The Illusion of Bilateral Breakthroughs
FIRST INSTANCE: The rhetoric surrounding U.S.-India trade 'breakthroughs' has a significant historical precedent. Prior to the formalization of the U.S.-India Strategic Partnership in the early 2000s, discussions around bilateral trade were often framed by U.S. administrations as part of broader geopolitical efforts to 'balance' rising Chinese influence. During the Clinton administration in the
late 1990s, for example, high-level visits often concluded with declarations of intent to remove trade barriers, despite the persistent U.S. trade deficit with India (USDOT, 2000). REPETITIONS: This pattern resurfaced prominently. In 2017, the Trump administration initiated a review of trade relationships, with India being a primary focus due to its tariff policies and market access restrictions.
These talks, often cast as attempts to reduce the U.S. trade deficit (which stood at approximately $24.3 billion with India in 2017, USTR, 2018), frequently stalled despite repeated public statements citing progress. Similarly, the Obama administration, while less confrontational on trade, also pursued efforts to deepen economic ties, frequently emphasizing India's 'emerging market' status with
underlying expectations of greater market liberalization for U.S. goods (State Department, 2015). A recurring aspect is the U.S. focus on intellectual property protections and agricultural market access, often met with Indian concerns about protecting domestic industries and livelihoods. OUTCOMES: The 'breakthroughs' have consistently proven transactional rather than transformative. For example,