The joint statement on the so-called Interim Agreement between India and the United States reads less like a partnership document and more like a compliance manual drafted in Washington and initiated in New Delhi.

Strip away the diplomatic varnish, and what remains is a pattern that is difficult to ignore. India eliminates or reduces tariffs across a wide spectrum of American industrial and agricultural goods.

India agrees to address long-standing barriers in US medical devices. India eases licensing procedures in ICT goods. India commits to aligning standards and conformity assessments.

India signals its intent to purchase $500 billion in American energy, aircraft, technology products, and metals over five years. And, on the American side, the language is narrower, conditional and hedged. An 18 per cent reciprocal tariff remains in place pending successful conclusion.

Removals are contingent. Preferential quotas are subject to national security reviews. Section 232 investigations hover in the background. The asymmetry is glaring and, in no way, subtle.

No Indian prime minister since independence has accepted a trade framework that reads this tilted in an interim stage. Even at moments of vulnerability, whether after 1991 or after the Pokhran sanctions, Indian negotiators secured visible strategic gains in exchange for structural concessions.

Here, the concessions are concrete and immediate, while the gains are procedural and prospective. The most telling clause is not about tariffs. It concerns the rules of origin that ensure the benefits of the agreement accrue predominantly to the United States and India. That line exists because Washington worries about third-country routing, especially from China.

In........

© Mathrubhumi English