India-US trade deal deadlocked | Experts caution over red lines

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio's visit to India and Washington's conditional 60-day waiver on Russian oil-related sanctions, they have reignited the debate over the India-U.S. trade deal. And the big question is, can India safeguard its red lines and stand firm against aggressive American demands to protect its farmers and local producers? Take a look at this next report for more details on this. After months of tariff pressure and a relationship that had been on a downhill trajectory, key signals have emerged from Washington. Rubio says the deal is close. Trump says it is very close. But Jay Shankar says that the last mile is the hardest. But while American officials are declaring progress, New Delhi remains circumspect. The central question is whether India can secure a win-win agreement without compromising its non-negotiable sectors. My advice will be, let us wait. Let there be certainty on 301, certainty on U.S. courts judgment on various measures taken by the U.S. administration, then let us get to know how the agreements with other countries U.S. has entered into, how that is going to shape or how that is going to be implemented. The latest turn in India-U.S. relations has come with a diplomatic visit, a conditional Russian oil waiver, and fresh optimism over a trade deal that has remained out of reach for months. Rubio's visit has added momentum to the trade talks, but it has also raised questions. Is Washington pursuing a broader strategic reset, or is it primarily seeking to safeguard American energy and economic interests? The signals from Washington have been unmistakably optimistic. In Mumbai, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the trade deal as very close, saying only a small number of issues remain. As far as the trade agreement is concerned, obviously the State Department doesn't negotiate trade agreements, but we are very much involved in what's happening. In my perch as National Security Advisor, we care a lot about it. We're very, very close. I would say we're about as close as you can be without having an executed agreement. I think there's a small number of items left to wrap up, so I think that will happen shortly, we're hoping, which it should, and hopefully have some good news to announce fairly soon, and perhaps the leaders can sign it thereafter. So we feel very optimistic that we will have something in place here very soon. President Donald Trump has also said an agreement is very close. But India's External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar has offered a more cautious assessment, warning that the final stretch is the most difficult. And that gap, in tone, is driving the debate. Washington is publicly projecting confidence. New Delhi is avoiding any suggestion that the deal is already sealed. The biggest test remains market access. The Trump administration wants greater access to India's vast consumer markets, including for American industrial products and agricultural goods. For Washington, a deal could help expand exports and deliver a political win by showing that its tariff pressure has produced concrete concessions. But India's farming sector is not just another bargaining chip. Agriculture supports millions of livelihoods, and small farmers cannot always compete with large, heavily subsidized American producers. Dairy, staple grains, and genetically modified crops are among the sensitive areas where India wants to preserve its policy space. For New Delhi, these safeguards are about food security, rural incomes, and the political and economic stability of its farming communities. We are going to enter into a final agreement. In the final agreement, there are many issues relating to non-tariff barriers removal, medical device on medical devices, and import licensing procedures doing away with them, no quantitative restrictions on the ICT product. It's all in the initial framework agreement of February 2026. I'm quoting only from that agreement. Then, if the U.S. standards, adoption of that standards, you should negotiate in a six-month time frame, which means if you accept the dairy standards, possibly the dairy products can move into the country, regardless of tariff, because their cost of production is very, very low. The question is whether these red lines will remain non-negotiable when the final bargain arrives. India wants better access for its own exporters, greater certainty for businesses and a deal that does not leave domestic producers exposed. Both sides are promoting the prospects of a win-win agreement. But the terms, not the rhetoric, will determine whether the gains are balanced. And the red line is that the US wants us to align our security and economic policies. This means any country the US considers safe as its enemy. It will be automatically India's enemy. So that means we will be compromising on our foreign policy, economic policy. For example, we are buying oil from Russia. After signing the deal, we can't buy oil from Russia. There's also a question of trust. Washington has used tariffs as leverage and its policy can shift quickly. What guarantee does India have that a deal will last, or that fresh demands will not follow after it signs. We have to learn from the mistakes of others. For example, European Union, Japan, Korea, they signed a trade deal with US. But even after signing of trade deal, US has gone ahead and imposed extra tariffs on them. So what's the point of trade deal? Trade deal should offer tariffs and other certainties. Deal under Trump, they don't offer such certainties. Unless we get that, we should not sign a trade deal. A temporary Russian oil waiver may ease immediate pressures, but it does not settle the longer-term trade dispute. The India-U.S. deal may be closed, but New Delhi's real test is not how quickly it can sign. It is whether it can turn Washington's urgency into an agreement that protects Indian interests, preserves its farm safeguards, and delivers lasting benefits. My advice will be, let us wait. Let there be certainty on 301, certainty on U.S. courts' judgment on various measures taken by the U.S. administration. Then let us get to know how the agreements with other countries U.S. has entered into, how that is going to shape or how that is going to be implemented.