Economic Highlights

New Delhi, 1 June 2026

Pakora to Petrol Price Trap

INFLATION POLICY-MADE

By Shivaji Sarkar 

Inflation in India is not merely the result of global shocks; it is increasingly a product of high fuel taxes, cesses and pricing policies that amplify costs across the economy. The country’s heavy dependence on petroleum and gas—further entrenched by schemes such as Ujjwala—has made energy prices the trigger for widespread inflation. 

A simple Petroleum Ministry advisory in March warning of tighter commercial LPG supplies was enough to push up the cost of everything from the humble pakora to ice cream, paints and construction materials. Pakora sellers say rising gas prices are compounded by costlier edible oils, commodities and transport, creating a cascading inflationary effect that touches almost every household and business. The pakora costs 40 percent more now. 

India's headline retail inflation rose to 3.48 percent (provisional) in April 2026, driven largely by food and beverage costs. Analysts, including those at ICRA, a Moody’s associate, expect headline figures to harden slightly to around 4.1 percent for May due to rising input and transport costs. It is rising now beyond Reserve Bank of India tolerance limits. 

If people were taxed less on petrol, they would have eventually spent it on other goods, promoting economic growth and government getting paid taxes anyway. That’s the common cry.The fuel policy needs immediate review. But bio fuel ethanol that has high moisture (water) is certainly not the solution. 

In such a scenario, should not the country have reduced petrol prices?  It collected Rs 39 lakh crore through high cess, additional excise duties etc “for funding redemption of approximately of Rs 3.3 lakh crore petro-bonds of regimes since 2002”. There is supposed to be a reserve of Rs 36 lakh crore as the benefit of crude falling below $40 a barrel (155 litre) was never passed on to the OMC. 

From FY2016 to FY2022, Indian OMCs largely benefited from deregulated fuel pricing, healthy refining margins, and relatively stable crude prices, with profits peaking despite pandemic disruptions. In FY2023 they suffered some losses. Profitability rebounded dramatically in FY2024 with combined earnings of Rs 86,000 crore, moderated to Rs 33,602 crore in FY2025 due to LPG subsidies, and recovered to Rs 77,821 crore in FY2026, driven by normal refining margins and gains from lower-cost crude inventories. 

Despite collecting nearly ₹36 lakh crore through fuel taxes and cesses, India has largely relied on market-linked fuel pricing rather than using these revenues to help OMCs stabilize prices. As a result, fuel prices remain higher and more volatile than in neighbouring countries such as Bangladesh and Bhutan, where governments more actively regulate or subsidize fuel to contain inflation. 

Reliance Industries Limited (RIL), which operates the world’s largest refining hub at Jamnagar and its associated petroleum businesses, achieved an annual net profit of Rs 95,754 crore for the financial year ending March 31 (FY26). This represents a 17.8 percent increase year-on-year. The OMCs have to pay higher taxes. Reliance is exempted from some taxes. 

Greedflation, Profits Soar, Workers Lose 

Petroleum prices alone are not hiking market prices. Many sectors like education and health are victims of severe price manipulations often called Greedflation.This refers to the practice of companies using economic disruptions—. such as supply-chain bottlenecks, inflation, or commodity price spikes—not merely to cover rising costs but to expand profit margins by raising prices beyond what costs justify. 

In India, the concept gained prominence during the post-pandemic recovery as concerns grew that some firms were using inflationary conditions to boost profits while consumers faced rising living costs. The debate centres on whether price increases were driven by genuine cost pressures or by growing corporate pricing power and opportunistic profit-taking. 

The correction is difficult for their clout. Data from post-pandemic periods highlighted that the net profits of thousands of listed Indian companies reached historic highs, often multiplying several times over pre-pandemic averages. 

Many have expanded profit margins. Many companies have 22 to 45 percent hike in profits. More than half of the increases in corporate profits are reportedly driven by fatter profit margins rather than expanded sales volume.Unlike traditional cost-push inflation, where rising labour costs drive up prices, the surge in corporate profits was largely decoupled from wage growth. The wages stagnate or even compressed. 

