Sarita PandeyA second Trump administration will likely implement a more transactional, security-driven approach to South Asia, balancing strategic alliances with economic pragmatism and counterterrorism goals. Trump’s “America First” policy will guide these interactions, focusing primarily on relationships that directly benefit U.S. interests, particularly in countering China’s influence in the region, managing security threats, and enhancing trade benefits for the U.S. Here’s an in-depth look at what Trump’s likely policies toward South Asia might entail.
1. India: Key Strategic Partner Against China and Economic Collaborator
Countering China’s Influence: India will continue to be viewed as a vital strategic partner, with Trump likely pushing for closer U.S.-India alignment in countering China. During his first term, Trump launched an Indo-Pacific strategy and supported India’s role in the Quad alliance (U.S., India, Japan, and Australia). In his second term, Trump will likely advance this strategy by expanding military exercises, security cooperation, and technology-sharing initiatives with India to bolster regional stability against China’s growing influence.
Defense and Technology Collaboration: The Trump administration may prioritize defense sales and technology partnerships, encouraging India to purchase more advanced U.S. military equipment. The aim would be to enhance India’s capabilities as a counterbalance to China, while benefiting U.S. defense industries. Trump might also push for expanded access to Indian bases for joint exercises or emergency use, strengthening the operational partnership.
Economic Relations and Trade Pressures: Trump’s transactional style would likely emphasize reducing the U.S.-India trade deficit and protecting American industries. While he values India as a strategic partner, Trump could take a harder line on trade, seeking to renegotiate agreements and impose conditions favorable to American exports. India, which has been balancing economic ties with both the U.S. and China, may face pressure from Trump to reduce its dependency on Chinese imports, with Trump potentially incentivizing U.S. companies to invest in India as a manufacturing hub.
Immigration Policies and Visas: While Trump values strong ties with India, his stance on H-1B and other work visas, which affects thousands of Indian professionals, could become a point of contention. He may reintroduce restrictions on these visas, impacting Indian IT companies and professionals. However, given the importance of technology collaboration, Trump could make some concessions to ensure this sector remains cooperative.
2. Pakistan: Focus on Counterterrorism with Limited Economic Engagement
Counterterrorism and Security Cooperation: Trump’s approach to Pakistan is likely to remain primarily focused on counterterrorism. In his first term, Trump cut aid to Pakistan, insisting it take stronger action against extremist groups that threaten U.S. and regional security. A second Trump administration would likely maintain this stance, conditioning any aid or support on measurable progress in countering terrorism and limiting the influence of groups like the Taliban or Haqqani network. However, Trump’s pragmatism could lead to selective engagement, especially if Pakistan is willing to cooperate on intelligence sharing.
Afghanistan and Regional Stability: With a continued desire to reduce U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, Trump may view Pakistan as a necessary partner for intelligence and stability efforts in the region. He might engage with Pakistan in limited terms, focusing primarily on areas where the U.S. has direct security interests. However, he would likely remain skeptical of Pakistan’s sincerity in combating terrorism, demanding more visible actions against cross-border terrorism, particularly regarding threats to India.
Economic Relations with Limits: Trump’s transactional approach to foreign aid means Pakistan would see little to no economic support beyond security assistance. Unless Pakistan demonstrates significant reforms or aligns more closely with U.S. strategic interests, Trump would avoid deepening economic ties, opting instead for a low-commitment relationship focused on security.
3. Afghanistan: Pragmatic Withdrawal and Limited Support
Diplomatic Engagements with Regional Actors: Trump may favor limited diplomatic engagement with the Taliban, as seen during his first term, to ensure they maintain some level of control in Afghanistan without directly threatening U.S. interests. He would likely attempt to negotiate commitments from Afghanistan’s neighbors, including India and Pakistan, to manage the country’s stability without significant U.S. involvement.
