India Moves Away from Us Toward China

high-ranking US officials frequently claimed that a caravan of American companies would relocate from China to India. However, this shift never substantially materialized, and US investment in India remains minimal. Instead, India’s trade dependence on China has increased significantly.

In his second term in 2019, Modi appointed S Jaishankar as foreign minister, hoping that his pro-American stance would help attract US investment and technology, while also securing preferential access for Indian goods in American markets—similar to what China achieved in the 1990s.

However, the role of the US government in its economy is largely limited to creating a legal framework for international trade and investment through treaties and regulations. The task of fostering a conducive investment environment falls to the host country, which American investors have long felt is lacking in India. Instead of increased US investment, major American companies like Ford, General Motors and Harley-Davidson exited the Indian market during this period.

Recently, it was hoped that assembling Apple’s iPhones in India would be a successful venture. However, the initiative faced significant setbacks due to high rejection rate of 50%, and concerns over E coli bacteria contamination, and lower worker productivity compared to China. As a result, the economic benefits India expected from aligning with the US and becoming its partner have not materialized as anticipated.

On the geopolitical front, meanwhile, India lost significantly. It once viewed South Asia and the Indian Ocean as its traditional sphere of influence, but after becoming a US ally, none of its neighboring countries remain within its sphere. Instead, India has arguably become more of a subordinate ally to the US.

This made India realize that the US expects it to relinquish its “strategic autonomy” and that India’s claims to a regional sphere of influence in South Asia are unacceptable to Washington.

Henry Kissinger famously remarked, “It may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal.” This sentiment seems to fit India’s experience perfectly. The US continued to exert political pressure on India at international events.

Meanwhile, despite India’s rhetorical trade restrictions on Chinese goods, its trade with China continued to grow. India’s increased trade with the US was largely driven by its rising imports from China. This dynamic revealed that while India needs China for its economic growth, China does not have the same dependence on India.

Ultimately, after four years of experimenting with foreign policy, the Modi government came to understand that China’s cooperation is essential for India’s economic development. The prime minister’s economic adviser argued that China would likely refrain from interfering in India’s border issues due to its dependence on India, coupled with the prospect of increased Chinese investment.

On the other hand, following the Ukraine war, the West intensified pressure on India to oppose Russia. The US warned India of consequences if it continued to purchase Russian oil and insisted that India abandon its relations with Russia, promising in return to provide arms.

Despite this pressure, India has continued to buy cheap Russian oil and is currently Russia’s largest oil buyer. Russia accounts for approximately 36% of India’s arms imports. The US pressure on India to refrain from purchasing arms and oil from Russia runs counter to India’s national interests.

Modi’s allies now recognize that maintaining a relationship with China is crucial for India’s economic development. Should China impose trade restrictions on India, the country would face significant challenges. The US can no longer offer the same advantages to India that it provided to China in the 1990s.

Modi has come to understand that India cannot secure preferential market access, technology or investment from the US due to its protectionist industrial and international trade policies, which favor bringing manufacturing back to America. Consequently, he has also acknowledged that India can seek technology, investment and market opportunities from China.

Conversely, Modi’s policy aimed at becoming a steadfast ally and partner of the US, which was intended to serve India’s interests, has proven to be fundamentally misguided. The ongoing border tensions with China have diverted India’s national priorities and squandered scarce financial resources. Modi has come to understand the truth in Kissinger’s words about the dangers of being America’s friend.

The first and second terms of Modi’s government have marked one of the worst decades in India’s history in regard to international relations. During this period, India has incurred unprecedented opportunity costs while experimenting with international and geopolitical strategies. In his third term, Modi is looking to reverse the course by shifting from the US to China.

2 Likes

No numbers just strong opinions.

Asia Times is a Chinese propaganda machine. So no wonder this story is a complete BS. For those who have not observed India for a long time, India maintained equidistant, if not bit closer to Russia, due to the fact that US is supplying arms and propping Pakistani military regime. For all his fault, Trump stopped the billions send to Pakistan Army, which was used to send terrorists into India. US holds Iran as a sponsor of terrorism, but applies similar strategy elsewhere in the world, especially with Pakistan. US and West sanctioned India for atomic testing. A decade where US India relationship should have leapfrogged, resulted in slow evolution. India’s legacy military is build heavily with Soviet weapons. With the disintegration of USSR, the military industrial might of russia suffered. In the last 20 years India tried to balance its weapons purchase by establishing military procurement with west.