A growing number of economists in the U.S. and Europe argue that recent inflation is increasingly “sellers’ inflation” ,manipulated by firms. The RBI needs to look at high prices charged by dominant firms instead of focusing on higher repo rates only.Listed corporate net profits has soared in 2025. Overall,there is strong evidence of expanding corporate margins during inflationary cycles in India. 

Education

Rising education cost is a quieter and more consequential form of inflation, and not linked to petrol, that India is overlooking. If the engine of India’s growth is its human capital, then the rising cost of building that human capital is not just a household problem, it is a macroeconomic one. 

The Ministry of Education told Lok Sabhaacross India, over 89,000 government schools were closed or merged over the last decade, with UP (25,126) and Madhya (29,400) accounting for more than 60 percent of this total.This has hit families hard as primary education costs zoom for greedy school managements. There are many more similar areas. 

Multiple fuel

NITI Aayog advocates for a technology-agnostic, “multiple fuel policy” to achieve energy security and net-zero emissions, rejecting a strict EV-only approach. And certainly, the ethanol-based bio-fuel with high water content is not the solution. It drastically reduces petrol energy efficiency. Pure bioethanol has about 33 percent less energy per unit of volume than pure petrol, says the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). 

The government must stop its use for more than one reasons, including damages caused to the vehicles.India’s energy and inflation control measures are flawed for many reasons.The overall energy policy, its pricing mechanisms and tax structure require a comprehensive review and reformulation. Short-term interventions may temporarily contain inflation, but they often distort markets, shift costs between consumers, producers and the government, and create uncertainty for investment and long-term planning. 

A more durable approach would balance consumer protection with transparent pricing, energy security, fiscal sustainability and incentives for efficiency. Without structural reforms, India risks recurring cycles of price shocks, subsidy burdens and uneven profitability across the energy sector, undermining both economic stability and sustainable growth.---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

Spotlight

New Delhi, 30 May 2026

EU-India FTA Ratification

LENGTHY BUT STRATEGIC

By Dr Krzysztof M. Zalewski

(Centre For Intl Relations, Poland) 

Against the backdrop of major global geopolitical tensions, the European Union and India continue to move forward with one of their most ambitious economic projects: EU–India Free Trade Agreement (FTA). Negotiations had formally concluded in January 2026, but the treaty is still far from entering into force. Legal verification, translation, ratification, and political approvals are expected to take at least another year. 

The FTA forms part of a wider strategic framework between both sides. Alongside trade liberalisation, EU and India have already signed a defence cooperation pact and are negotiating an investment facilitation treaty. Together, these reflect a broader geopolitical objective: strengthening strategic cooperation in an increasingly uncertain international order. 

Recall, at EU–India Summit in Delhi this January, leaders announced successful conclusion of negotiations, although the full text wasn’t immediately released because it remained under “legal scrubbing” — process of refining legal language and ensuring compatibility with regulations on both sides. 

The complete text was eventually published on February 28, 2026. Ironically, the same day witnessed the outbreak of Persian Gulf conflict following attacks by Israel and US on Iran. As global attention shifted towards Middle East crisis, the agreement received little public discussion. Only after regional situation stabilised did attention return. 

Lengthy Ratification Process

The ratification process on the European side is expected to be lengthy and politically sensitive. The agreement must first be translated into all official EU languages. The European Commission (EC) will then request approval from the Council of European Union to sign the agreement. All member states must consent before the signing ceremony can take place. 

After signature, the agreement will move to European Parliament, which can either approve or reject the text but can’t amend it. If Parliament approves, the matter returns to the Council of EU for final confirmation.Past experience shows such procedures can face delays. The EU–Canada trade agreement (CETA), negotiated in 2016, still awaits full ratification despite provisional implementation. Similarly, the EU–Mercosur agreement has faced political and legal obstacles. 

India’s ratification process is comparatively simpler. Inter-ministerial consultations are conducted under Ministry of External Affairs. Once the concerned ministries submit their assessments, the Cabinet authorises signature of agreement. However, FTA cannot formally enter into force until EU ratification is completed and both sides agree on an implementation date. 

