A version of this story appeared in the daily Threat Status newsletter from The Washington Times. Click here to receive Threat Status delivered directly to your inbox each weekday.
OPINION:
When President Trump imposed a crushing 50% tariff on Indian goods last week to punish the country for buying Russian oil, he upended decades of Washington efforts to forge closer ties with New Delhi. It marks a stunning reversal of fortune for India and a further sign of Washington’s realignment with regional rival Pakistan.
When Mr. Trump entered the White House, few expected him to reshape America’s approach to South Asia. For decades, U.S. policy had tilted toward India — courting its market, cultivating its democracy and counting on New Delhi to serve as a counterweight to Beijing.
Pakistan, by contrast, was cast as an unreliable partner, useful only as a proxy to fight terrorists in Afghanistan but accused of taking U.S. aid for granted. In the past year, however, Mr. Trump has unsettled that orthodoxy. In his own disruptive way, he has forged a more strategic balance between Pakistan and India that recognizes Pakistan’s enduring importance to regional stability and reminds India that Washington’s support is not unconditional.
The shift was first signaled during Mr. Trump’s March address to a joint session of Congress. The president singled out Pakistan for its role in an Afghanistan operation that resulted in the capture of a senior Islamic State group commander responsible for the deaths of 21 American service members in the Kabul airport bombing. It was a rare moment: a U.S. president publicly crediting Islamabad with a success that mattered deeply to American families.
For years, Pakistan has bristled at being treated solely as a problem. Mr. Trump’s acknowledgment validated the reality that Pakistan’s counterterrorism role, imperfect though it may be, remains indispensable. The message was not lost in Islamabad, where officials saw it as a sign that Washington might be turning the page on years of finger-pointing.
That recognition has been reinforced by action. Earlier this year, Mr. Trump met privately at the White House with Gen. Syed Asim Munir, Pakistan’s army chief, to discuss counterterrorism and bilateral economic relations — an unprecedented step for an American president. Such outreach matters. The Pakistani military remains the central institution in the country, and any genuine reset requires its buy-in. By engaging directly with Gen. Munir, Mr. Trump signaled respect and opened the door to practical cooperation on trade, investment and energy. For a country struggling with economic headwinds, the promise of deeper economic ties with the United States is powerful leverage.
The rest of the world appears to be noticing Pakistan’s reforms. After years of scrutiny, the global Financial Action Task Force recently removed Pakistan from its “gray list,” recognizing the government’s serious steps to crack down on terrorist financing and money laundering. The move was more than symbolic; it gave Pakistan renewed access to international markets and credit and bolstered its argument that it is prepared to be treated as a responsible stakeholder. For Washington, that progress provides another reason to keep the door to cooperation open.
Mr. Trump also showed an ability to act as a mediator recently when Pakistan and India edged dangerously close to open conflict. After cross-border skirmishes and escalating rhetoric, the region teetered on the brink of a potential nuclear flash point. Mr. Trump’s intervention was decisive. He leaned on both sides, applying pressure behind the scenes and helped broker a de-escalation.
India has badly misplayed Mr. Trump’s overtures. Instead of seizing on U.S. efforts at peace and dialogue, New Delhi doubled down on hard-line positions, including repudiating Mr. Trump’s effort to de-escalate the recent conflict with Pakistan. At the same time, India’s economic decisions have clashed with Mr. Trump’s “America First” priorities. Most notably, India has continued importing the bulk of its oil and gas from non-U.S. sources, even after repeated warnings.
The result: massive sanctions. This was a sharp downturn for a relationship once billed as the centerpiece of America’s Asia strategy. Mr. Trump made clear that even large democracies are not immune to pressure if they disregard U.S. interests.
This represents a broader shift. For years, Washington viewed India as the senior partner in South Asia, betting on its vast population and rapid growth to serve as a counterweight to China’s rise. American firms transferred technology, capital and intellectual property into India, hoping to build a like-minded economic giant. Yet this bet has come at a cost. Much as the U.S. once “coddled” China — ushering it into the World Trade Organization and tolerating mercantilist practices that hollowed out U.S. industry — India now has privileged access to American technology and markets. Its economy has grown in ways that often come at America’s expense. The uncomfortable question arises: Could India be the next China?
Consider the parallels. China was once seen as a partner whose growth would benefit the world and lock it into a cooperative system. Instead, it became a strategic rival, leveraging Western capital and technology to fuel its rise. India, though a democracy, is already showing signs of divergence: pursuing its own independent foreign policy, resisting U.S. sanctions regimes and guarding its domestic markets. It is not inconceivable that in a decade or two, India could stand in an economic position similar to China’s today, empowered in part by American technology transfer, yet pursuing ambitions that challenge U.S. interests.
Mr. Trump, characteristically, has little patience for such illusions. His administration’s willingness to sanction India, pressure it on energy imports and publicly highlight Pakistan’s cooperation suggests a reset in U.S. thinking. South Asia is no longer viewed through a simple India-centric prism. Instead, Mr. Trump is carving out a more balanced approach: rewarding Pakistan when it delivers, cautioning India when it strays and inserting American leverage at moments of crisis. It is not a polished doctrine, but it reflects a kind of disruptive pragmatism, recognizing realities on the ground rather than clinging to past orthodoxy.
Looking ahead, strategic convergence is possible. Afghanistan remains an unresolved issue, with troubling reports that al Qaeda is reconstituting there. That makes Pakistan’s intelligence cooperation and counterterrorism partnership even more critical for American security. At the same time, Pakistan sits atop significant mineral deposits, including rare earths, to which its leaders have signaled they want to offer the U.S. preferential access.
In a symbolic gesture that underscores the goodwill Mr. Trump has cultivated, Pakistan has even nominated him for the Nobel Peace Prize. If developed carefully, these shared interests could underpin a durable partnership that strengthens U.S. security, supports Pakistan’s economic recovery and creates new leverage in a region long defined by volatility.
In South Asia, balance is not weakness; it is strategy. Mr. Trump’s instincts, however unconventional, have reasserted America’s role as the indispensable power, able to shape events between nuclear-armed rivals while protecting its own economic interests. In a region where missteps can spiral into catastrophe, that balance is an achievement worth noting.
• Christopher Shays represented Connecticut’s 4th Congressional District for 21 years, including in senior positions on the Homeland Security and Government Reform committees.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.