Now, US in its fight against China, decided to make India a pawn by pushing India to buy lots of Western weapons. This coincided with the need to rebuild Indian weapons Inventory. Simultaneously India wanted to start local manufacturing of defense systems. Of course Soviets, to a certain extent French were willing to do this. But US, UK, Israel refused.

Separately, West like it does always, unilaterally issued sanctions against Russia, while Europe was still buying natural gas from Russia. Of course Biden administration and EU threatened India of consequences and had very little in answer when India’s foreign minister famously said in the press meet “What India buys in a month, you are buying in a afternoon. When I have a problem with China, you guys didn’t care about it, but if you have a problem suddenly you think it is worlds problem?

India has to buy cheap Oil from Russia because it makes economic sense for them. And most of the Russian oil are refined by India and exported to EU, and EU is happy to buy. If Russian Oil is completely eliminated from the market the price impact of that would be so severe, eventually US grudgingly decided to let it go.

Any relationship with China is tricky, if not fatal, for Indian politician, especially after the border attack initiated by China. China has a habit of taking territory from its neighbors. India during the very early years of its Independence, a young nation, had lost significant territory to China. Some part of Tibet are actually Indian territory. Even today China calls parts of India state as theirs and renames cities and towns. But Modi in his 3rd term as PM is trying to reduce the tensions in the border, so that he could focus on domestic issues.

US India relationship is solid, even though west doesn’t like India attending BRICS meeting in Russia. In fact today in CNBC, some idiot was suggesting why are we not sanctioning India. The West doesn’t understand that a nation of 1.4 Billion people is bigger than US, Canada, EU and Australia combined and is not subordinate to West wishes.

Lastly, if you want a rules based world order then it has to be applied everywhere. But West attitude of it only applies to others is not going to help. Irrespective of that, India is not moving towards China and will never do that. India will move towards equidistance. They will not be at West side, or Russia/China side. They will be on their side. After all they are a nation of 1.4 billion.

4 Likes

https://www.business-standard.com/economy/news/thaw-in-indo-china-ties-how-bilateral-trade-faired-in-last-decade-124102301294_1.html
Chart shows steadily increase China imports.

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/India/china-emerges-as-india-s-top-import-source/ar-AA1snpG1
China emerges as India’s top import source

https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2024/04/us-india-ties-remain-fundamentally-fragile.html
U.S.-India Ties Remain Fundamentally Fragile

Indeed, the two countries continue to experience friction in several areas that, if left unaddressed, could ultimately undermine or even derail future cooperation.

If you look into this report 3 major themes emerge surrounding democratic principles. Hindu nationalism, thus treatment of Muslims, Kashmir, prosecuting opposition.

First let us start with Kashmir:
British raj was carved into 2 nation, a muslim state pakistan and the rest went to India. When India got independence, there were many princely states, that were not part of the new nation. Many of them either willingly or in some cases with the threat of military action, merged with India. Kashmir was a ruled by a Hindu king with sizable muslim population. It was also birth place of India’s first Prime minister. So he wanted that to be part of India, so he traded parts of hindu majority areas for Kashmir. Within days of Independence Pakistan attacked Kashmir, still that state has not decided whether to join India or not. The Kashmir king requested India’s help and wanted to merge with India. Now, the PM for reasons best known to him, granted certain privileges to Kashmir, which was not offered to any other princely state that merged with India, that is your 370. Note, Kashmiri’s are Indian citizen, they enjoy all rights similar to any citizen, but Indian citizens have restricted rights in Kashmir, for ex: you cannot buy land. Now, Pakistan had two geographical part, , what is today’s bangladesh and today’s Pakistan, 2500 KM apart, India in between them. Bangladesh and Pakistan both being muslim majority, were culturally different and Bangladesh felt Pakistani rulers were not treating them fairly. So eventually they decided to go independent. Pakistan sent the army to quell the independence and India, at the request of Bangladesh intervened and defeated Pakistani army. Pakistan turned to military dictatorship and for the Pakistani Military the Bangladesh war defeat was a major embarrassment. Enter Afghanistan, US wanted to kick Russia out of Afghanistan, pulled together various splinter groups to fight the regime. There is no unit amongst them. So US invented JIHAD. Thus mujahideens are born.

US is very comfortable with non-democratic forces all through the history and indulged in happily toppling governments, coup, military coup, assassination, what not… all in the name of democracy.

Pakistan learned a valuable lesson from US, that is using terrorism, religious terrorism, islamic terrorism as a state policy. US trained Pakistani military in using this first in Afghanistan, later against India.

