Donald Trump’s close aide and former trade advisor, Peter Navarro, has once again directed sharp criticism at India. For the second consecutive day, Navarro has made remarks targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent diplomatic engagements, especially his interactions with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping during the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit. Navarro has described Modi’s meetings with the two leaders as a “strategic mistake,” arguing that India risks undermining its long-standing partnerships with the West.
Navarro’s comments highlight growing frustration in certain U.S. political circles regarding India’s foreign policy balancing act. While Washington has often praised New Delhi’s role as a democratic counterweight to China, there has been rising concern about India’s deepening ties with Russia and its continued engagement with forums that include Beijing. At the SCO summit, the display of camaraderie among Putin, Xi, and Modi was interpreted by Navarro as an alignment that contradicts the broader Western vision of containing authoritarian powers.
For Navarro, the issue is not merely about symbolism. His criticism suggests that by engaging closely with Putin and Xi, India may inadvertently signal a tilt away from the Western alliance system at a time when global divisions are sharpening. He has urged Modi to strengthen ties with the United States, Europe, and Ukraine rather than fostering connections with Moscow and Beijing. Navarro views such interactions as damaging to India’s credibility as a strategic partner in the Indo-Pacific region, especially in light of ongoing U.S.–China tensions and the war in Ukraine.
This is not the first time Navarro has singled out India. On the previous day, he accused the country of being excessively protectionist, calling it the “Maharaja of tariffs.” According to him, India has maintained steep trade barriers that disadvantage American companies and hinder a fair global trading environment. This dual criticism—first on trade policies and then on strategic choices—reflects his broader skepticism of India’s current trajectory.
From India’s perspective, however, the situation is more nuanced. New Delhi has consistently pursued a policy of strategic autonomy, maintaining ties across multiple power centers rather than aligning exclusively with one bloc. Its relationship with Russia has deep historical roots, particularly in defense and energy cooperation. At the same time, India has strengthened its ties with the United States through initiatives such as the Quad, increased defense cooperation, and expanded technology partnerships. For India, engaging with Putin and Xi at multilateral forums like the SCO is part of its diplomatic balancing act rather than a sign of shifting allegiance.
Navarro’s repeated attacks underscore the tensions inherent in this balancing strategy. While the United States expects India to side more openly with the West, India seeks to preserve flexibility and avoid over-dependence on any single bloc. The criticism also reveals the impatience of certain American policymakers who view global politics through the lens of binary choices, whereas India sees value in multipolar engagement.
Ultimately, Navarro’s remarks may not alter India’s approach, but they do reflect the challenges that New Delhi faces as it navigates an increasingly polarized world. Modi’s outreach to both Putin and Xi may be controversial in Washington, yet for India, it remains a calculated move to protect its national interests.
0 Comments