'The current strain in the relationship is serious and likely to be long lasting.'
'Even if Trump suddenly changes his attitude toward India -- which he is entirely capable of doing -- it is unlikely that New Delhi will be able to pick up the pieces and respond as if nothing has happened.'
"In all the talk about Modi's supposed relationship with Trump, there is a risk of missing the structural shift in US policy during Trump's second term. If great-power competition is no longer the leitmotif that defines US interests, then India's relevance to the United States diminishes considerably," Dr Ashley J Tellis -- the Tata Chair for Strategic Affairs and a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the Washington, DC think-tank.
Dr Tellis -- who was born and raised in Bombay -- played a stellar role during the negotiations on the India-US civilian nuclear treaty as senior adviser to the US undersecretary of state for political affairs at the State Department.
He earlier served as senior adviser to then US ambassador Robert D Blackwill at the US embassy in New Delhi and prior to that was a member of the National Security Council staff as special assistant to President George W Bush and senior director for strategic planning and Southwest Asia.
"Trump's myriad recent actions have undermined a quarter century's bipartisan effort at building trust with India, but what is truly tragic about this meltdown is that it was entirely unnecessary," Dr Tellis tells Nikhil Lakshman/Rediff in the first of a two-part must-read interview.
"I witnessed at close quarters the last serious crisis in US-India relations after the 1998 nuclear tests, but that imbroglio was at least rooted in a serious conflict of interests. This time around, we have a grievous but contrived crisis that should never have occurred to begin with."
What do you make of Sergio Gor's nomination as special envoy for South Asian affairs based in New Delhi? What does this appointment mean for India-US relations?
Will it help New Delhi to repair the ruptured relationship since Mr Gor is perceived to be close to President Trump?
Does this mean the administration has officially hyphenated India and Pakistan in a manner that was unacceptable to India when President Obama and Secretary Clinton had wanted Richard Holbrooke in a similar role?
I wish Mr. Gor well. If confirmed by the Senate, he'll have his work cut out for him in a way that his recent predecessors did not. All previous US ambassadors since Robert Blackwill came to India with the wind behind their backs.
The United States viewed India as a critical strategic partner, and its ambassadors were mainly challenged by the task of finding creative ways to fructify that partnership. Today, the bilateral relationship has been severely damaged, and Mr. Gor will need all the help he can get to repair the serious breach of trust. Whether he's up to it, only time will tell.
What being a 'special envoy' to South Asia means in this context is mystifying. No one I know in Washington has any idea, but if it implies leading the charge on mediating between India and Pakistan, Mr. Gor deserves not simply my best wishes but my condolences too.
Clearly, President Trump perceives a natural hyphenation between India and Pakistan. But that is not a great foundation on which to strengthen ties with India.
As one of the architects of an improved India-US relationship, are you dismayed by the events of recent weeks when all the difficult work of many years has unraveled so quickly?
Is this rupture real? Is it semi permanent or is it likely to be forgotten quickly like so many impetuous Trump events and reactions like, for instance, the first Zelenskyy visit to the Oval Office?
Would you describe this as a the worst crisis in India-US relations you have witnessed in your career?
I am deeply dismayed by the recent turn of events, but a crisis was coming since PM Narendra Modi's visit to Washington, DC in February this year. For all of Modi's success in disarming Trump then, I suspected that India had only purchased a reprieve and not a resolution of the problems that Trump cared about.
Indian diplomacy had put too much stock in Modi's ability to charm Trump when in fact the president cares little about relationships, only his own interests. And India did not count very highly on this score.
In all the talk about Modi's supposed relationship with Trump, there is a risk of missing the structural shift in US policy during Trump's second term. If great-power competition is no longer the leitmotif that defines US interests, then India's relevance to the United States diminishes considerably.
Trump's obsession with correcting US trade deficits transforms India from being the priority it previously was into just another vexing problem.
Consequently, the current strain in the relationship is serious and likely to be long lasting. Even if Trump suddenly changes his attitude toward India -- which he is entirely capable of doing -- it is unlikely that New Delhi will be able to pick up the pieces and respond as if nothing has happened.
India's confidence in the United States has been unfortunately shattered.
Trump's myriad recent actions have undermined a quarter century's bipartisan effort at building trust with India, but what is truly tragic about this meltdown is that it was entirely unnecessary.
I witnessed at close quarters the last serious crisis in US-India relations after the 1998 nuclear tests, but that imbroglio was at least rooted in a serious conflict of interests. This time around, we have a grievous but contrived crisis that should never have occurred to begin with.
In your assessment, what provoked President Trump to pillory India and threaten India with harsh tariffs?
Was it the Indian refusal to give him credit for ending the May war?
Was it the Indian refusal to encourage American mediation, which Pakistan was likely egging on the administration about?
Or was Mr Trump riled about the fact that New Delhi was resistant to opening up areas of the Indian economy like agriculture?
Or was it a messy blend of all these events and issues?
I don't think the trade dispute was significant in provoking the current crisis. Both sides had negotiated in good faith and had produced an interim agreement that awaited Trump's consent.
The turning point in Trump's attitude to India came with the ending of the Indo-Pakistani military crisis in May of this year. India, unlike Pakistan, committed the cardinal sin of not fulsomely congratulating Trump on his peacemaking: Islamabad stoked his ego on this count whereas New Delhi bruised it.
PM Modi compounded the problem by attempting to set the record straight during his June 17, 2025 phone call with President Trump. He contested the president's narrative as if the history of events was really at issue.
What he ended up challenging, however, was Trump's self-conception of his own role -- which the president takes seriously -- leading him to treat Modi's complaints as a churlish denial of his big beautiful contributions to peacemaking in South Asia.
The first rule of good diplomacy is not to know your facts but your interlocutor -- unfortunately, lulled by his previous engagements, Modi, this time around, misjudged the president completely.
If Prime Minister Modi asked you for advice on how to resolve this crisis, what 5 or 7 things you would tell him to do?
I don't know if I can enumerate five, let alone seven, things, but as matters stand there is one specific problem that needs to be resolved urgently if Trump is to change his attitude to India: New Delhi's purchases of Russian oil.
This is a problem, first and foremost, because Trump has now made it so. So, if there is any single suggestion I'd have for PM Modi it would be to find a way to address Trump's complaints on this score.
Mind you, this is not the first time that India's energy purchases from third countries have become a problem for the United States. But we managed to resolve such difficulties before by engaging India quietly yet firmly.
Unfortunately, this time around the bilateral engagements have been conducted noisily and in the public sphere, making a resolution difficult if not impossible. Yet this is something that needs to be resolved if Trump is to be persuaded to treat India differently.
Beyond oil, there are three other things that PM Modi can do to help repair the relationship.
First, get into the habit of praising President Trump loudly for his achievements, real and imagined.
Second, get on the phone and speak to Trump to tell him what a great friend he has been to India and how the bilateral relationship will scale new summits during his presidency to the great benefit of the United States.
Third, set up a bilateral meeting with Trump at the earliest, possibly at the UNGA, and assure him that the billion-plus people of India await his visit for the QUAD summit where their affection for him will be on fullest display!
None of this will be easy because, as a matter of fact, India has not done anything particularly egregious to bring the current misfortunes upon itself.
Yet the solutions necessary cannot be tailored to the problems in this instance but to the individual causing them.