U.S.-India Relations Under Stress, With Sadanand Dhume

30 snips

Jul 15, 2026

Sadanand Dhume, senior fellow on South Asia at CFR, offers sharp analysis of U.S.-India tensions. He walks through tariffs, trade stalls, and the May 2025 India–Pakistan clash. He examines U.S.–China rapprochement, the Quad’s fading momentum, India’s balancing with Russia and China, and tech and AI as bright spots for rekindling cooperation.

Ask episode

AI Snips

Chapters

Transcript

Episode notes

INSIGHT

Sharp Downturn After Early 2025 Peak

U.S.-India relations peaked in early 2025 but quickly soured due to tariffs, Pakistan outreach, and U.S. warmth toward China.
Sadanand Dhume cites 50% punitive tariffs and Trump’s public friendliness to Pakistan as key shocks.

INSIGHT

Ceasefire Put Modi In A Political Bind

The May 2025 India-Pakistan clash and Trump-brokered ceasefire strained ties because Pakistan accepted credit while India could not politically.
Dhume explains Modi couldn't publicly thank Trump without undercutting his domestic strongman image.

INSIGHT

Trade Offers Rejected Despite Major Concessions

Trade talks stalled despite India offering major concessions; U.S. officials still rejected offers and imposed very high tariffs.
Dhume notes former U.S. trade officials thought India's offers were "fantastic" yet Trump refused them.

Get the Snipd Podcast app to discover more snips from this episode

Get the app

U.S.-India relations have struggled despite U.S. President Donald Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s close personal relationship. This episode unpacks why tariffs, security concerns, and a détente with China has reframed the importance of the relationship, and what it could take to put it back on track.

Host:

James M. Lindsay, Mary and David Boies Distinguished Senior Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy, CFR

Guest:

Sadanand Dhume, Senior Fellow for India, Pakistan, and South Asia, CFR

We Discuss:

Why U.S.-India relations have been uncertain since mid-2025 after having slowly strengthened over many years.
How the second Trump administration’s early actions and India’s multipolar diplomacy forced substantive confrontations thatTrump and Modi’s personal relationship could not overcome.
Why U.S.-India trade negotiations stalled and the Trump administration imposed tariffs, despite India repeatedly offering concessions.
How the May 2025 India-Pakistan conflict and Trump’s claim of forcing a ceasefire put Modi in a domestic political bind.
How Pakistan’s prominent role in brokering the U.S.-Iran ceasefire has amplified Indian anxieties about a U.S.-Pakistan thaw.
Why Trump’s talk of a Group of Two with China undermines its strategic desire to strengthen India as a counterweight to Chinese power.
What the state of the Quad—an informal security dialogue among the United States, Australia, India, and Japan—and the United States’ de-emphasis of the Indo-Pacific framework reveal about U.S. strategy in Asia.
How Modi is normalizing ties with China and whether there is a limit to normalization given the Himalayan border dispute and China’s efforts to constrain India’s growth.
How India’s dependence on Russian arms has fallen over time, and why India is increasingly skeptical that Russia can act independently of China.
Why Modi has resisted domestic political pressure to challenge Trump, and what that restraint reveals about India’s calculation of its long-term national interest.
Where the greatest opportunity lies to rebuild the U.S.-India relationship, and why tech cooperation and Silicon Valley represent the most natural and promising place to start.

Mentioned in the Episode:

“How People in 24 Countries View India,” Pew Research Center

Mathew George, Katarina Djokic, Zain Hussain, Pieter D. Wezeman, and Siemon T. Wezeman, “Trends In International Arms Transfers, 2024,” Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

For an episode transcript and show notes, visit The President’s Inbox at https://www.cfr.org/podcasts/presidents-inbox

Opinions expressed on The President’s Inbox are solely those of the host or guests, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions on matters of policy.