The author says the first Trump term’s “Indo-Pacific Command” framed India as a partner against China; the second term, in this telling, has strained Europe, Canada, Australia, and India while warming to Russia, China, North Korea, and Pakistan.

Renaming the command back to “Pacific” just before a June 2026 Modi–Trump G7 meeting is read as a slight. Trump called the Saudi–Pakistan–Türkiye Mecca defence pact “big, bold and important”; New Delhi said it was watching the security effects.

India is said to have passed on mediating the Iran–U.S. fight (Jaishankar: not appropriate); Pakistan took the role. The piece argues Modi’s circle missed a Gulf opening and that India’s regional weight is slipping.

The present moment may not be the most appropriate time for well-wishers to discuss India’s relations with the United States. In international relations, the relationships among states are always influenced by the passage of time, significant events and leadership. These outcomes reflect states’ actions geared towards survival and the pursuit of maximum power in the international system. Hans Morgenthau argued that all states strive for power because it is closely linked to pride and national interest. Eight years ago, the U.S. made the strategic decision to rename the U.S. Pacific Command to the Indo-Pacific Command. The Trump administration may think that China’s growing influence across sectors, including its military capabilities, its critical minerals sector, and its pursuit of an unbreakable global supply chain, presents a multifaceted challenge for the U.S. in addressing these concerns on its own. This change reflected a policy focus on advancing relations........

© Eurasia Review