The recent remarks by U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent shed light on the evolving tensions between Washington and New Delhi over trade, Russia, and geopolitical alignments amid the backdrop of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit.

Speaking in an interview with Fox Business, Bessent conveyed optimism that the United States and India would eventually resolve their ongoing trade disputes.

Emphasising the democratic values that India shares with the West, he underscored that these values bring New Delhi closer to Washington’s strategic outlook than to those of Russia and China. While discussing the SCO summit, he attempted to minimise its significance by branding it as "largely performative," suggesting that the event functions more as a symbolic display of unity rather than yielding substantive outcomes.

At the same time, he voiced disapproval of India’s growing energy trade with Moscow, particularly pointing out the resale of Russian crude oil which, he asserted, indirectly finances Russia’s war effort in Ukraine.

According to Bessent, such actions have contributed to the imposition of stiff tariffs by Washington, including a 50 percent levy on key Indian goods, with a 25 percent penalty directly tied to India’s procurement of discounted Russian oil.

Despite these sharp words, he reiterated hope that both democracies, as “two great countries,” would work through the present disputes.

His remarks reflect deeper strains in bilateral relations, particularly as New Delhi continues to pursue a multi-aligned foreign policy balancing ties with conflicting poles—Washington on one end, and Moscow and Beijing on the other.

This balancing act drew much sharper criticism from White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, who took a more confrontational tone. Navarro openly criticised Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi for his participation in high-level discussions with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping during the SCO summit. He accused Modi of “getting in bed with authoritarians,” calling the gesture “shameful” for the leader of the world’s largest democracy.

Navarro argued that India should recognise its greater dependence on its partnerships with the U.S., Europe, and Ukraine, and thus refrain from aligning or engaging with Moscow in the current geopolitical climate shaped by the war in Ukraine.

He forcefully urged India to halt purchases of discounted Russian oil, framing such transactions as contradictory to India’s democratic ethos and its strategic alignment with the West.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, however, used the SCO platform to advocate a different vision, one focused on connectivity and cooperation within the Eurasian bloc. Stressing that connectivity functions as a critical driver for trade, trust, and overall growth, Modi’s remarks were framed in the context of India’s longstanding foreign policy approach that emphasises development partnerships and regional integration.

This framing underscores India’s attempt to leverage forums like the SCO for economic gains while avoiding overtly ideological posturing between rival geopolitical camps.

On the other hand, Russian President Vladimir Putin saw the SCO’s activities as laying groundwork for an emerging Eurasian security and economic framework, increasingly independent of traditional Euro-Atlantic institutions.

Putin highlighted how member states are progressively shifting toward the use of national currencies in trade, signalling efforts to reduce dependency on the U.S. dollar and Western-led financial structures.

Chinese President Xi Jinping also echoed broad themes of anti-Western rhetoric at the summit, calling on SCO members to oppose Cold War mentalities, bloc-based confrontations, and bullying practices on the global stage.

By emphasising fairness, justice, and a revisionist narrative on World War II history, Xi positioned the SCO as a counterweight to Western geopolitical dominance.

This shared rhetoric from Moscow and Beijing signals an effort to consolidate influence in Eurasia by presenting the organisation as an alternative institutional structure in global governance, even though the group’s cohesion remains fragile due to divergent national priorities among its members.

Taken together, the events surrounding the SCO summit highlight the difficult balancing act for India as it navigates its foreign relations. While deeply invested in its strategic partnership with the United States, including defence, technology, and trade cooperation, New Delhi also finds value in maintaining close oil trade and diplomatic ties with Moscow, alongside engaging China in multilateral forums despite their bilateral tensions.

The U.S. position, as reflected by officials like Bessent and Navarro, demonstrates Washington’s growing impatience with India’s hedging strategy—a tension that has now materialised into tariffs and sharper rhetoric.

Whether the U.S. and India can reconcile these differences will depend on New Delhi’s ability to reassure Washington of its strategic commitment, even while preserving a measure of autonomy in its ties with Moscow.

In this sense, Bessent’s cautious optimism and Navarro’s caustic criticism reflect two sides of the same coin within U.S. foreign policymaking: an awareness of India’s indispensability as a democratic and economic partner, paired with mistrust over its continued engagements with Russia and China.

Based On ANI Report