Aid and Development Cuts: Trump’s focus on cost-cutting would likely mean reduced development aid to Afghanistan, with funds being diverted to higher-priority areas. Any financial support would be minimal, targeted primarily at counterterrorism initiatives rather than broader economic development.
4. Bangladesh: Emphasis on Trade and Humanitarian Issues
Relations with the Interim Government: The Trump campaign generally advocated for a less interventionist foreign policy, focusing on an “America First” approach, and it’s unrealistic to assume that Bangladesh was ever a primary concern for the campaign. However, Bangladesh’s interim government should reflect on how changes in the U.S. may influence bilateral relations. Fortunately for Dhaka, there is ample time to adjust, as it will likely take months for the Trump Administration to fully staff its foreign policy positions and begin enacting any changes that could impact Bangladesh.
Economic and Trade Relations: Trump’s interest in South Asia’s economic landscape would likely extend to Bangladesh, especially given its robust textile industry and growing economic potential. Trump might push for improved trade terms, focusing on creating opportunities for U.S. businesses. Bangladesh’s role as a manufacturing hub could be highlighted, particularly if the Trump administration seeks alternatives to Chinese supply chains.
Human Rights and Rohingya Crisis: While Trump’s administration historically de-emphasized human rights as a foreign policy priority, the scale of the Rohingya crisis might draw some attention. However, any involvement would likely be limited and symbolic, with minimal U.S. financial or logistical support for refugee issues unless there’s a clear U.S. interest. Trump may encourage regional solutions or lean on allies, such as India, to assume greater responsibility for addressing humanitarian issues.
5. Sri Lanka, Nepal, and the Maldives: Strategic Interests and China’s Influence
Countering China’s Regional Influence: Trump would likely continue the U.S.’s focus on countering China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) influence in countries like Sri Lanka, Nepal, and the Maldives. Trump may offer security cooperation and limited economic incentives to help these countries maintain autonomy from China’s debt-driven investments, particularly in strategic locations like Sri Lanka’s Hambantota port.
Security Ties and Defense Cooperation: Trump may deepen defense ties with these smaller nations to counter China’s influence, offering military training, joint exercises, and maritime cooperation. For instance, in the Maldives, Trump’s administration might focus on enhancing maritime security cooperation to counterbalance Chinese interests in the Indian Ocean.
Economic Engagement with Conditions: Trump’s economic aid and investment would likely be conditional, expecting these countries to take visible actions against China’s influence. Trump may also encourage U.S. companies to pursue projects in infrastructure, energy, or telecommunications in these regions, but only if there’s a clear economic return for the U.S.
6. Regional Implications of Trump’s Policies Toward China and Russia
Strengthening Alliances Against China: Trump’s “America First” approach would likely reinforce alliances against China, pushing for a more coordinated effort in South Asia. India would be central to this plan, with Trump expecting it to take a lead role in regional security while aligning closely with U.S. strategic interests.
Mixed Approach to Russia-India Relations: Trump’s warmer stance toward Russia could indirectly benefit India, as it allows India more room to maintain its longstanding defense ties with Moscow without fear of U.S. sanctions. While Biden’s administration expressed frustration over India’s dealings with Russia, Trump may take a more flexible approach, seeing India’s relationship with Russia as less of a concern if it helps counterbalance China.
Economic Pragmatism: Trump’s approach would largely avoid entanglement in South Asia’s internal matters unless there’s a direct U.S. interest. Economic relations would be transactional, with Trump willing to support South Asian countries economically only if they align with U.S. strategic objectives or provide clear economic benefits.
Finally, a second Trump administration would likely see a pragmatic, transactional approach to South Asia, focusing on strategic alliances to counter China, limited engagement with Pakistan for counterterrorism, and a low-commitment economic approach. India would remain central to Trump’s South Asia policy, while Pakistan and Afghanistan would receive limited, security-focused attention. The Trump administration would prioritize economic benefits and security gains, expecting regional partners to take on greater roles in maintaining stability.
