Trump's tariff toolkit: Lose Bharat, strengthen China, shatter Pax Americana

First Post

3 days ago

By treating Bharat as a subordinate to be bullied rather than a partner to be engaged, President Trump risks a rupture that could last far beyond his presidency read more
America may soon find that the real cost of its tariffs is not measured in dollars but in lost alliances and diminished influence. Image: X/@RepJoeWilson
Seven months into his second term, Donald Trump's presidency appears to be entering uncharted waters—even for those who claim to understand his unconventional political playbook. The former real estate mogul built his political brand on unpredictability, disruption, and a refusal to play by traditional rules. Until recently, this approach seemed to have some method in its madness—a calculated chaos designed to keep rivals off balance and extract concessions in negotiations.
But Trump's latest tariff moves—especially imposing a 25 per cent tariff on exports from Bharat—have stripped away the façade of methodical unpredictability, exposing what many now see as unrestrained impulsiveness. In the process, Trump risks undoing years of careful, if uneven, progress in Bharat-US relations.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
This is not just another trade dispute. It marks a deeper failure to understand Bharat—not merely as an emerging economic power, but as a civilisational state with a unique worldview and long memory. By treating it as a pawn in a transactional game, Trump risks alienating the one partner that could have helped secure America's long-term strategic interests in a rapidly changing world order.
Limits of a Businessman-President
Trump's leadership style has always mirrored his business persona. In his worldview, every international relationship is a negotiation—a zero-sum game where one side wins only if the other loses. Deals, concessions, and optics matter more than shared values or historical context. To him, tariffs are tools of power, not just economic instruments. The logic is simple: inflict maximum pressure, force capitulation, and claim victory.
In this narrow calculus, Bharat becomes just another 'trading partner' to be coerced into submission. The 25 per cent tariff, therefore, is not only about correcting trade imbalances with Bharat; it is an attempt to showcase American dominance in the relationship. But this approach fundamentally misunderstands Bharat's ethos and foreign policy DNA.
Bharat does not conduct diplomacy as a series of business transactions. Its foreign policy is rooted in a civilisational consciousness that values strategic autonomy, mutual respect, and sovereignty above coercive bargaining. Friendship, for Bharat, is never synonymous with subservience. Any attempt to impose terms through brute economic force risks triggering resistance, not compliance—especially in the long term.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
A History of Distrust
Washington's discomfort with Bharat's independent streak is hardly new. During the Cold War, successive US administrations grew frustrated with New Delhi's refusal to align fully with the West. Washington often preferred authoritarian or Islamist regimes that were pliable, even unreliable, over a democratic Bharat unwilling to be dictated to. Pakistan's military establishment, for all its instability, was seen as a more 'manageable' partner than Bharat's noisy democracy with its fiercely independent foreign policy.
As Seema Sirohi writes in Friends with Benefits, the Bharat-US relationship has been about 'a thousand heartbreaks and a hundred reunions… a story of inching closer, drifting apart, trying again, getting disappointed, developing new stakes in each other, losing interest, recharging batteries, giving it another shot, succeeding partly, celebrating with high rhetoric, hiding disappointment but strategically leaking true feelings while continuously rebranding the relationship as larger, deeper, and wider, and strengthening the foundation.'
Since the early 2000s, however, US administrations—starting with George W Bush—consciously reached out to Delhi, recognising its importance in balancing China's rise. Barack Obama, despite ideological differences, continued to invest in US-Bharat ties. Trump's first term continued this trajectory, with high-profile summits and public bonhomie between leaders of the two countries.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Trump's second-term tariff war has brought that optimism to a grinding halt, though one could sense its beginnings during the Joe Biden era. At a time when Washington should be cementing alliances in the Indo-Pacific to counter China's assertiveness, it is instead alienating its most natural partner. Worse, this follows another strategic misstep: alienating Russia through Nato's eastward expansion, thereby pushing Moscow closer to Beijing. With both Russia and Bharat drifting away, America's much-vaunted Indo-Pacific strategy now looks increasingly fragile.
Sindoor and Shifting Perception
Recent events have further complicated Washington's calculus. Operation Sindoor—a swift and decisive military action by Bharat—demonstrated capabilities that few believed New Delhi possessed. Within three days, Bharat achieved what many believed was impossible against a nuclear-armed adversary. This single event forced both allies and rivals to reassess the country's military transformation.
The US had been wary of rising Bharat for a while, but until Op Sindoor, its concern was largely economic—as was the case during the Biden era. Operation Sindoor brought Bharat's military transformation to the forefront. It signalled that the country was no longer just a counterweight to China but a potential independent pole in global geopolitics. This possibility has alarmed a power-driven West accustomed to using Delhi as a pawn in its broader game against Beijing. If Bharat grows too strong—economically and militarily—it will no longer be a tool of American strategy but a peer competitor shaping a multipolar world order.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Trump's tariffs, therefore, can be read as much about 'making America great again' as about slowing Bharat's rise. A $10 trillion Indian economy within a decade, with established military might, would fundamentally alter global power dynamics, giving New Delhi too much leverage for Washington's liking. Yet this approach is self-defeating.
Unlike China, which aims to displace the US as global hegemon, Bharat seeks coexistence, not domination. America's inability to embrace this vision of shared power could cost it a valuable ally at a time when its own global leadership is under strain.
A Self-Inflicted Strategic Loss
Trump's continuing diatribe against Bharat reflects an enduring inability in the United States to accept partners that do not fit into America's hierarchical worldview. Delhi's insistence on a multipolar order, where no single nation dominates, challenges the very foundations of strategic thinking in Washington, DC.
Bharat does not pursue anti-Americanism. It does not seek to undermine US power. Rather, its worldview—rooted in Sanatani philosophy—seeks coexistence and plurality, both in socio-spiritual life and in international politics. It envisions a world where multiple civilisations thrive without hegemony. By failing to understand this nuance, Washington repeatedly mistakes Delhi's independence for defiance, leading to cycles of estrangement and reconciliation.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
By treating Bharat as a subordinate to be bullied rather than a partner to be engaged, Trump risks a rupture that could last far beyond his presidency. Bharat does not easily forgive or forget attempts to compromise its sovereignty. And unlike Pakistan or other US client states, it cannot be bought off with aid packages or military hardware.
Conclusion
Trump's tariff war represents a classic case of winning battles while losing the war. The immediate goal—extracting better trade terms—may or may not be achieved. But the long-term damage to US-Bharat relations is already evident. Trust has been eroded. Doubts about American intentions have resurfaced. With this, Trump has handed Beijing a strategic victory without China firing a single shot.
In a world reshaped by rising powers, America may find that the real cost of its tariffs is not measured in dollars but in lost alliances and diminished influence. Trump may, in the short term, earn a few extra dollars for the US, but in the long term, he risks putting the very idea of Pax-Americana on sale.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
China's Xi Jinping must be the only person laughing right now.
Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.