Optimistically, the agreement could become operational in early 2027. A more realistic estimate points to mid or late 2027.The most controversial subject—agriculture—was excluded from the agreement by mutual consent, as it’s equally problematic for India. However, it remains unclear whether the agreement might not spark controversy for other reasons. 

Strategic Importance Beyond Trade

The FTA is only one pillar of a broader EU–India partnership. Security cooperation and investment agreements are equally important components of this emerging relationship.At Oslo recently Prime Minister Modi stressed next priority should be investment agreement. This demonstrated that both sides increasingly see each other not merely as trading partners, but as strategic actors in a changing global order. 

Main Economic Provisions

The agreement contains 20 chapters and numerous annexes dealing with trade in goods, services, customs procedures, intellectual property, labour mobility, and regulatory cooperation.Although detailed tariff schedules haven’t yet been released, EC has stated that tariffs on around 90% of Indian exports to EU will initially be reduced, eventually reaching 99.3% liberalisation. On Indian side, tariffs on 86% of imports from EU will initially fall, eventually expanding to 96.6%. 

India has agreed to reduce or eliminate tariffs in several industrial sectors, including:Chemicals, Cosmetics, Plastics, Automotive parts, Textiles and clothing, Ceramics, Machinery,

Boats and marine equipment.Tariffs on many products will disappear immediately, while others will be phased out over periods ranging from five to ten years. 

The agreement also provides tariff reductions for selected European food exports to India, including olive oil, fruit juices, confectionery, pasta, chocolate, and sheep meat. Certain products not significantly produced in India, such as kiwi fruit and pears, will receive duty-free quotas. 

One of the most significant sectors covered by FTA is automobiles. India has historically imposed tariffs of up to 110% on imported European vehicles. Under agreement, tariffs will gradually decline to 10% over five to seven years for a quota of 250,000 vehicles annually.   Equally important is reduction of tariffs on automotive components. This is expected to encourage European manufacturers to expand production within India itself, integrating the country more deeply into global supply chains. 

Simplifying Trade Procedures

Beyond tariffs, measures are introduced aimed at reducing bureaucracy and facilitating business operations.Customs procedures will be simplified through among faster clearance for low-risk and perishable goods;reduced documentation, online publication of rules, creation of digital “single window” systems for documentation and certification, establishing category of “Authorised Economic Operators”, granting trusted exporters and importers access to faster and simpler procedures. 

Special emphasis is placed on SMEs, which form majority of businesses involved in EU–India trade. Dedicated contact points and simplified rules of origin are intended to help participate more effectively.The simplified certification system is also designed to prevent third-country products, especially Chinese goods, from being falsely labelled as Indian exports.Trade in services will also be liberalised in accordance with WTO principles and previous EU agreements. 

However, one major European objective remained unresolved. The EU sought broader access for European firms to participate in Indian government procurement tenders. New Delhi resisted, and the final agreement contains only limited transparency provisions without guaranteeing open tendering or equal treatment standards as sought. 

Climate and Carbon Issues

One of the most contentious topics during negotiations concerned EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which entered into force on January 1, 2026 and imposes additional charges on imports produced through carbon-intensive processes, particularly affecting sectors such as steel and heavy manufacturing. India requested exemptions or transitional relief for Indian exporters, but EU rejected, arguing that CBAM is a core element of European climate policy and cannot be weakened for individual partners.It is likely to remain a long-term source of friction between both sides. 

Intellectual Property & Labour Mobility

The FTA contains detailed provisions on intellectual property rights, including protections for trademarks, copyrights, industrial designs, and trade secrets. It strengthens judicial and administrative enforcement mechanisms, introduces civil and criminal penalties for violations, and permits confiscation and destruction of counterfeit goods. 

Labour mobility, a major Indian priority, also received attention. Although visa policy remains under authority of individual EU member states, negotiators introduced several facilitative measures connected to trade in services.These include:Easier short-term business visas;Faster visa processing;Quicker notification procedures;Simplified movement for intra-corporate transferees. 

Geopolitical Implications

The broader significance of FTA extends well beyond trade. The EU and India increasingly share concerns regarding global supply chains, strategic autonomy, technological competition, and need to diversify international partnerships.Although differences remain, especially regarding relations with Russia, these disagreements are not currently preventing closer cooperation. 

