Introduction

In a recent revelation, former U.S. National Security Adviser (NSA) John Bolton disclosed that Peter Navarro, a top trade adviser in the Trump administration, sought to create tension between then-President Donald Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi over trade-related issues. Bolton’s remarks shed light on internal divisions within the Trump administration’s foreign policy team and highlight how U.S.-India trade disputes became a contentious factor in bilateral relations during Trump’s presidency.

This article explores Bolton’s claims, the background of U.S.-India trade ties, Navarro’s economic agenda, Trump’s unpredictable approach to foreign policy, and the broader implications of these dynamics for the future of India-U.S. relations.

Bolton’s Claim: Navarro’s Strategy

According to Bolton, Peter Navarro often took a hardline stance on trade with U.S. partners, including India. Navarro, who was one of Trump’s most influential economic advisers, reportedly tried to convince Trump that Modi was unfair to American businesses and that India’s trade practices posed significant disadvantages for the U.S.

Bolton suggested that Navarro pushed Trump toward a confrontational position by portraying Modi as overly protective of India’s domestic industries. The goal, Bolton argues, was to pit Trump against Modi and escalate tensions, thereby giving the U.S. more leverage in trade negotiations.

U.S.-India Trade Relations Under Trump

The United States and India, the world’s two largest democracies, share strong political and strategic ties. However, trade has often been a sticking point. Under Trump’s “America First” agenda, Washington demanded fairer trade deals and targeted countries running large trade surpluses with the U.S.—India included.

Some of the major trade issues between the U.S. and India during Trump’s presidency were:

• Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) withdrawal (2019): The U.S. ended preferential trade treatment for India, affecting billions of dollars of exports.
• Tariffs and duties: The Trump administration raised tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from India, prompting India to impose retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods like apples, almonds, and walnuts.
• Market access disputes: Washington frequently accused India of restricting American companies in sectors such as agriculture, e-commerce, medical devices, and data storage.
• Digital trade and data localization: The U.S. was critical of India’s policies requiring data storage within its borders, which affected U.S. tech giants.

Despite these disputes, Trump and Modi maintained a strong personal rapport, evident in public events like the “Howdy Modi” rally in Houston in 2019 and the “Namaste Trump” event in Ahmedabad in 2020.

Navarro’s Role in Trump’s Economic Policy

Peter Navarro, known for his hawkish views on trade, was one of the architects of Trump’s protectionist economic policies. He played a key role in framing trade deficits as threats to U.S. national security and was instrumental in implementing tariffs against China, Europe, and other partners.

Navarro often clashed with other senior officials in the Trump administration, including free-trade advocates like Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow. His confrontational style extended beyond China and Mexico—India too became a target in his narrative of unfair trade practices.

Bolton’s claim underscores how Navarro’s influence may have pushed Trump to adopt a more aggressive posture toward New Delhi, despite Trump’s personal admiration for Modi.

Trump’s Unpredictable Approach

Donald Trump’s foreign policy was often marked by unpredictability and transactional calculations. On one hand, Trump saw India as a strategic counterbalance to China and valued Modi’s friendship. On the other hand, he frequently criticized India for what he called “unfair trade practices.”

During the 2019 G20 summit in Japan, Trump publicly called India the “tariff king,” arguing that India imposed excessively high tariffs on U.S. goods. He also tweeted multiple times about U.S.-India trade disputes, reflecting Navarro’s talking points.

Yet, Trump’s rhetoric often contrasted with his actions. Despite disputes, the U.S. and India strengthened defense cooperation, expanded strategic dialogues, and signed deals for American military equipment. Trump also emphasized India’s importance in the Indo-Pacific strategy aimed at countering China’s growing influence.

Bolton’s Perspective and White House Dynamics

John Bolton, who served as Trump’s NSA from 2018 to 2019, has frequently highlighted internal divisions within the Trump administration. His memoir The Room Where It Happened portrays Trump’s White House as deeply factional, with advisers competing for the president’s ear.

Bolton’s latest claim about Navarro’s attempt to pit Trump against Modi fits into this narrative. According to Bolton, while Trump admired Modi personally, Navarro’s insistence on prioritizing economic grievances risked damaging the broader U.S.-India relationship.

Bolton suggests that internal rivalries often complicated policy-making, where short-term trade disputes could overshadow long-term strategic considerations.

Modi’s Balancing Act

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, during Trump’s tenure, sought to carefully balance India’s trade interests with the strategic necessity of deepening ties with Washington. India resisted U.S. pressure on some trade issues—such as agricultural imports and digital policies—but simultaneously worked to expand defense and energy cooperation.

For example:

• India increased purchases of U.S. crude oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG).
• Defense deals included agreements for helicopters, drones, and surveillance systems.
• Strategic alignment in the Indo-Pacific grew stronger through the Quad grouping (India, U.S., Japan, Australia).

Modi’s ability to maintain a cordial personal relationship with Trump helped prevent trade disputes from escalating into a full-blown diplomatic crisis.

Implications for U.S.-India Relations

Bolton’s revelation adds context to the complexity of U.S.-India relations during Trump’s presidency. It underscores three key points:

1. Internal U.S. Divisions: The Trump administration was often split between hardliners like Navarro and pragmatists who favored a broader strategic partnership with India.
2. Trade vs. Strategy: While trade disputes created friction, the larger strategic picture—especially the need to counterbalance China—prevented relations from deteriorating severely.
3. Personal Diplomacy: Trump and Modi’s rapport served as a stabilizing factor, showing how personal ties between leaders can influence bilateral relations.

Lessons for the Future

As the Biden administration continues to strengthen ties with India, the lessons from Trump’s tenure remain relevant:

• Managing trade disputes carefully: Both countries must find ways to address trade disagreements without undermining strategic cooperation.
• Institutionalizing partnerships: A strong institutional framework is necessary to prevent personal rivalries within administrations from shaping foreign policy.
• Balancing economic and security interests: Both Washington and New Delhi must strike a balance between domestic economic concerns and the shared need for regional security cooperation.