India’s Strategic Restraint Amid Trump’s Unpredictability Draws Diplomatic Attention

New Delhi: The unpredictability that has long characterised U.S. President Donald Trump’s political conduct continues to pose challenges not only for America’s rivals but also for its closest allies.

In such an uncertain environment, even traditional partners often struggle to anticipate Washington’s next move. Against this backdrop, India’s measured and calculated approach in dealing with the Trump administration has drawn attention within diplomatic and strategic circles.

Despite repeated attempts by President Trump and senior members of his administration to provoke a reaction—on issues ranging from trade negotiations to India’s purchase of Russian oil—New Delhi has largely resisted the temptation to respond impulsively. Instead, India has opted for restraint, strategic patience, and a clear articulation of its national interests, a posture that analysts say has helped the country navigate an otherwise volatile bilateral phase.

While several European nations and the United Kingdom appeared unsettled by Trump’s aggressive tariff policies, India deliberately avoided direct confrontation from the outset. Even after the U.S. imposed tariffs of up to 50 per cent on Indian goods—25 per cent of which was linked to India’s continued import of Russian oil—there was no public war of words from either Prime Minister Narendra Modi or senior Cabinet ministers. Indian officials, instead, continued engagement through diplomatic channels, maintaining composure amid harsh rhetoric from Washington.

India also declined to rush into a trade agreement that would have disproportionately harmed sensitive domestic sectors such as agriculture and dairy. Despite mounting pressure and tariff threats, New Delhi refused to sign any deal that compromised long-term economic interests. Notably, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick later acknowledged that efforts to force India into even a partial trade agreement had failed, attributing this in part to Prime Minister Modi’s refusal to engage directly under coercive conditions.

India’s early understanding of Trump’s transactional approach was sharpened during the India–Pakistan tensions, when Trump publicly claimed credit for halting Operation Sindoor and asserted that tariff threats had helped defuse the situation in May 2025. This episode underscored for New Delhi how trade and diplomacy were being leveraged to advance personal political narratives, prompting India to adopt a more cautious and controlled engagement strategy.

While Trump continued to repeat his claims, India firmly but calmly rebutted them with verified information, avoiding escalation. Pakistan, meanwhile, quickly embraced Trump’s version of events, further reinforcing India’s resolve to rely on factual diplomacy rather than rhetorical exchanges.

Tensions peaked during a phone conversation between Trump and Modi on June 17, when the Indian Prime Minister made it clear that the U.S. had no role in the ceasefire process. India also declined to support Trump’s Nobel Peace Prize ambitions, a move that reportedly deepened Washington’s irritation. Weeks later, the U.S. announced steep tariffs on India, while Pakistan faced a comparatively modest levy of 19 per cent.

Despite these developments, India maintained its policy of restraint. Even as Trump’s advisers publicly accused India of acting as a “laundry” for the Kremlin and described Russian oil purchases as “blood money,” New Delhi refrained from retaliatory rhetoric. At the same time, Trump continued to publicly praise Modi, calling him a “true,” “dear,” and “very good friend,” highlighting a dual-track approach of public warmth and policy pressure.

Crucially, India refused to be drawn into this “good cop–bad cop” dynamic. It neither compromised on its core economic interests nor agreed to halt Russian oil imports under pressure. Instead, India strengthened domestic economic policies to counter external shocks and diversified its diplomatic engagements.

A notable shift in strategy was India’s insistence on promptly issuing official readouts of all high-level communications with Washington. By releasing its version of conversations before Trump could frame them through social media posts, New Delhi effectively controlled the narrative. This approach proved particularly effective following the September 17 phone call, placing the U.S. President on the defensive.

Simultaneously, India expanded its global economic footprint. While trade talks with the U.S. stalled, New Delhi concluded agreements with the United Kingdom, Oman, and New Zealand, and accelerated negotiations with the European Union. Once finalised, an India–EU trade agreement would become the largest of its kind globally, linking economies representing over two billion people.

India also deepened engagement with Latin American nations, Gulf countries, and the broader Indian Ocean region, reinforcing the message that it has multiple strategic options beyond the West. Analysts note that while European nations are still grappling with how to respond to Trump’s policies, India recognised the trajectory months earlier and quietly built safeguards.

By avoiding unnecessary confrontation and responding through disciplined diplomacy, India has sought to protect its interests without inflaming tensions. In doing so, New Delhi has demonstrated that strategic patience—rather than reactive politics—remains its preferred tool in managing an unpredictable global partner.