In Europe, public discussion of FTA remains limited, though controversy could emerge once specific industries identify sectors vulnerable to competition. In India, however, exporters and business groups are showing strong interest in possible opportunities. 

The intended objective is clear: to deepen economic interdependence and strategic cooperation between two major democratic actors navigating an increasingly fragmented international system.If FTA, defence cooperation framework, and investment agreement are all successfully implemented, EU–India relationship could evolve into one of the most  important strategic partnerships in the emerging multipolar world.---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)

REWIND

New Delhi, 28 May 2026

EMERGENCE OF YOUTH POWER

By Inder Jit

(Released on 30 November 1976) 

Every Congress’ session is usually described as historic. Yet if there was one in recent years which was truly historic it was the session that concluded on Tuesday last in Gauhati. Indeed, a week after the curtain came down on the colourful and memorable meet, it appears no less significant than it did at Jawahar Nagar on November 22 – especially on three counts. First, it saw India’s hitherto dormant youth power and, more specifically, the Youth Congress and its leader, Mr Sanjay Gandhi, not only “steal the thunder of the AICC” in the words of the Prime Minister but emerge as a major factor in Indian politics. Second, the Communist Party, which has been enjoying for the past seven years an influence in national affairs disproportionate to its intrinsic strength, was virtually cut down to size and told for the first time in so many words where it got off. Third, it saw Assam and the six neighbouring States in the sensitive and strategic north-east area open a new and welcome chapter in regional integration, burying the troubled, suspicion ridden past.

At the Chandigarh Congress, as I wrote on January 6 last, Mr Sanjay Gandhi made “an impressive debut” on the political stage and “infused the Youth Congress with a new sense of involvement and adventure.” Komagatu Maru Nagar, moreover, saw Mr. Sanjay Gandhi and Mrs. Ambika Soni, the dynamic President of the Youth Congress, hold out promise of blazing a new trail. Both proved as good their word and the Indian Youth Congress show at Jawahar Nagar turned out to be one better than even their highly impressive meet at Pragati Maidan in New Delhi on August 9 last. For one thing, the attendance at the conference was unprecedented a record: number of 13,000 delegates from all over India, including a thousand women, as against the target of 10,000 delegates, notwithstanding the long travel and inconvenience involved. More important, the enthusiasm and inspiration of those who attended had to be seen to be believed. The session itself was largely businesslike with Mr Sanjay Gandhi and Mrs Soni, who again impressed all by her powerful oratory and superb chairing of the conference, setting the pace by speaking briefly and effectively.

Acknowledgement of the success of the Youth conference came not only from the Prime Minister but from several Chief Ministers and Central Ministers. Of particular significance was the compliment paid by the Prime Minister when she said “After attending your convention at Pragati Maidan and after seeing you function here, I am fully assured that India’s future is safe in the hands of our youth.” In fact, she was happy that India’s youth was again astir and had understood, and accepted its due responsibility. “India’s problems are now your” she said and added: “Remember, what happens hereafter is not my "bhavishya but aap ka bhavishya. You must go ahead with courage.” Earlier, four Chief Ministers complimented the Youth Congress, lauded Mr Sanjay Gandhi’s result-oriented leadership and explained what each had done to implement the five-point programme. Giani Zail Singh, who described Mr Gandhi as a great national leader (“desh ke mahaan neta”), drew loud applause as he advocated greater association of youth and, in support, quoted Guru Nanak's saying: "Aap ditta so doodh baraber...” (What you, give on your own is milk!)

Apart from expressing her confidence in the youth, Mrs Gandhi made two other significant points. First, she gave a new import and dimension to Mr Sanjay Gandhi’s five-point programme. She clarified that this programme was more fundamental than the 20-point programme and that, in fact, the success of her own programme depended upon the success of the Five-point programme, which provided the foundation for the super-structure. In other words, the mathematical equation was meaningfully changed from 20 +5 to 5+ 20! Second, she also took care to set the record straight for such of the CPI and other lenders who extended their support to the 20-point programme but refused to take notice of the five-point programme on the ground that they could not be expected to support a programme put forward by “a private individual”. Mrs Gandhi said the Congress party had all along stood for the programmes outlined in the five-point plan. Now these had been strung together and projected pointedly to ensure affective implementation. Had the programme been taken up in its present form and thrust twenty years ago, “we would have had today an altogether new and better picture of India.”

