Trans-Pacific View | Diplomacy | South Asia

Rubio’s Unusual Visit to India Marks a Paradigm Shift in India-US Ties

The U.S. secretary of state’s itinerary skipped the corridors of power in Delhi for boardrooms and a refinery. 

Since the February 2025 inauguration of the second Trump administration, New Delhi has struggled to find a way to deal with the constantly swinging moods in Washington. Although the still-emerging strategic partnership between the two has, at times, seemed to take center stage, on most occasions, U.S. President Donald Trump appears to have expressed very little affinity for India, his vice president’s matrimonial ties to the country notwithstanding.

The tariffs imposed on India – at one time among the highest for targeted countries – and the failure to arrive at a trade deal despite prolonged negotiations are among the many irritants that have seeped into the relationship. 

Beyond all else, there is the stark reality that in Washington’s calculations India appears to matter only to the extent it episodically can be played off against China. In this context, U.S. Secretary of State Mark Rubio’s two-day visit to India on October 20-21 may not have provided the positive breakthrough New Delhi was earnestly looking for, highlighting instead the contours of the changing strategic partnership and the increasingly erratic nature of U.S. foreign policy under Trump 2.0.

Rubio broke a protocol of sorts. His first stop was Mumbai, India’s financial capital. As a result, there was no meeting between him and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which would have been a foregone conclusion had he included New Delhi in his itinerary. In Mumbai, he met the top two industrial chiefs of the country: Gautam Adani of the Adani Group and N. Chandrasekharan of the Tata Group. India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, who recently aired his grievances against the U.S., flew down to Mumbai to meet Rubio as well as visiting UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed.

That the U.S. secretary of state could decide the venue of his meeting with his Indian counterpart while in India has been criticized by the opposition parties. It also dovetails squarely with emerging assessment that U.S. strategy is divorced from any cogent calculations, responding rather to rapidly shifting whims and fancies of a transactional leader. 

Following the meetings – bilaterally between Jaishankar and Rubio, another between Jaishankar and bin Zayed and finally, all three together – a readout of cooperation was issued. Curiously missing were two important initiatives involving all three countries: the I2U2 and the India-Middle East Economic Corridor (IMEC). 

The I2U2 was formed by the three countries along with Israel in 2021, and the IMEC was announced in 2023. Both projects have stalled due to a variety of reasons including the war in Iran. Jaishankar’s summation of the trilateral meeting as a “useful exchange of perspectives on energy, connectivity and contemporary developments” was a clear indicator of the limited outcome of the confabulation and served only to raise questions concerning U.S. intentions. 

Rubio and U.S. Ambassador to India Sergio Gor did try to sound optimistic while predicting the future of the India-U.S. trade deal. Rubio said that the deal, which is allegedly 99 percent complete, could be only “weeks away” from being signed. This kind of temporal signaling is de rigor in Trump administration communications, but generally has little connection to real time. Rubio, in fact, uttered those same words on June 4 while testifying before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “We can wrap up the negotiations on our trade agreement, which we think we’re a few weeks away from being able to conclude,” he said roughly 20 weeks ago.

The latest statement of reassurance comes amid pessimistic Indian assessments, including that of the country’s finance minister. Speaking at the Munich Leaders Meeting on October 5, Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said, “The negotiations........

© The Diplomat