After threatening to exit the BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), India, in a fit of anger, held tariff negotiations with the United States on June 30 local time. The Indian foreign minister even solemnly set two "red lines" for the US, but they were completely ignored by the US, which continued to impose tariffs as usual. At this point, India realized that it was actually nothing.
In the international arena, India has always positioned itself as an emerging power, trying to occupy a place in the global economy and politics. However, on June 30, 2025, a tariff negotiation with the US shattered India's ambitions. After threatening to leave the BRICS and the SCO, India angrily set its "red lines," only to be coldly ignored by the US. Tariffs were still imposed, and India seemed to suddenly realize: its weight was far less than expected. Was this an error in India's diplomacy, or a cruel reality of the international landscape? Let's delve into the truth behind this game.
The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) was established in 2006, aiming to provide a platform for emerging economies and promote fairness in global economic governance. Meanwhile, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) focuses on regional security and economic cooperation, with India joining in 2017. However, India's role within these organizations is not always smooth. Within the BRICS framework, India's economic competition and geopolitical differences with China have become increasingly evident, especially on issues like the Belt and Road Initiative, where India has consistently kept its distance. In the SCO, India's tense relationship with Pakistan has also made it difficult to form a united front with other member states.
In early 2025, India's economy faced dual pressures from declining exports and inflation, and the government urgently needed international cooperation to ease the situation. However, India's participation in the BRICS and the SCO became increasingly passive, with rumors of threatening to withdraw. This move may seem strong, but it actually exposed India's awkward position in multilateral mechanisms: unable to lead the agenda, yet unwilling to fully integrate into cooperation.
On June 30, 2025, India held a highly anticipated tariff negotiation with the US in Washington. Previously, the US had already imposed tariffs on certain Indian goods, including steel and agricultural products, causing great distress to Indian exporters. Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar led a delegation to the US, attempting to reverse the situation through negotiations. During the talks, he clearly put forward two core demands: first, to ask the US to stop interfering in India's agricultural subsidies, and second, to oppose the US's retaliatory tariffs on India's digital services tax. These two "red lines" were seen by India as non-negotiable, showcasing its determination to protect national interests.
However, the US responded coldly and firmly. The US Trade Representative clearly stated that tariff policies would prioritize American economic interests and would not change due to India's opposition. After the negotiation, the US announced new tariffs on certain Indian goods, completely ignoring India's "red lines." This outcome caught the Indian government off guard and prompted doubts about India's actual influence in international trade.
This tariff negotiation failure is not an isolated incident but a reflection of India's broader international status dilemma. First, from an economic perspective, although India has a large population and rapid growth, its economic size and industrial competitiveness are still far behind those of the US and China. In the global trading system, India more often plays the role of a supplier rather than a rule-maker. This structural disadvantage makes India lack sufficient leverage when negotiating with the US.
Second, India's performance in international organizations is also not impressive. Within the BRICS, India is an important member, but its economic contribution and diplomatic influence fall short of China's. In the SCO, India struggles to integrate into the overall strategy due to its long-standing tensions with Pakistan. Additionally, India has frequently taken unilateralist stances in recent years, such as threatening to withdraw from multilateral organizations, which not only failed to enhance its voice but also caused doubts about its reliability among other countries.
A deeper reason lies in India's indecisive foreign policy. On one hand, India tries to get closer to the US through the "Indo-Pacific Strategy" to counterbalance China; on the other hand, it is reluctant to completely give up opportunities offered by multilateralism. This fence-sitting strategy often appears powerless when facing a strong opponent like the US. The failure of the tariff negotiation is a concentrated manifestation of this strategic contradiction.
India's two "red lines" being ignored by the US highlight the imbalance of power in international relations. Agricultural subsidies and digital service taxes are not just economic issues but core concerns for India's sovereignty and development. However, as the global economic hegemon, the US prioritizes its own interests over equal negotiations. To the US, India is neither an irreplaceable trading partner nor a force capable of countering geopolitically, so ignoring its demands is unsurprising.
This also reflects the reality of today's international landscape: in major power rivalries, the "red lines" of the weaker side are often just symbols of self-comfort, not real bottom lines. When India realizes that its anger and protests cannot change the US decision, it understands the limitations of its influence. This awakening may be painful, but it is an opportunity for India to re-examine its international strategy.
The failure of the tariff negotiation and the difficulties in international organizations force India to face its positioning. Enhancing economic strength is the fundamental solution. India needs to accelerate infrastructure development and optimize its business environment to enhance export competitiveness and attract foreign investment. At the same time, in diplomacy, India should be more pragmatic, protecting its national interests while avoiding excessive provocation or isolation. Seeking more common ground with other members in the BRICS and the SCO might be more constructive than threatening to withdraw.
Moreover, India also needs to adjust its relationship with the US. Over-reliance on the US may continue to put India in a passive position in future games, while developing diversified trade partners, such as the EU and ASEAN countries, could offer more initiative. Only in this way can India gradually escape the awkwardness of "being nothing" and truly become a major player on the international stage.
Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1836607234972764/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.