The CPI has of late been at its old and familiar game of publicly and repeatedly drawing a distinction between Congressmen and Congressmen. It has also been labeling a section of Congressmen as “a reactionary caucus” within the ruling party and alleged that it was trying to destabilize several State Governments. The CPI General Secretary, Mr Rajeshwar Rao, has advisedly desisted from naming the persons constituting the alleged caucus. But who the CPI has in mind is pretty well known. Mrs. Gandhi also took care of this without naming the CPI and in the bargain gave the party its worst-ever drubbing and, what is more, sought to end what Congressmen have been silently but increasingly resenting for long: CPI’s “dominance over Congressmen and policies”. She said the Congress would not tolerate interference by any other party in its internal affairs about what it should do or should not do and what steps it should take or not take in one State or another. Their offer “of cooperation to Indira Gandhi” while opposing others in the Congress was meaningless, she said and, raising her voice, added: “This is not acceptable to me at all.”

The CPI also came under implied attack from Mr Sanjay Gandhi. He, too, preferred not to name the CPI in the course of his brief speech. But no one was left in doubt that the reference was to the CPI. Some parties which called themselves socialists, he said, were trying to run down the Youth Congress by arguing that it had no political programme and what it was promoting was merely a social programme. This, he added, was a strange argument especially coming as it did from parties which claimed to be socialist. The Youth Congress was not interested in their kind of politics which comprised burning buses, stopping trains and indulging in violence. The Youth Congress stood for serving the poor people and considered this to be the only healthy socialist programme. Mr Sanjay Gandhi, however, has hastened to clarify for the benefit of the fraternal delegates, including those from the Soviet Union and East Europe, that the IYC was neither pro this country nor pro that but was only pro-India. His subsequent reference to bhải bandi with those who had helped India in times of need and had cooperated with it at the UN drew a meaningful applause.

Jawahar Nagar”also provided a glimpse into the style and outlook of Mr. Sanjay Gandhi, who attracted the spotlight only next to the Prime Minister and was invariably the most popular draw in Gauhati from the moment he alighted by a scheduled flight at the airport. First and foremost, he wants politics to become work-oriented and not remain power-oriented. As he told the Congress-affiliated NSUI, presided over by energetic Miss Githanjali Sharma, they could have easily come forward with many more points. But he was not interested in mere paper resolutions. Second, his outlook does not appear to be authoritarian, as is sought to be made out by his detractors. He complimented Mrs. Soni and the Youth Congress for setting up 6,000 block committees ahead of the schedule announced at Chandigarh. However, he pointed out that these had been appointed and not elected. He then suggested that the IYC should set itself a target of having duly elected block committees during the next year adding: “It is easy to banao and udao from above and carry on mage se. But if those committees are to enjoy prestige and respect, we must have chunao. Then only these will be good, strong and effective.”

Some excitement was caused when the Youth Congress leaders fired three broadsides at the “old Congress”. Mrs Ambika Soni initially complained that senior Congressmen were spurning ÏYC’s cooperation in implementing the 20-point programme and were even obstructing the Youth Congress in its work for fear that their chairs would be threatened. Subsequently, Mr Sanjay Gandhi said: “In Chandigarh, the Congress met in a big way and we as a small cell. Now we are meeting in a big way and the Congress as a cell. This is so because we have implemented what we had promised at Chandigarh. The Congress talked of making 1976 the year of the organisation and yet what has been done?” Finally, when Mr Borooah came to address the IYC session in the afternoon, Mrs Soni reminded the Congress President of his promise at the AICC in June last that the Youth Congress would be fully associated with the implementation of the 20-point programme. But, she added, the promise had not been kept.