Kashmir has two regions, Jammu and Kashmir, in fact it is called Jammu Kashmir. Jammu is hindu majority and Kashmir is muslim majority. Cross border islamic terrorists killed and successfully drove Hindus completely out of Kashmir valley and even out of Jammu. India to fight terrorism deployed large number of army and terrorism raged for over 25 years. During this period, many provisions of 370 were slowly diluted. Eventually Modi government suspended the local legislature, split the territory and carved out ladakh which is buddhist majority area, and brought under direct federal rule. Then they canceled 370. 5 years later, they removed the federal rule, state elections took place and a new government elected by people is in power.

A very long history. The reason I wrote such a long piece is for the reader to understand the hypocrisy of US defence mouthpiece concerns about Kashmir. US wants to keep Kashmir burning, because Kashmir is between India, Pakistan and China, and as a leverage against India. Pakistan is essentially a broke state, they cannot import Oil, food or essential medical supplies for a decade now. US sold them F-16’s saying to fight terrorism. If you know F-16, you cannot hunt terrorists with that but they are good in deliver a nuke.

If some other country remarks about cases against Trump, remember he is the opposition leader of the current government, US will not tolerate. Yet in their infinite wisdom thinks the corruption cases brought against some state leaders (who are in opposition to modi government) as a concern for democracy. US hypocrisy has no bounds.

Lastly about certain laws against muslims. Remember how India formed. Essentially Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh has eliminated their minorities and became 90, 95, 98% muslims either through persecution, forced conversion etc. The Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, even Christians living in these country fled to India. Most of them have cultural and family ties with India. However, they were living as refugees for many decades. At last Modi government decided to address this, with a immigration reform. Basically providing a path to citizenship to these folks. The controversial part is the path to citizenship from these countries excluded Muslims. Since these countries are Muslim majority, Muslims cannot be religiously persecuted. Note, if you are Muslim from Saudi Arabia and seek asylum in India, you will be granted, however if you are a muslim from those 3 countries you will not. India has its reasons and US considers that as persecution against muslims. Given the challenges in our southern border, one would assume, US will be able to appreciate a nuanced position. But US hypocrisy doesn’t let such nuanced views come in between.

2 Likes

+1. Agree. This is a nonsensical article.

Why would India not move from US influence due its historical hypocrisy?
US has a long history of support for authoritarian rulers-Marcos, Trujillo, Shah, and even Saddam Huessein for a few years [Iraq-Iran War].

The US utilizes rule of law or humanitarian reasons for meddling in regions they have little understanding of the local culture & mores believing military forces will accomplish its strategic objectives. Iraq, Syria, Libya & Afghanistan have proven such hubris wrong even with multi trillion dollar expenditures. Islamic fundamentalism is alive and well. Damn hard to kill an idea/belief short of killing everyone.

I guess I would add Vietnam to the list of failures as well.

India is close to Russia historically. It will not forego this bond.
India is getting close to US. The relationship has gained strength progressively with Obama, Bush and Trump. With Biden it is strained in part due to the Ukraine war. India does not like to be pushed to not to buy oil from Russia.

BRICS summit last week was very successful.

Trump shut down the money spigot to Pakistani Army and pretty much outcast them. Under Biden traditional US military Pakistani Army relationship is restarted. While head of states visits get headline, Pakistani Army generals coming to US or vice versa do not. Pakistan Military gets over $2 B in aid now. How big it is for Pakistan? For getting a loan from IMF, Pakistan has to raise electricity prices to eliminate various welfare schemes to cut government employees salary.

US military institution has deep relationship with Pakistan Army. The relationship with India is transactional that should be viewed from China and Military equipment sale.

1 Like

Humans we are caught between bad rulers. The Americans try usually to uphold the constitution to even out our leadership woes.

In the Middle East the jump from tribe to constitution is failed by all but Jordan and Israel

India has a long history of being non-aligned. As a former tributary to the English Empire maybe they don’t relish repeating the experience. Israel is one of their main allies. Rebels with a cause?

The Captain

2 Likes

Pretty simple. The USA is the biggest market for India exports. Coming in a close second is the EU. BRICs combined doesn’t come close.

The economy is what matters and India’s economic future is with the West. If BRICs depends on India, BRICs will go nowhere.

The title of this thread is also misleading. It should read that China is appeasing India. China’s economy is export driven and the West is increasingly wary of Chinese exports as you may have heard. India runs a huge trade deficit with China, buying $120B USD of China’s product while exporting only about $20B USD to China. Angering India is bad for China.

China needs to sell goods to India, the most populous nation. It will do whatever it takes to keep India friendly as long as the economic war with the US and EU continues.

4 Likes