Nisha Biswal served as Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs from 2013 to 2017, playing a key role in shaping the US-India partnership. She talks to TNIE on the emerging India-US trade understanding, the tariff diplomacy under President Trump, and the prospects for durable strategic cooperation between the two countries amid shifting global power equations. Excerpts:
After a fraught phase, what strategic recalculation finally broke the logjam leading President Trump to announce a trade deal?
Most of the negotiations had been completed for some time. There was a feeling that the deal would not be finalised until the two leaders spoke. The phone call on February 2, initiated by President Trump, enabled the two leaders to find wins: India got removal of the 25% energy tariff and a reciprocal rate of 18%, which was better than other Asian peers, without compromising on its agriculture and dairy sectors; The US got removal of Indian tariffs on a cross-section of sectors, a commitment to cut Russian energy imports and commitments to buy US energy, technology and defence products. The timing can perhaps be attributed to the arrival of Ambassador Sergio Gor to New Delhi but also the announcement of an EU-India FTA.
Though the final text of the deal some distance away, does it signal an economic reset in India–US ties, or is it merely a tactical arrangement amid an unpredictable US tariff regime?
It’s more of a tactical stabiliser than a full reset. The deal brings the relationship back from a period of tariff escalation, but the real reset will come only if both sides translate this temporary alignment into durable progress on supply chains, tech, and services.
How do both sides achieve durable progress on supply chains and, considering these ideas have been on the table for sometime now?
The interim trade agreement between the US and India removes an irritant in the strategic partnership by removing the 25% energy tariff and reducing the reciprocal tariff to 18%. At the same time, it opens the door to cooperation on critical supply chains. The presence of S Jaishankar at the Critical Minerals Summit this week was an opportunity for the two countries to work together for solutions to reduce Chinese dominance of critical minerals and rare earth materials.
The summit discussed ways to prevent market manipulation through trade measures that create price stability, stockpiles that support demand stability and other measures. Also, India’s integration into trade and economic with the US, EU, UK, Canada, and Australia further strengthens supply chains that are routed through like-minded and trusted networks.
Given the Trump administration’s recent history of sudden tariff shifts, how can India assess the durability of this deal as a foundation for long-term cooperation?
Durability won’t come from the document alone. It will depend on how deeply India and the US integrate in critical areas like energy, technology, and defence. The more strategic the cooperation becomes, the harder it will be for either side to revert to disruptive tariff swings.
Trump has said India would stop buying Russian oil, while Delhi has made no public commitment. Is it realistic for Washington to expect India to disengage from Russian energy, given their long-standing strategic ties?
A rapid disengagement from Russian energy is unrealistic. India’s priority is energy security at affordable prices, and Russian barrels still meet that test. India will diversify over time if alternatives are competitive, but it won’t make absolute commitments that limit its strategic flexibility.
Despite China importing more oil from Russia, there was no sanction on Beijing. How do you see the China-US ties under Trump and what does it mean for Quad, alternative supply chain?
I believe the US is seeking to stabilise its relationship with China. President Trump’s trip to China in the spring may focus on some steps to normalise trade with China in non-critical sectors, including agriculture. However, there are fundamental differences between the US and China on advanced technology, critical minerals and pharmaceuticals.
The Trump administration has brought US-Pakistan ties closer. What does that concretely mean for India?
This isn’t a zero‑sum shift. The US-Pakistan ties reflects regional security considerations, not a downgrading of India’s role. India’s ties with the US is broader, deeper, and more future‑oriented.
With the US sceptical of BRICS and India set to host the BRICS meet this year, can Delhi deepen its ties with Washington?
India has long shown it can work across multiple alignments. Its partnership with the US advances tech and economic interests; BRICS advances India’s voice in the Global South. Strategic autonomy allows India to strengthen both without being constrained by either. Ultimately, it is in the US interest to have India be a moderating influence in fora where the US is not present.