Games of Tariffs & Power: Why Is Trump Hitting India Hard and Praising Pakistan?

Tariffs are never just about economics — they’re about leverage, influence, and sometimes, pure political theatre. Under Donald Trump, America’s trade policy became a chessboard where South Asia was a critical square. While India faces a crushing 50% tariff on key exports, Pakistan enjoys a much friendlier 19% rate — a move that has sparked debate from Washington to Islamabad. But is this short-term favor a blessing or a trap? In this article, we break down why Trump’s White House hit India hard, praised Pakistan, and what this means for the region’s future in an interconnected global economy. The Tariff Landscape: Numbers That Speak

Currently, U.S. tariffs stand starkly different across South Asia:

India faces a hefty 50% tariff.

Pakistan enjoys a much lower rate of 19%.

Other South Asian countries average around 20%, with gradual increases over time.

On the surface, Pakistan’s position seems favorable—lower tariffs mean easier access to the American market. The government in Islamabad sees this as a positive diplomatic gesture. But this silver lining hides a cloud: in the long run, it could backfire.

Here’s why: Pakistan’s exports are overwhelmingly dependent on textiles—about 92% of its total exports. Competing countries like Canada and Mexico enjoy GSP (Generalized System of Preferences) status in the same market, giving them better tariff-free access. Pakistan, however, only gets GSP benefits on a narrow range of goods—rice, plastics, and just about 5% of textiles. This limited scope keeps Pakistan vulnerable to sudden shifts in U.S. policy.

The Texas Connection

One interesting twist is the U.S. state of Texas, which exports around $2 billion worth of cotton (kappas) to Pakistan annually. In many textile-related imports, Pakistan actually has GSP status, unlike other South Asian competitors who face tariffs of 35–50%. This gives Pakistan a short-term advantage in that specific niche. The problem? It encourages over-reliance on one sector instead of broadening the export base.

Why Tariffs Hurt in a Connected World

In a tightly interlinked global economy, tariffs often harm more than they help. They trigger reciprocal tariffs—a tit-for-tat response where both sides lose. Take the example of U.S.–China tensions: each tariff hike invites retaliation, disrupting supply chains and consumer prices.

Even the U.S. itself is not immune. Vans and trucks made in Europe face a 25% U.S. tariff, which benefits American automakers. But in industries like textiles, the story flips—higher tariffs on imported clothing reduce demand, which in turn lowers the export of U.S. cotton. American farmers feel the pinch. This illustrates the reality of the “modern super-connected world”: no nation operates in a vacuum.

A striking illustration comes from the book The Travels of a T-Shirt in the Global Economy (2005), which traces how a simple German-made T-shirt might travel across three continents before reaching a store shelf. Tariffs disrupt this delicate dance.

Why Trump is Turning Up the Heat on India

The U.S.–India friction under Trump wasn’t just economic—it was deeply political. Trump openly warmed toward Pakistan while pressuring India, partly to gain leverage in broader geopolitical games.

One major flashpoint: Trump reportedly warned India to halt oil purchases from Russia, a move tied to broader U.S. sanctions strategy. At the same time, he pushed for mediation in the Kashmir dispute, a proposal India rejected outright. This refusal, alongside India’s reluctance to align fully with U.S. interests, annoyed the Trump administration.

Moreover, India walks a diplomatic tightrope—it’s a member of both the U.S.-led Quad alliance and the BRICS bloc with Russia and China. From Trump’s perspective, that looked like playing both sides.

India’s Image vs. Reality

Domestically, India promotes a narrative of economic greatness—its large population and growing GDP often feed a sense of national pride. But global weight is a different matter. Russia, with a smaller population and GDP, holds a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, wields energy influence through oil exports, and remains a major arms producer.

India, meanwhile, still struggles to produce advanced military hardware, such as fourth-generation fighter jets, without foreign assistance. The gap between perception and actual geopolitical clout remains wide.

Short-Term Favor, Long-Term Risk for Pakistan

Pakistan’s current tariff advantage is not a permanent win. It is, in many ways, a tactical move by Trump—meant to reward Pakistan’s cooperation while putting India under pressure. But relying too heavily on preferential treatment, without diversifying exports or securing broader GSP access, leaves Pakistan exposed. If U.S. policy shifts, the cushion could disappear overnight.

The lesson for both countries—and the rest of the world—is clear: in the era of interconnected economies, tariffs are less about protecting industries and more about political maneuvering. But in the end, they rarely deliver lasting prosperity.