The ongoing trade tensions between the United States and India escalated further as U.S. President Donald Trump once again lashed out at New Delhi’s trade policies, accusing India of imposing exorbitant tariffs and declaring that the country has now offered him a “no tariff” deal.

In an interview on The Scott Jennings Radio Show, Trump reiterated his long-standing stance that India has historically been “the most highly tariffed nation in the world,” an argument he used to justify his administration’s decision to impose a steep 50 percent levy on Indian goods, further compounded by an additional 25 percent tariff linked to India’s consistent purchase of Russian crude oil.

Stressing his self-proclaimed expertise on tariffs, Trump alleged that pressure from Washington compelled New Delhi to make an unprecedented concession of scrapping tariffs altogether, a position he portrayed as proof that his aggressive trade strategy was paying dividends.

However, he warned that India’s delayed action had already done deep damage, accusing the Indian side of benefitting disproportionately from U.S. markets for decades while giving little in return.

This was not the first time Trump escalated his rhetoric against India. Earlier in the week, he described bilateral trade relations as “a one-sided disaster,” charging that India exported “massive” amounts of goods to the U.S. but continued to stifle American companies with prohibitively high tariffs, preventing them from gaining meaningful access to India’s large domestic market.

Trump linked this imbalance not only to economic inequities but also to strategic decisions by India, specifically its preference to continue buying oil and weapons systems from Russia instead of shifting procurement to American suppliers. According to Trump, New Delhi’s willingness to supposedly reduce tariffs to zero came too late, and he indicated that such concessions would not undo what he called decades of “unfair trade practices.”

The developments surrounding Trump’s tariff policies have, however, sparked considerable backlash within the U.S. itself. A U.S. appeals court recently ruled that the tariffs imposed on Indian imports were illegal, further raising questions about the durability of Trump’s economic actions if subjected to judicial scrutiny or congressional challenges.

Critics argue that Trump’s aggressive and unilateral approach could damage Washington’s long-term strategic interests by alienating one of its key Indo-Pacific partners at a time when the U.S. seeks to build stronger coalitions to balance China’s expanding influence.

Former U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan delivered one of the sharpest criticisms, alleging that Trump had “thrown away” years of progress in building trust with India. Sullivan suggested that personal business interests involving Pakistan and the Trump family had interfered with national interests, causing India to question America’s credibility as a strategic partner. This, he warned, sends a worrying signal to other allies like Japan and Germany, who may begin to doubt Washington’s reliability under Trump’s leadership.

Indian stakeholders and policy observers appear to be treating Trump’s statements with caution. Mukesh Aghi, President and CEO of the U.S.-India Strategic Partnership Forum (USISPF), suggested that Trump’s rhetoric should be weighed carefully, noting that some of his remarks often carry more political weight than substantive grounding.

Aghi emphasised that India would prioritise its own national interests, while also acknowledging that the country’s policymakers and public are astute enough to distinguish between rhetoric and reality.

Meanwhile, New Delhi continues to face increased global uncertainty, given the cumulative effect of U.S. tariffs, its own economic vulnerabilities, and heightened geopolitical risks stemming from its energy dependencies on Russia amid ongoing great-power rivalries.

Trump continues to portray his tariff war against India as a strategic victory that forced New Delhi into offering major concessions, the broader picture is far more complex.

His actions have prompted domestic legal hurdles, diplomatic frictions, and a deeper examination of Washington’s credibility among allies.

For India, balancing its strategic autonomy with the necessity of preserving access to U.S. markets and technology will remain a delicate challenge, particularly as bilateral ties enter one of their most contentious phases in decades.

Based On ANI Report