Trump’s policies towards India cutting our nose to spite our face: US lawmakers flag concerns

US lawmakers on Wednesday expressed concern that recent American policy choices towards India could complicate bilateral relations, warning that a coercive approach risks undermining long-standing strategic cooperation between Washington DC and New Delhi.

The comments were made during a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs South and Central Asia Subcommittee titled “The US–India Strategic Partnership: Securing a Free and Open Indo-Pacific”, where legislators discussed the evolving dynamics of the US–India relationship in the context of global geopolitical competition.

Why did a Modi–Putin photograph feature in the congressional hearing?

US Representative Sydney Kamlager-Dove presented a photograph of Prime Minister Narendra Modi with Russian President Vladimir Putin, taken during Putin’s recent visit to India, to underscore her concerns about the direction of US policy towards New Delhi.

"Trump's policies towards India can only be described as cutting our nose to spite our face... Being a coercive partner has a cost. And this poster is worth a thousand words."

She argued that US policy decisions were inadvertently weakening American influence rather than strengthening it. Using the image of Vladimir Putin and Narendra Modi as a prop, she warned that Washington is pushing India closer to Moscow — and that it is the United States, not New Delhi, undermining the partnership.

"You do not get a Nobel Peace Prize by driving US strategic partners into the arms of our adversaries. We must move with incredible urgency to mitigate the damage that this administration has done to the US-India partnership and return to the cooperation that is essential to US prosperity, security, and global leadership..."

How did Congress assess India’s strategic positioning?

Representative Ami Bera acknowledged that images of India’s leadership engaging with Russia and China generated unease among some members of Congress, but emphasised his belief that India remains guided by long-term strategic considerations.

“... The ranking member had a picture of Prime Minister Modi with Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping. That does cause some heartburn for folks in Congress. But it's my assessment that India understands their long-term interests. They have to coexist with China... But they also understand their long-term interests lie with the West...”

Bera stressed that India’s geopolitical realities necessitate engagement across multiple power centres while maintaining deep ties with Western partners.

What concerns were raised about US visa and talent policies?

Bera pointed to US visa policy as an area requiring recalibration, warning that restrictive measures could harm American innovation and competitiveness.

“The $100,000 fee on the H-1Bs hurts American companies. I'm glad that I've heard the president at times say, 'hey, wait a minute, we need this talent and these relationships.'...”

He added:"... I hope we can work together in Congress to come up with a visa that allows Indian scientists to travel back and forth to the United States, as well as US scientists and engineers to move back and forth to India..."

According to Bera, highly skilled professionals from India do not pose a risk of visa overstays and are essential to the US technology and research ecosystem.

Trump and the H-1B visa debate

During Donald Trump’s administration, H-1B policy became a focal point of reform: the White House pursued a ‘Buy American, Hire American’ agenda that increased vetting of H-1B petitions and tightened eligibility standards, and agencies adopted measures that raised compliance costs for some employers.

What did Trump do to the H-1B system in 2025?

The Trump administration introduced sweeping new fees and restrictions on the H-1B visa programme as part of what officials described as an effort to reduce fraud, curb dependency on foreign workers, and prioritise domestic labour markets.

The most controversial change: A proposed $100,000 H-1B fee

The Trump administration imposed a one-time fee of approximately $100,000 on companies petitioning for certain H-1B workers.

The figure was not a statutory USCIS filing fee. It was reported as a policy proposal under review within DHS and the White House.

Analysts noted that the number represented a combination of a proposed levy + compliance, legal, and processing burdens, which together were estimated to bring the employer cost close to $100,000 per hire.

Additional fee increases and documentation requirements

The administration also:

• Raised processing and anti-fraud fees for several categories of employers.
• Imposed stricter renewal documentation.
• Requested additional employer attestations about domestic recruitment.
• Increased the scrutiny applied to large firms with high proportions of foreign workers.

How did Trump justify the 2025 H-1B policy tightening?

Trump and senior officials argued in 2025 that reforms were needed to:

• reduce perceived misuse of the programme,
• discourage dependence on foreign workers,
• and “protect American jobs,” as the president often phrased it

Did Trump later signal a reversal on talent-based immigration?

Yes — and this shift was explicit in mid- and late-2025.

Facing strong lobbying from the technology sector, semiconductor manufacturers, AI laboratories, and research universities — groups that argued the new fees would constrain innovation — Trump publicly acknowledged the importance of retaining skilled migrants.

What did US lawakers say about India’s relationship with Russia?

While acknowledging concerns in Washington DC about India’s closeness with Moscow, Bera described the relationship as historically grounded rather than unexpected.

"... We do have some concerns about India's closeness with Russia, but just based on historic norms, that's to be expected."

He suggested India could play a constructive diplomatic role amid ongoing international efforts to end the war in Ukraine.

"What I would like to encourage India to do is that the president sincerely wants to find a cessation to the conflict in Ukraine. India can play a unique role given their lines of communication with the Russians..."

How do lawmakers see India’s global role evolving?

Bera said India’s aspiration to assume a larger global role brings with it greater responsibility in moments of international crisis.

"... This is a time for India, which wants to take a bigger role on the global stage, to step up..."

He added that cooperation with India would remain important even after the conflict in Ukraine ends.

"... When this conflict ends, we are going to have to work together to figure out how to bring Russia back into the fold."

(Note: These are the opinions and views of US lawmakers, and do not represent Mint's views in an capacity)

US–India relations under Trump — tariffs, oil and strategic friction

US–India relations during Trump’s presidency were marked by both strategic cooperation and significant economic disagreements, particularly over trade and energy policy.

Why did Trump impose tariffs on India?

Trump repeatedly criticised India’s trade policies, accusing New Delhi of maintaining high tariffs on American goods. He frequently referred to India as a “tariff king” while justifying reciprocal duties imposed by the US.

As part of this approach, the Trump administration imposed or threatened tariffs on a range of Indian exports, arguing that the US–India trade relationship was unbalanced and unfair to American businesses.

These measures were presented as leverage to compel market access reforms rather than as a rejection of the broader strategic partnership.

How did Russian oil purchases factor into US pressure?

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Indian refiners became among the largest buyers of discounted Russian seaborne crude, a development documented by industry and shipping data, as reported by Reuters.

Trump publicly criticised countries that continued buying Russian oil, including India, arguing that such purchases indirectly undermined Western pressure on Moscow.

Tariffs and trade pressure were framed by the US President's administration as tools to discourage these transactions.

Trump has on occasion asserted that India had reduced or ceased purchases of Russian oil — a claim the Indian government has not formally confirmed; independent trade data show India continued to import significant volumes of Russian crude through much of 2025.

How did Trump describe India while applying pressure?

Trump’s rhetoric towards India often combined praise and criticism. While he highlighted strong personal ties with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and emphasised shared strategic interests, he simultaneously used sharp language on trade.

The president publicly criticised India’s tariff policies — at one point referring to New Delhi as a ‘tariff king’ — while pressing for changes through trade measures.