Mr Borooah tactfully sought to assuage the IYC feelings by addressing them as “esteemed colleagues of the Youth Congress”. He also humoured them in the course of his speech analysing historically, like a learned leader that he is, the recent developments. There had been a “qualitative change” in politics since the Emergency, he said, and this change wan summarised in the IYC slogan: “Talk less, work more.” (Two days later, Mr Borooah, who described himself as “a temporary President”, asserted at the AICC meeting that the Congress, too, had implemented its Chandigarh resolve: five lakh seva dal workers had been recruited of which three lakhs had been trained and were in uniform; by the end of 1976 another three lakh workers would be trained, bringing the total to six lakhs. Mr Borooah’s remarks at the youth meet manifestly assuaged feelings but what really helped was Mrs Gendhi’s own bouquets to the IYC and her firm view that there was need for active cooperation between the Congress and the Youth Congress. Finally, Mrs Soni briefly intervened at the AICC meeting to clarify that the IYC was a part of the parent organisation and that there was no question of any parallalism.

Nevertheless, steps will need to be taken from now onwards to prevent any sense of rivalry emerging between the two at some stage. This will be necessary all the more in view of the outlook stimulated among some Youth Congressmen by the success of the Gauhati meet. At any rate, immediate action is required to remove the grievances of the Youth Congress against senior partymen about cooperation. Simultaneously, IYC leadership will need to ensure that even as they individually screen their membership of about 5 million, as suggested by Mrs Gandhi, members of the Youth Congress do not in their zeal start throwing their weight about. The Youth Congress has the required vigour and vitality --  and new ideas. But, in the final analysis, youth and experience are complimentary and have to function together in the best national interest.

While the arrangements made by the Reception Committee, which was headed by Mr Hokisho Sema and included Assam’s Chief Minister, Mr Sarat Sinha, who understandably had to carry the main burden, were excellent within its many limitations, almost all prominent Congressmen and Youth leaders I met at Jawahar Nagar were agreed that time had come to change the style and method of future AICC meetings. In fact, Mrs Gandhi herself said that efforts needed to be made to make the meetings more businesslike. True, as Mrs Gandhi emphasized, the Congress has been a movement, is a movement and must continue to be a movement. Nonetheless, the Congress has to think in terms of encouraging greater involvement of its AICC members in the formulation and execution of its policies. Mr Sanjay Gandhi and the Youth Congress have already helped to set a now tone by emphasizing the mood to talk less and work more. Will they now blaze another trail to ensure effective implementation of various programmes?---INFA.

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

Round The World

New Delhi, 29 May 2026

Quad’s Delhi Drift

RUBIO CAME TO SALVAGE OR TOUR?

By Dr. D.K. Giri

(Prof. International Relations, JIMMC) 

When US Secretary of State, Mark Rubio landed in Delhi last week, the atmospherics were impeccable. The motorcade signalling the big power, the Hyderabad House lunch, the inspired visit to Missionaries of Charity with his wife Jeanatte – all choreographed to indicate that India-US ties were back on track. But the observations and inferences pointed to the contrary. The question raised is whether Rubio was here to salvage a fraying bilateral relationship or was this a well-timed diplomatic holiday before a multilateral event in Delhi. 

The multilateral event in reference here is the Quad Foreign Ministers’ conference. As the dust settled after the conference, New Delhi was left with more questions. For India, the answers matter because the Quad itself now looks adrift. India’s approach to Quad has moved the full circle. New Delhi was apologetic about Quad suggesting it as a networking platform for developmental purpose whereas it was purely a security arrangement to contain China in India Pacific. Now, America, which was largely responsible for creating Quad, is moving away from multilateral engagement by bilaterally making up with China. There could be more than what meets the eye. But we can only go by what is in the public domain. 

Rubio’s visit was primarily commercial. With President Trump’s “America First” agenda back in force, Washington’s view of India has boiled down to single metric, market access. The State Department’s talking points were blunt. India is being asked to import 500b USD worth of American goods over the next five years, from LNG to defence equipments to apples and almonds. 

Rubio played a salesman-in-chief with skill. He used every forum to push the trade task, framing it as a win-win with India that would cut her dependence on China and Russia. But the subtext was clear to all discerning observers. That is, tariffs are off the table only when the cash register reigns. The irony is hard to miss. 

