US India Also Fought Trade War: Is India Too Strategic?

Diplomacy and international strategy are not the highlight of Trump's ruling, but foreign strategies such as "India's strategy" are not effective in the short term.

In May 30, 2018, the United States changed the Pacific Command "US Pacific Command" to the "Pacific Command of the United States of America", and officially replaced the "Asia-Pacific", which is known as "Indo Pacific" (the Indo-Pacific of India Pacific region) by the exclusive invention of Trump.

At that time, some experts believed that the proposal and enhancement of the "India and Tai" strategy indicated that the Trump administration recognized the close ties between the India ocean and the Pacific region, and reintegrated India into the official "Asian chess game" of the United States, aiming to unite India to counter the China led "one belt and one road" initiative.

White, associate professor of SAIS at the advanced international research institute of Johns Hopkins University, even thinks that this strategy is of strategic significance, which means that the United States reiterates to India and other countries that India is an indispensable pillar in the future Asian order, which is a smart marketing strategy.

However, in May 31, 2019, Trump announced that since June 5th, the United States has ended its trade treatment for India's GSP system. The Indians who feel very angry have subsequently retaliated: in June 15th, the India government announced that the highest tariffs of 28 would be imposed on the 120% American products, including almonds, apples and walnuts since the following day.

The "first in the United States" prior to the "India Pacific" strategy in trade war

According to us data, in 2018, bilateral trade between the United States and India totaled 142 billion US dollars (7 times more than in 2001), of which India exported about $55 billion to the US, that is to say, India's trade with the United States was in the lead. It was difficult for Trump to use the reasons why the United States suffered losses in the Indo US trade, and "to ensure" fair trade "and so on.

Some American scholars believe that India's "must and can only be tolerated". The reason is that "Trump can not reason". Trump's move is inevitable; and the WTO complaint mechanism will soon collapse due to the failure of Trump to obstruct the appointment of WTO arbitrator. The arbitration mechanism requires at least 3 law officers, and the number of judges will be reduced to two by the end of the year. And "India's losses are negligible". (according to the data in 2017, India's exports to the United States affected by the GSP are only 5 billion 500 million -57 billion dollars, India's benefit rate is only 3%-4%, even if it bears all losses by the Indian side, but India is "not guilty of offending the US".

However, it is clear that Narendra Modi, a India prime minister who had just been re elected recently, did not think so.

In fact, India's tariff retaliatory measures had been made as early as last June, on the grounds that the United States refused to exempt India from the Levy of steel and aluminum tariffs, but since then, the retaliatory measures have been put into effect repeatedly due to frequent consultations between the two sides. Until this time Trump abolished the universal system, Mo Di was determined to "fight back".

Recent U.S. - Indian relations have been discords on many issues. Trump is angry at India's plans to continue importing oil from Iran and threatens sanctions. India is not buying the pressure on the US side. The abolition of the GSP and the effective implementation of tariff retaliation were seen by many observers as "starting a trade war between the US and India". Then, what is the concept of the "India strategy" preheated in the two countries?

From Trump's point of view, the successful re-election campaign in 2020 has always been the top priority of its strategic layout. And maintaining the "us first" in the trade area, and making it possible for us to claim that "we win" in the trade of all important economies in the United States is the strategic key to satisfy its strong supporters and maintain a high support rate.

Diplomacy and international strategy are not the highlight of Trump's ruling, but foreign strategies such as "India's strategy" are not effective in the short term. Because of this, when Trump launched the focus of "trade war" in the United States and concentrated on China, the European Union, Japan and even Mexico and Canada, the US India trade, which was originally the US side, would not be brought into line.

Once there is no more progress in other trade directions or succumb or frustration, Trump is likely to turn his back on the issue of Indo US trade because he has long been dissatisfied with India's dumping of generic drugs to the United States, and believes that it can press India to yield to India's pressure. At the same time, "India strategy" must give way to "the first in the United States", or simply let it play a big strategy in order to seek re-election.

The United States and India have room for each other.

However, moody did not have much room for compromise.

The reason why he won an unexpected victory in the election which was not long ago was that the nationalism of India, which was publicized since the end of last year, has successfully mobilized the mood of the voters in India. If this time, under the pressure of Trump, he will succumb to the consequences, and the consequences can be imagined.

India is a country with a strong sense of national pride, and is looking forward to "fishing for profit" in the global trade war. Before the start of the Indo US trade war, the Ministry of Commerce of India also announced a study that said the Sino US trade war is good for India. The reason is that India can "dump up to 350 or more of India's superior products" to China and the us when trade between China and the United States is blocked. It would be a great irony to the Modi administration if this moment is under pressure in the US.

Moreover, since Trump took office, the overwhelming majority of trade partners, including India, dare not "bet" their integrity. Even Krishna, who advocates India's "concession and concession," has to admit that Trump has always had the habit of asking for money and making progress. It is obvious that modi wants to take a hard hit and stop Trump's step by step. At this point, "India strategy" can only be shelved temporarily.

But the two sides actually have room for each other: Secretary of state Pompeio said "there is something to say" after the US abolished the GSP, while some observers noted that India moved out of the list of twenty-ninth American goods, a shrimp called Artemia, which were originally listed on the tariff list. All this is a vague indication that the two countries have left room for negotiation.

"Discussions" may take place immediately: Pompeio will visit India in a few days, and a few days later, modi and Trump will attend the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan on 28-29 June. If there is a "good talk" between the two sides, there are plenty of time and opportunities.

But in any case, the election in India has just ended, and the election day in the United States has been nearly one day. As long as the two strategies of "India too" and "the United States first" are still in the same position on the map of Trump's "electoral grand strategy", there will be no suspense as to the result of "two strategic guess sizes".