NEW DELHI/WASHINGTON — India has responded with rare political unity to U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to double tariffs on Indian goods to 50%, portraying the move as an attempt to strong-arm New Delhi over its Russian oil purchases and agricultural market protections.
Calling the levy “unfair, unjustified and unreasonable,” the Ministry of External Affairs accused Washington of “double standards,” noting that other major buyers of Russian crude have not faced similar punishment.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi struck a defiant tone, vowing that India would “never compromise on the interests of farmers, livestock rearers and fisherfolk,” even if that meant paying a “very heavy price.”
His remarks came amid heightened sensitivity over U.S. demands for access to India’s agriculture, dairy, and genetically modified (GM) crop markets — areas the government has declared “non-negotiable on principle.”
An Uncommon Political Consensus
While foreign policy disputes in India often trigger bitter partisan exchanges, the tariff crisis has seen an unusual cross-party consensus emerge in defense of India’s trade sovereignty.
-
Congress Party president Mallikarjun Kharge declared that “India’s national interest is supreme” and condemned the use of tariffs as coercive leverage.
-
Senior Congress MP Shashi Tharoor called for “equal counter-measures” and argued that Washington’s message contained “hidden signals” unrelated to trade.
-
Regional leaders such as Sharad Pawar, head of the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), urged “collective national support for the Centre” and described Trump’s tactics as “pressure politics that no one should bow to.”
-
Even leaders typically critical of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) — including Tejashwi Yadav of the Rashtriya Janata Dal — voiced support for India’s firm posture, framing the dispute as a matter of sovereignty rather than party politics.
Editorials across the political spectrum echoed this line. The Hindu insisted that “India’s foreign policy choices cannot be manipulated,” while Dainik Jagran praised “the united resolve of Parliament in the face of unfair foreign pressure.”
Public and Media Sentiment
Indian television networks and newspapers have turned the tariff dispute into a rallying point for national pride. Prime-time debates have highlighted not only the economic stakes but also the symbolism of rejecting perceived external diktats.
Social media trends such as #IndiaUnited and #BoycottUSGoods gained traction within hours of the second tariff announcement, with calls for greater self-reliance in manufacturing and reduced dependence on U.S. imports.
Many commentators have contrasted the current atmosphere with earlier coverage celebrating a “special relationship” between Modi and Trump. “The romance is over,” wrote political columnist Pratap Bhanu Mehta, describing the tariffs as “imperialism on steroids” and warning against “capitulating to the emerging American imperial state.”
Economic Stakes and Sectoral Exposure
The United States remains India’s largest export destination, with shipments worth about $87 billion in 2024. The 50% tariffs — set to take effect later this month — threaten to hit labor-intensive sectors hardest:
-
Textiles and Apparel: Already under pressure from low-cost producers in Bangladesh and Vietnam, smaller Indian firms could see U.S. orders vanish.
-
Gems and Jewelry: A sector heavily dependent on U.S. luxury markets risks a sharp contraction.
-
Auto Components and Steel: Manufacturers warn of reduced competitiveness against East Asian rivals.
-
Leather Goods: Margins too tight to absorb such steep duties.
SC Ralhan of the Federation of Indian Export Organisations warned that “nearly 55% of our shipments to the U.S. will be affected,” calling the situation “a severe setback” unless diplomacy reverses the measures.
Sovereignty, Energy Security, and the Russia Question
At the heart of Washington’s complaint is India’s continued intake of discounted Russian oil, which has at times accounted for 40% of its crude imports since the Ukraine war began.
New Delhi insists these imports are essential for inflation control and energy security, and points out that other nations — including NATO allies — continue some form of trade with Russia without penalty.
Walter Ladwig of King’s College London notes that while trade tensions between India and the U.S. are not unprecedented, “this is the most serious public rift in years, sharper in tone and more coercive in method.”
Strategic and Diplomatic Moves
Indian officials are quietly preparing:
-
Retaliatory tariff options on select U.S. imports, potentially within WTO rules.
-
Diversification of trade ties toward the EU, Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia.
-
Back-channel diplomacy to seek a temporary suspension of the 50% tariff in exchange for calibrated assurances on oil imports and market access in non-sensitive sectors.
-
Defense procurement pacing reviews, signaling that strategic cooperation could be affected if economic relations sour further.
Looking Ahead
The tariffs will take effect on 27 August 2025 unless a deal is reached. Economists such as Prerna Prabhakar of the Centre for Social and Economic Progress advise against tit-for-tat tariff hikes, urging India instead to address its own high-tariff regime to improve global competitiveness.
“If India wants to offset this problem of being at a disadvantage in the U.S. market, it has to work on its competitiveness issues. Fundamental to that is lowering its own tariffs,” she said.
For now, India’s political class — from ruling party to opposition benches — stands unusually aligned. The message to Washington is clear: on core economic sovereignty, there is no daylight between India’s parties, its government, and its people.
