it is clear. India must choose realism with China over illusion with America.