US-India relations: Strategic altruism tested under Trump’s second term

A compelling analysis by Foreign Affairs reveals a critical turning point in U.S.-India relations after a quarter-century of strategic partnership shaped by a doctrine known as “strategic altruism.” This concept, which quietly underpinned Washington’s foreign policy toward India since the early 2000s, posited that supporting India’s rise would yield long-term benefits for the United States — economically, militarily, and geopolitically. Yet, with the return of Donald Trump to the White House, this long-standing framework faces an unprecedented test, compelling India to reconsider its approach amid shifting U.S. priorities.

For over two decades, successive U.S. administrations—from George W. Bush’s landmark civil nuclear deal to Obama’s Indo-Pacific “pivot,” and even Trump’s first term—viewed India not as a rival but as a strategic partner essential to balancing China’s growing influence in Asia. U.S. policymakers invested in India’s growth without demanding immediate quid pro quo, trusting that India’s emergence as a democratic, economic, and military power would realign regional power dynamics in favor of shared American interests. This was strategic altruism in action: a conscious U.S. decision to foster India’s ascent as a long-term investment rather than a transactional exchange.

However, the article highlights that Trump’s second administration has fundamentally altered this dynamic. No longer guided by strategic altruism, the new U.S. approach demands tangible returns from India upfront. Trade tensions have escalated, with Washington threatening hefty tariffs unless India delivers concessions on market access. Defense procurement has become a key bargaining chip, with the U.S. pressing India to boost purchases of American military hardware, including the possibility of access to advanced F-35 jets. Energy cooperation is also being leveraged, as Washington urges New Delhi to increase imports of U.S. oil and LNG.

This shift reflects the administration’s broader worldview that the United States has been taken advantage of by allies and partners. Unlike previous administrations where India’s intrinsic strategic value was broadly recognized—even amid policy frictions—Trump’s team appears more transactional and less convinced of India’s unique role as a regional counterweight to China. Moreover, the administration’s incoherent and factional approach to China leaves India uncertain about long-term U.S. strategy in the Indo-Pacific.

For India, this presents a paradox. Historically committed to strategic autonomy and multialignment, it must now engage in what the article calls “delayed reciprocity”: making short-term concessions to secure long-term gains. India faces domestic political risks in doing so, particularly around market access and agricultural tariffs, which are politically sensitive. Yet, Prime Minister Modi’s political strength and India’s urgent need for foreign investment, security partnerships, and technological collaboration make accommodation a pragmatic choice.

The analysis underscores India’s reliance on U.S. investment to sustain its ambitious growth goals, including Modi’s vision of a $30 trillion economy by 2047. Security concerns are acute as well, with India confronting a two-front challenge from Pakistan and China, the latter aided by Chinese military and intelligence support to India’s adversaries. Technological cooperation—especially in AI and semiconductor manufacturing—remains a crucial frontier where U.S.-India collaboration could define future competitiveness.

By Vugar Khalilov