A $686 million American arms deal with Pakistan, a contested $100,000 visa fee, and a stalled trade framework have left Washington and New Delhi navigating one of their rougher diplomatic patches in recent memory.
The friction predates the Democrats’ sweeping midterm victory, which handed them control of both chambers of Congress and placed the Republican White House under a fresh layer of institutional scrutiny.
For India, whose largest export market is the United States, the new balance of power in Washington arrives at a delicate moment when bilateral ties remain under pressure on multiple fronts.
Trade sits at the center of those tensions, with an interim framework discussed by President Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi in February still not formalized, as the two sides remain divided over market access and specific trade commitments.
Shanthie Mariet D’Souza, founder of the Mantraya Institute of Strategic Studies, expects Democratic lawmakers to apply “increased scrutiny of protectionist measures” and push for “stronger trade oversight and clearer standards for environmental and labor issues.”
D’Souza nonetheless maintains that “the fundamental pillars of the India-US strategic partnership are expected to remain strong” and that deepening economic ties between the two nations will likely continue as a long-term goal.
The visa question adds a separate layer of complexity, with the Trump administration having imposed a $100,000 payment requirement for certain new H-1B petitions, alarming Indian professionals and American tech firms that depend heavily on the program.
California-licensed immigration lawyer Rajkrishna Iyer is skeptical that a Democrat-controlled Congress will meaningfully reverse that course, noting bluntly that “for the last 25-plus years, Congress has done nothing for immigration.”
Iyer does believe the steep fee faces a legal reckoning, saying “most likely, the new rules will not come into effect. And if they do, federal courts are likely to strike them down because the fees are not reasonable.”
He reserved his sharpest assessment for the president himself, arguing that “a rational president would not spend time imposing further restrictions on legal immigration. But as we know, the president is not rational.”
On the geopolitical side, India’s continued purchase of Russian energy and arms remains a fault line, even after the U.S. granted New Delhi an oil ban waiver in March 2026 and Trump eased some Russia sanctions in October.
In a September congressional vote on Russian sanctions, a significant number of Democrats joined Republican colleagues in endorsing trade restrictions against Moscow, signaling that bipartisan pressure on the Russia issue is unlikely to evaporate.
D’Souza expects the administration to hold its position, predicting it “will approach this issue with diplomatic caution to avoid straining relations with New Delhi” while still preferring reduced dependence on Moscow.
India’s status as Russia’s single largest arms customer continues to irritate Washington, even as New Delhi has pushed back against the U.S. selling advanced military technology worth $686 million to Pakistan for its F-16 fleet.
Former Indian ambassador to the U.S. and Israel Navtej Sarna counseled restraint in reading too much into the midterm outcome, saying “it may be facile to try and parse these results for their immediate impact on specific areas of foreign policy. Much will depend on how Trump reacts.”
Sarna does expect Washington to become “a more contested place,” and suggested that greater institutional checks could ultimately benefit the bilateral relationship if they inject stability and restore formal linkages.
A more pointed warning came from Amitabh Mattoo, dean of the School of International Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University, who cautioned that Trump could “double down and adopt an even harder line towards New Delhi if he comes to believe that Indians, particularly sections of the diaspora, played a role, directly or indirectly, in his party’s defeat.”
Harsh Pant of the Observer Research offered a steadier read, arguing that the India-U.S. partnership has long commanded bipartisan backing and that “I don’t think India will be one of those issues” on which the White House and Congress are set to collide.
Pant concluded that regardless of who controls Capitol Hill, the deeper lesson for India remains unchanged: “The need for diversification of partnerships, the need to be self-reliant in certain critical sectors, the need to have alternative supply chains — all of those issues remain where they are. The US midterms do not really change the calculus.”
