Ace investor and author Ruchir Sharma, known for his global economic insights, has shared a nuanced perspective on the implications of Donald Trump's second term as U.S. President, with particular emphasis on his approach to tariffs and foreign relations. In an interview with India Today News Director Rahul Kanwal, Sharma cautioned that Trump is likely to adopt even more aggressive tariff policies during his second term, which he believes will have significant consequences on global trade dynamics.
Sharma explained that tariffs are a tool Trump can wield without needing Congressional approval, as they fall under executive authority. "Trump doesn't need Congress for that," Sharma stated. "Tariffs are under executive control, which means the President has the power to impose them unilaterally." However, Sharma added that Trump would still need Congressional support for initiatives like tax cuts and other fiscal policies. He warned that a more confrontational stance on trade could exacerbate tensions between the U.S. and its trading partners, particularly countries like China, which Trump has historically targeted in tariff disputes.
On the topic of India's relationship with the United States, Sharma advised caution in assuming that the personal rapport between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Trump would automatically translate into lasting, strategic alignment. While acknowledging the strong strategic and economic ties between the two countries, Sharma emphasized that the nature of these relationships remains transactional in essence. "The essence is transactional," Sharma said, signaling that while India and the U.S. share mutual interests, these partnerships are based on pragmatism rather than long-term commitments. He cautioned that the U.S. could, in the future, prioritize its own interests, potentially undermining India’s strategic role.
Sharma further elaborated on this point, warning that America’s foreign policy under Trump is driven by national self-interest rather than ideological or long-term alliances. He speculated that should the U.S. determine that striking a deal with China or another country serves its interests, it may do so without taking India’s relationship into account. "Tomorrow, if America sees it in its interest to cut a deal with China, for whatever reason, they’re not going to think about 'Oh, India is an ally,’" he warned, signaling the fluid and transactional nature of modern international relations. This reflects a broader skepticism about the reliability of American alliances, particularly in an era of economic nationalism and shifting global power dynamics.
Sharma’s assessment extended beyond the U.S.-India relationship, noting that India’s presence in American politics is relatively subdued. He remarked that during the U.S. election campaign, India was scarcely mentioned by the candidates. "Even the campaign, if you look at it, India was barely mentioned. A couple of times India was brought up, but it made headlines here. But if you track it from an American perspective, it was barely mentioned," Sharma observed. This, he suggested, reflects the reality that India, despite its growing global significance, remains largely peripheral in the context of American electoral and political discourse.
Despite India’s low profile in U.S. political discussions, Sharma pointed out that India’s "brand" in America is still strong, largely due to the success of Indian immigrants who have made significant strides in various fields. The presence of highly successful Indian-origin individuals in sectors like technology, business, and healthcare has contributed to a positive perception of India in the U.S. "The Indian brand today is very strong. It's largely associated with these very successful immigrants who have come," Sharma explained. These individuals, especially those in high-profile roles like CEOs of major corporations, have helped to shape the narrative around India as a source of talent and innovation. Sharma acknowledged, however, that this positive image persists even though India is also the source of the second-largest contingent of illegal immigrants to the U.S., which complicates the broader narrative of immigration and national identity in both countries.
Turning to the broader political landscape in the U.S., Sharma analyzed the underlying factors behind Donald Trump’s victory, attributing it to deep economic dissatisfaction among the American electorate. He noted that a significant portion of the population feels alienated by the current economic system, which they believe no longer serves their interests. "70% of people in America felt that the system needs to be torn down or something dramatic needs to be done. So this is a vote against the system. It's a protest vote," Sharma explained. The idea that the U.S. political system is failing to address the needs of the majority has led to a growing sense of disenfranchisement, which has made populist candidates like Trump more appealing to voters looking for radical change.
Sharma’s analysis sheds light on the complex dynamics that are likely to shape U.S. foreign policy, trade relations, and its interactions with India in the coming years. While the U.S. and India share a growing strategic partnership, Sharma’s insights suggest that this relationship could be tested by the transactional and pragmatic approach that Trump is expected to take in his second term. India, he warns, must remain prepared for shifting U.S. priorities and be mindful of the broader trends in global politics that could impact its role on the world stage.
Â