The Quad was created as a value-based coalition of democracy. But in Trump-Rubio era, it is being used as a buyers’ club. America-India ties were strategic vis-à-vis countering China, now are more transactional. Partnership in defence is deepening but that may also have a trade angle as the volume of cash is highest in this sector. 

Unarguably, Quad was the real casualty of Rubio’s visit. The Foreign Ministers of India, the US, Japan and Australia met in New Delhi with one agenda, announced a date for the Leaders’ Summit which has not been held since 2024. After Trump’s trade tirade against India which derailed the Summit last year, New Delhi made a renewed diplomatic push to host it in 2026, fearing that grouping would otherwise slide into geo-political irrelevance. 

What happened instead was telling. The Ministers concluded the meeting in just over an hour with no Summit date, no joint press conference, just a bland statement on maritime domain awareness and critical technology. Clearly, without the political weight of a Leaders’ Summit, the Quad is reduced to a talk shop of bureaucrats. Trump’s invitation to Modi signals theunlikelihood of his visit to India this year. 

India will pass on the baton to Australia for the next Summit. But the damage is done. In absence of Leaders’ Summit, Quad loses both purpose and the punch. Worse, Trump’s reaching out to Beijing suggests that countering China is no longer the lodestar. If Washington is making up to Beijing while squeezing New Delhi on Pakistan and trade, what exactly is the Quad containing? 

If the trade was high on agenda, human rights were not, contrary to the expectation of many Indians especially Christians. Rubio, a practicing Catholic, who was built his political brand on religious freedom, chose not to raise the issue of Christian persecution with the Government of India. Therefore, his visit to the Missionaries of Charity was heavy on symbolism and light on substance. There was no press statement, no demarche, no allusion to the churches vandalised, or the anti-conversion laws proliferating across states. 

Indian Christian community saw it all in despair. For years, they have looked upto successive US governments as moral counterweight. Rubio’s silence was therefore not neutral, it was a statement. It revealed to minorities in India that in the new hierarchy of US interests 500b USD in exports outranks Article 25 of the Indian Constitution. It also told New Delhi that the Trump administration will not allow values to override deals. To America, it may be realpolitik, but it undermines its image as defender of freedom and human rights. 

Rubio’s ambivalence on Pakistan reflected old patronage with new excuses.Asked repeatedly about continued US military aid and F-16 sustenance package to Pakistan, Rubio gave the standard Washington straddle: “We have relationships with both countries”. He also said that India-Pakistan relations are of their own kind. He condemned terrorism in general but refused to call out Pakistan unlike in the past. For a Secretary of State, who had called China, “the greatest threat of our time”, such hedging on Pakistan left a bad taste in the mouth. 

New Delhi’s concern on America-Pakistan relation is not abstract. Every time Islamabad gets aid from United States, the fallout is seen in Kashmir through Indians’ blood. Rubio’s ambivalence signalled that Trump 2.0 will revere to the old American style: use Pakistan when needed and placate India when necessary. Indians will continue to ask if Washington does not stand with us on Pakistan, why we shouldstand with Washington on China. New Delhi should raise this concern strongly with Washington. Trump likes to strike deals, why is Modi not offering him deals on China, on Pakistan, on Russia and others. 

From Rubio’s four-day visit to India culminating in Quad Ministers’ Conference, the most uncomfortable question emerges: What was Rubio really doing in India? The official schedule was thin, the deliverables were thinner. Mrs. Rubio accompanying the Secretary of State in the visits to cultural sites gave the trip a tourist tick flavour. For a Foreign Minister of the United States, the biggest power in the world, to mix diplomacy with what looks like a family holiday, would be unseemly at any point of time. More so, when Quad needs resuscitation, it borders on the cavalier. 

Great powers are judged by how seriously they take their partners. When a top US diplomat comes for one day of meetings and two days of optics, it lends a message of disengagement not repair. From Rubio’s visit and the Quad conference, India must draw three conclusions. Bipartisan consensus on India in Washington is tearing up. Second, the Quad’s strategic importance cannot be taken for granted. If the US is distant from Quad, India could explore other options. Third, India on chair seems to be the most stable leg of the Quad table. So, if New Delhi dies not lead, no one will. 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)