admin 
New Delhi, January 10:
Major trade agreements depend on policy alignment and concrete negotiations, not symbolic gestures by national leaders, the Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI) said on Friday.
The statement came after US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick claimed that the India–US Bilateral Trade Agreement failed because Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not personally call former US President Donald Trump.
GTRI rejected the claim and said it oversimplifies complex trade negotiations.
Remarks Shift Focus Away From Core Issues
Lutnick made the remarks during the All-In Podcast. He said negotiators had prepared the deal structure. According to him, the final step required a leader-level phone call.
He added that Prime Minister Modi later agreed to make the call. However, he said the US had already moved on by then.
GTRI said this explanation raises serious questions.
Talks Continued Despite Alleged “No Deal” Decision
India and the US continued negotiations well after July 2025. Officials held multiple discussions on tariffs, market access, and regulations.
During the same period, the US concluded trade deals with Indonesia, Vietnam, and the Philippines.
“If Washington had already decided there would be no deal, talks would not have continued for months,” GTRI said.
The think tank called Lutnick’s statement a retrospective justification, not a real-time reason.
Policy Differences Remain the Main Obstacle
GTRI stressed that unresolved policy issues caused the delay. These include tariffs, agriculture, digital trade, and regulatory control.
“Trade agreements of this scale rely on hard policy choices,” the report said. “They do not depend on symbolic diplomacy.”
GTRI warned that focusing on personal gestures distorts negotiating reality.
Tariffs Add Pressure to Trade Relations
Trade tensions have increased in recent months. The Trump administration imposed steep tariffs on major exporters, including India.
Since August 2025, Indian goods entering the US have faced tariffs of up to 50 per cent.
GTRI concluded that the India–US trade deadlock reflects substantive disagreements, not missed phone calls.
About The Author
