Narendra Modi first rolled out the red carpet for Xi Jinping.
He shared a riverfront swing in his home state with the leader of China, the giant neighbor that he hoped his own large nation could emulate in economic prosperity. But as they chatted, Chinese troops got involved in a standoff with Indian troops along their shared border. The flare-up in 2014 was the first of several acts of aggression that would ultimately leave Modi embarrassed, his economy squeezed by the need to keep tens of thousands of Indian troops on a war footing high in the Himalayas for several years.
Years later, India’s strongman warmed up to the United States, putting even more of his political credit on the line to rapidly transform a relationship that had been only slowly shedding its Cold War-era frost. Modi developed such a bonhomie with President Donald Trump in his first term that he broke with protocol to campaign for a second term for him at a stadium-packed event in Houston. Modi’s confidence in India’s increasing alignment with the United States grew after the Biden administration looked past that partisan play to continue expanding relations with India, a bulwark against China.
“AI” stands for “America and India,” Modi, who has a penchant for playing with acronyms, told a joint session of Congress last year.
Then came the very public humiliation of Modi by Trump, now in his second term. The president singled India out for a whopping 50% tariff, citing its purchases of Russian oil, and called India’s economy “dead.” And the president stirred rancor among Indians by giving the leadership of Pakistan — India’s smaller archrival, which Trump himself had previously called a state sponsor of terrorism — equal footing as he tried to settle a conflict between the Asian neighbors earlier this year.
All that has plunged India into a moment of soul-searching, exposing limitations to its power on the world stage despite its gargantuan size and growing economy. Modi acknowledged this week that he might pay a personal political price for the trade dispute.
There is increased activity toward warming ties with Beijing again, with Modi scheduled to visit at the end of the month for the first time in seven years. But relations remain strained by the border skirmish as well as China’s recent support of Pakistan in its military escalation with India. China, for its part, has been wary of New Delhi’s efforts to create a manufacturing alternative to China.
Modi has also been working the phone. He spoke with President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil, which is stuck in its own messy showdown with Trump. He spoke with President Vladimir Putin of Russia and said that both sides vowed to deepen “the India-Russia Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership.”
Russia’s steadfastness as a partner is being talked up by officials in India. Modi’s national security adviser was in Moscow this week to finalize details of a trip by Putin to New Delhi.
“I look forward to hosting President Putin in India later this year,” Modi said on social platform X after their call.
But beyond the scramble and defiance, India’s ambition to consolidate its rise as an economic and diplomatic force appears deflated by the sudden uncertainty.
Stuck between two superpowers that have shown no hesitation to put India down in moments of friction, there is a growing sense among Indian officials and experts that the country will have to firmly return to its long-tested doctrine of “strategic autonomy.” In plain speak, that means India is on its own and should make do with a patchwork of contradictory and piecemeal ties, and avoid overcommitting to alliances.
Nirupama Rao, a former Indian ambassador to Beijing and Washington, said Trump’s punishing moves had upended “the strategic logic of a very consequential partnership” that had been carefully nurtured over more than two decades. There will be “very pragmatic strategic recalibrations” by New Delhi to protect its interests, she said.
India’s growing economy allows its leaders breathing room, but it is still a moment of “deep introspection” for the country.
“We have to draw our lessons from that and really focus on the national priorities and what we need to do to become strong and more influential,” Rao said.
There is no indication that official talks between New Delhi and Washington have entirely broken down.
Trump’s announcement that the additional 25% tariff, imposed as a penalty for India’s trade ties to Russia, will go into effect later in the month suggested it could be a crude bargaining tactic to get a more favorable trade deal — and to pressure Russia to reach a settlement in Ukraine.
Before Trump put the purchase of Russian oil at the center, Indian officials said progress was being made over his broader concern that trade was out of balance. India had showed willingness to expand its purchases of U.S. energy and defense items.
After multiple rounds of talks, the technical teams from India and the United States appeared to be close to finalizing a first phase of bilateral agreement over the summer. India was even willing to open up, to an extent, its long-protected agriculture market as well, officials have said, something that had been a sticking point in the negotiations.
Amitabh Kant, until recently Modi’s envoy for dealing with the Group of 20 economies, said that Trump had used strong-arm tactics against other traditional U.S. allies as well and that India could still arrive at a mutually beneficial trade deal.
“But even if the trade issues are sorted out, the trust would have been lost forever,” he said.
If Modi’s response to the Chinese aggression is any indication, analysts say, he will try to resolve the breakdown with the United States quietly and without public escalation.
In the wake of the deadly Chinese encroachment at the border, Modi’s response was measured. Even as he leveraged the shared threat from Beijing to expand defense and technology and maritime ties with the United States, his officials were at pains to avoid being used by the United States as a pawn against Beijing. That avoidance of public escalation has made it possible to work toward patching up the relationship since October, when officials of the two sides started engaging in earnest.
The chest-thumping against Trump from Modi’s shocked support base has been limited, and Modi has cloaked his defiance as defending his people’s livelihoods.
“India will never compromise on the interests of its farmers, fishermen and dairy farmers,” Modi told a gathering this week after Trump’s announcement of the high tariffs. “I know I will have to pay a heavy price personally, and I am ready for it.”
The relationship, in fact, had began souring months before Trump’s focus on Russian oil, leading some officials and analysts to suggest the breakdown in ties has to do with a more personal slight that Trump has felt.
After tensions between India and Pakistan escalated this spring into days of cross-border clashes between the nuclear-armed neighbors, Trump announced that he had pressured both sides to agree to a ceasefire.
While Pakistani officials welcomed it — and even later said they had put Trump’s name up for a Nobel Peace Prize — Indian officials contradicted the American president. They pushed hard against Trump’s assertion, which he has repeated dozens of times since, and aimed to project Modi’s image as a strong leader who had forced Pakistan through military might to plea for a ceasefire.
“What we now have is a U.S. president who is a very egotistical person with the highly personalized style of leadership and an Indian prime minister who is also an egotistical person with a highly personalized style of leadership,” said Sanjaya Baru, an author and former adviser to Modi’s predecessor. “When you have two leaders who have converted what is essentially a relationship between nations into a relationship between individual leaders, I think this is the price that we probably are paying.”
The New York Times News Service