The U.S.-India relationship has once again come under intense scrutiny following recent criticism of President Donald Trump’s decision to impose steep tariffs on Indian imports.

In an exclusive interview with ANI, Edward Price, an adjunct professor at New York University and a noted senior U.S. analyst, strongly condemned the move, describing the tariffs as "irrational," counterproductive, and damaging to Washington’s own long-term strategic interests.

Price went as far as to argue that the United States should not only reduce tariffs on India but in fact cut them to zero percent and extend a formal apology to New Delhi. His stance underscores how deeply some U.S. foreign policy experts view the India-U.S. partnership as central to shaping the balance of power in the 21st century.

Price emphasised that India holds what he called the “deciding vote” in contemporary geopolitics, especially in the evolving dynamic between China and Russia. He warned that by attempting to penalise India through tariffs—reportedly as high as 50 percent on some categories of trade—the Trump administration risks alienating one of America’s most pivotal allies.

He stated that such punitive measures make little strategic sense at a time when Washington is already engaged in fierce confrontation with Beijing and locked in a destabilising conflict with Moscow. According to him, forging a closer partnership with India, not punishing it, is vital to offsetting China’s assertiveness and Russia’s revisionist behaviour.

The analyst further praised Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s geopolitical balancing act. He described Modi as “pretty smart” in reminding Washington that India has alternatives, yet simultaneously not moving fully into the Russia-China orbit.

For instance, Modi’s decision to avoid participating in Beijing’s recent military parade was cited as a signal of India’s refusal to openly side with China and Russia, despite maintaining diplomatic and economic engagement with both.

Price stressed that India’s strength lies in its independent-minded sovereignty, rooted in its distinctive civilizational identity, which prevents the country from falling into any lasting sphere of influence—be it Moscow’s or Beijing’s.

Dismissing notions that India might one day become subsumed under Chinese influence, Price argued that New Delhi will continue to exercise autonomy in its decision-making. He pointed to Russia as a cautionary example, describing Moscow’s growing dependency on Beijing as a form of “economic conquest” rather than a genuine strategic partnership. India, in contrast, is too large, diverse, and independent to accept such subservience, making it one of the world’s most unpredictable yet critical strategic actors.

The issue of President Trump’s personal financial entanglements also came under focus. Referring to former U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan’s allegations that Trump is deliberately weakening relations with India in order to pursue his family’s business ties in Pakistan, Price acknowledged the unusual problem posed by such conflicts of interest.

He noted that unlike his predecessors, Trump maintained “active financial interests” while in office, which opens the door to speculation about how personal wealth intersects with matters of national policy. Nevertheless, Price admitted that it is almost impossible to fully ascertain the extent to which these interests shape U.S. decision-making, given the opaque nature of Trump’s private finances.

Beyond questions of trade and personal credibility, Price’s warnings reflect broader anxieties within the American strategic community. The imposition of aggressive tariffs has rattled foundations of trust in the U.S.-India partnership, a relationship widely considered one of the most crucial in navigating great-power competition through the 21st century.

Experts worry that continued trade tensions could bleed into other areas of cooperation—such as defence coordination, Indo-Pacific strategy, and technology partnerships—at a time when India’s alignment with democratic powers is seen as integral to counterbalancing authoritarian blocs.

In essence, Price’s commentary highlights the critical crossroads at which U.S.-India relations currently stand. On one hand, Washington has the opportunity to build a stronger alliance with New Delhi based on mutual respect, trade openness, and geopolitical necessity. On the other hand, punitive tariff policies and perceived personal conflicts risk pushing India into a more cautious, self-reliant, and less cooperative stance.

For both nations—two of the world’s largest democracies—the stakes extend beyond economics, potentially determining the very future of the international order as China seeks dominance and Russia attempts resurgence.

Based On ANI Report