Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

News

US election seen from India: "Deteriorating US-China relationship is a good thing"

Art of man carrying the Indian flag in front of a map of India
Make us preferred on Google

Pramit Pal Chaudhuri is the foreign editor of the Hindustan Times, based in New Delhi. Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Gabrielle Debinski: Is there a lot of focus in India right now on the US election?

PC: The focus on the US election in India at present is not that great. There has been coverage, obviously of the riots and the protests [against racial injustice]. President Trump's own, shall we say, eccentric statements do get a fair amount of coverage here, but otherwise, partly because of our present problems with China and the continuing problems with COVID-19, local media coverage definitely has been very internally and domestically focused.


The government of India is monitoring of course — as I presume most other governments are — what's happening in America. But I would argue that they are not overly concerned about results because there's a view, and I think seconded by people I've talked to in Washington, that there is a very broad bipartisan consensus in the United States regarding the importance of the Indo-US relationship.

GD: So the Indian government is generally confident that the close Indo-US relationship will continue regardless of who wins in November?

PC: In the broadest sense, yes. There are a number of issues which the governments, depending on who becomes president, will be different. For example, Prime Minister Narendra Modi is very concerned about climate, it has been one of his signature concerns as prime minister. Obviously, with Biden, he will be able to do a lot more than he would be able to with President Trump.

On trade, the Indian government is a strong supporter of the WTO and the multilateral trade system, and probably the biggest friction with Trump has been on the issue of trade and this presumably will be different under a President Biden.

But on the other hand, [the Indian government] has also been very broadly pleased with the fact that President Trump has taken on China aggressively, if sometimes a little incoherently.

The fact that he's been able to shock China so much, both on trade, or things like ripping apart the INF treaty, which India thought was an excellent move because of its importance for the strategic balance in the Indo-Pacific, were things that they saw that Trump did. And they are not clear in their mind yet that a Biden administration will take these issues as seriously — at least in the first year.

GD: Turning back to China — how is the India-China spat perceived, broadly speaking, by the Indian people? And is the growing US-China rivalry becoming a headache for the Indian government?

PC: The Indian government's goal with China is to have a certain, should we say, a modus vivendi, rather than to be friends. They don't expect to have a good relationship.

India has always had a tough line regarding China, for example, and Chinese investment. The total Chinese FDI into India today barely totals $8 billion. Which is basically almost nothing. That's been because of deliberate policies by the Indian government to keep Chinese investment out of the country.

So for them, if anything, a deteriorating US-China relationship is a good thing as far as India is concerned. Trump, in their view, was willing to break China, literally, in an attempt to recalibrate the relationship.

Too often they felt that American officials privately say, "yes, China's terrible" and then say, "but we can't do X, Y and Z."

In Trump's case, it's "China is terrible and I'm going to do X, Y and Z." And the Indians are very pleased that this was happening though they're not necessarily, should I say, all in praise of the tactics that he used.

GD: Looking back at 2016, how much would you say the outcome of the US election affected your country?

PC: Well, the Indians were as surprised as anybody else when Trump was elected. They had a very good relationship with both Bill and Hillary Clinton and had assumed that they would pick up a lot of the strands that the bilateral relationship already had based even on their previous experiences with Bill Clinton.

I think with Trump, they came to recognize one thing which they hadn't understood —which perhaps many other countries hadn't understood — that the deep cleavages in the United States, particularly on the issue of equity, had delegitimized the American establishment and that they had not realized how deeply that had occurred.

They were also surprised, and continue to be worried about, the degree to which the Republican Party has turned, as the Americans would say, on a dime, on two key issues: immigration and trade. The Republicans have in recent times at least been the party of free trade and the party of immigration. And Trump obviously turned his party against both of those issues.

The [Indian government] now recognizes they have to invest a lot more in both sustaining the international trading system, as well as working more closely with the Americans on things like immigration, which they've sort of left to the American political system.

America issues more visas to Indians than they do to any other country in the world other than Mexico. Almost a million visas are issued every year to Indians, and the Indian-American community has expanded at an enormous rate.

Before Trump came, it was rising at about 20-25 percent a year, and it has now become by far the largest, wealthiest Indian diaspora anywhere, far surpassing the diaspora that exists, for example, in England. So until now, it's just been taken for granted. And they've been rated as a sort of model immigrant population in the United States.

And now you have a president who is actually saying that, well, I don't really care anything about them. For example, in some of the trade negotiations we have now been holding with the Americans, India is bringing in immigration issues and saying can we incorporate H-1B visas or something into the larger trade dialogue, which is something we've never done.

This interview is part of the GZERO project Global voices on the US election, which you can find in full here.

More For You

This week, I unpack Germany’s political upheaval, talk to historian Nicole Hemmer and reporter Molly Ball about Trump’s unencumbered power, and answer your questions on the Russia-North Korea axis, Japan’s new government, and COP29. Plus, your weekly rec from my dog Moose.Let’s get to it.- IanWant to understand the world a little better? Subscribe [...]
America’s long arm of counterterrorism
Natalie Johnson
In the 25 years since 9/11, the US has pursued counterterrorism operations in dozens of countries around the world. Brown University’s Cost of War Project tracked operations in nearly 80 countries between 2021 and 2023, or roughly 40% of countries worldwide. In most countries where the US conducted operations, it trained or assisted local security [...]
Palestinian youth look at a new Israeli settlement from the Palestinian village of Duma, near Nablus, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

Palestinian youth look at a new Israeli settlement from the Palestinian village of Duma, near Nablus, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, February 24, 2026.

REUTERS/Ammar Awad
Middle powers take on Israeli West Bank settlements The UK, Canada, and France announced sanctions on exports from Israeli settlements in the West Bank on Tuesday, later joined by nine additional European countries. In a speech announcing the sanctions – which have significant cross-party support in the UK – Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband condemned [...]
The cascading consequences of 9/11 for America and the Middle East
“This will devastate America and the region!” I howled as I watched the second plane slam into the Twin Towers in New York from my distant Beirut living room. Osama bin Laden was killed in 2011, a decade after the September 11th attacks, and al-Qaeda’s core leadership was dismantled. But my fears were not misplaced. Bin Laden achieved something [...]