Prof Virender Koundal
In a recent statement that sparked global attention, the American President allegedly remarked that the Indian economy is “dead” following the imposition of tariffs. Such a sweeping assertion raises critical questions: Is this a strategic provocation? A reflection of economic rivalry?Or simply a miscalculated political statement? Regardless of the motive, the comment is not only inaccurate but also fails to recognize the broader transformation underway in the Indian economy. India, today, stands as the world’s fourth-largest economy and the fastest-growing major economy. With a GDP exceeding $4 trillion, India is not only surviving global shocks-it is thriving, independently and confidently.
India’s economy is projected to grow at 7.2% in 2025, outpacing most G20 nations, including the United States. The country has emerged as a global hub for digital innovation, services, renewable energy, and manufacturing. With massive public investments in infrastructure, digital public goods, and social welfare schemes, India’s economic resilience is underpinned by both domestic consumption and strategic exports.
The narrative that India is faltering economically is not supported by any credible macroeconomic indicator. The World Bank, IMF, and numerous rating agencies consistently affirm India’s robust fiscal health and policy direction. In contrast to the rhetoric from Washington, data paints a picture of a country redefining its place in the global economy.
Central to India’s growth trajectory is the policy doctrine of Atmanirbhar Bharat (Self-Reliant India), launched post-pandemic to reduce dependence on foreign imports, especially from politically sensitive countries. This initiative is not isolationist; rather, it emphasizes strengthening domestic capacities and becoming a credible partner in global supply chains. India now leads in the production of vaccines, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, electronics, and even defence technologies.
Far from being a “dead economy,” India’s pursuit of self-reliance is breathing new life into sectors previously dominated by imports. This self-reliance, however, seems to have irked Washington, which expected India to align unquestioningly with American commercial and strategic interests.
One cannot overlook the growing bias in Washington’s tone when discussing India. The American President’s comments reflect deeper frustrations that India is not conforming to U.S. economic and geopolitical expectations. This stems from several decisions made by New Delhi that assert India’s sovereignty in trade, defence, and foreign policy.
Firstly, despite persistent lobbying, India has not opted for the American F-35 fighter jets. Instead, it is investing in indigenous platforms like the Tejas Mk-II and collaborating with France and Russia for advanced defence technologies. This rejection of American arms is not due to anti-American sentiment, but due to strategic and economic calculations rooted in India’s long-term self-reliance and cost-efficiency.
Secondly, the Ukraine conflict, India continued to import discounted oil from Russia, citing national energy security interests. The move was criticized in Western capitals, but it was a pragmatic decision that helped India stabilize domestic fuel prices amid global inflation. India’s stance was clear: its national interests cannot be compromised by distant geopolitical calculations.
Thirdly, India has firmly protected its agricultural sector from foreign dominance. Washington has long demanded India open its markets to subsidized American agricultural produce, especially genetically modified crops, dairy products, and processed foods. However, India, respecting its small and marginal farmers, has maintained critical subsidies and protective tariffs.
Fourthly, the Indian dairy sector, the largest in the world, is largely run by small farmers and cooperatives. The U.S. push to open Indian markets for American milk products-often derived from hormone-injected cows-has been firmly resisted. Cultural sensitivities, food safety, and economic sustainability make it imperative for India to shield its dairy sector from unrestricted imports.
India’s economic doctrine today is fundamentally rooted in “India First.” This principle has guided policy decisions across sectors-from industrial policy to digital regulation, from semiconductor manufacturing to defence procurement. Be it banning Chinese apps for security reasons, or resisting unfair digital taxation demands by tech giants, India is asserting its digital and economic sovereignty.
This is not a hostile stance; it is a mature economic nationalism aligned with the practices of most developed nations, including the U.S. Ironically, while America champions its “America First” policy, it questions India’s similar assertion of national interests.
It is important to highlight American hypocrisy on issues like subsidies and tariffs. The U.S. itself provides billions in subsidies to its farmers, particularly in soy, wheat, and corn, but criticizes India for extending minimum support prices (MSP) to its small farmers. Similarly, America has imposed high tariffs on steel, aluminium, and solar panels from various countries, but calls India “protectionist” for levying tariffs on luxury goods or sensitive imports.
This double standard reveals not just a bias, but a deep discomfort with India’s economic assertiveness. As India moves away from the Global South dependency narrative and joins the high table of major economies, Western policymakers find their leverage diminishing.
India is no longer a fringe player in global economic diplomacy. As a key member of the G20, QUAD, BRICS+, and other platforms, India is shaping trade norms, digital governance, and financial architecture. It is pushing for reforms in the WTO and IMF to better reflect the voices of emerging economies. In the Indo-Pacific, India is the only country capable of balancing Chinese influence without being entirely dependent on American patronage.
This strategic autonomy unnerves traditional power centres. The U.S. expected India to toe its line on China, trade, defence purchases, and digital policies. But India, while maintaining a strong relationship with Washington, has refused to act like a junior partner.
Contrary to the “dead economy” rhetoric, India is currently witnessing a digital revolution. With over 1.2 billion mobile connections, 850 million internet users, and more than 100 unicorns, India’s digital economy is valued at over $1 trillion. The Unified Payments Interface (UPI), Aadhaar infrastructure, and platforms like ONDC (Open Network for Digital Commerce) are globally admired.
U.S. tech giants are investing billions in India, clearly indicating their belief in India’s economic future. In fact, American firms from Google to Microsoft, Apple to Amazon, are expanding operations in India-a strange paradox if the economy were truly “dead.”
Under the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme, India is attracting massive investments in electronics, semiconductors, renewable energy, and pharmaceuticals. Companies such as Apple and Foxconn are shifting their production bases from China to India. Global investors see India as a credible alternative, backed by democratic stability, young workforce, and improving infrastructure.
This transformation into a manufacturing powerhouse again challenges the older narrative that India is only a service-based economy. A rising India is less dependent, more competitive, and less controllable-something Washington may find unsettling.
India’s economic rise is inconvenient for some, especially those who were used to a pliant New Delhi in global affairs. The American President’s assertion of India’s economic “death” is not only unfounded but also deeply ironic, given that the U.S. is increasingly dependent on Indian markets, talent, and political goodwill to counterbalance global uncertainties.
India is not looking to replace the U.S. or undermine global institutions. But it is equally clear that it will not allow itself to be patronized or dismissed by selective trade comments and geopolitical bullying. The Indian economy is not dead-it is evolving, asserting, and rising. It is not seeking charity; it is demanding respect.
(The author is Department of Economics University of Jammu)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
