U.S.-India partnership threatened

 

​

The effort to “globalize the Intifada,” promoting antisemitic and anti-Zionist protests and actions worldwide to undermine cooperation by the governments in Washington and Jerusalem and reduce United States support for Israel, has largely failed. That said, fueling religious and ethnic hatred is an enduring tool of statecraft for both aggressive foreign policy and efforts to destabilize domestic solidarity.

Organizations and networks that helped support and direct the weaponization of hate against Jews in the U.S. could well turn their attention to promoting anti-Hindu activity in the country and elsewhere as an instrument for weakening U.S.-India cooperation and sowing domestic discord in both countries. This strategy could put one of America’s most important emerging strategic partnerships at risk.

The steady progress of U.S.-Indian alignment has recently been derailed over the breakdown of trade talks, Indian disgruntlement over the U.S. response to the flare-up of conflict between Pakistan and India, and the U.S. punishing India for its oil trade with Russia. This is unlikely to lead to a permanent rupture in the bilateral partnership, and it has the potential to reinforce the desire in both capitals to minimize vulnerabilities that could be exploited to disrupt cooperation and engagement. Much is at stake in the future course of relations between India and the U.S.

A strengthening partnership between India and the U.S. is vital to both countries and has significant geopolitical implications. The two nations have long viewed their bilateral relationship as essential for blocking the expansion of Chinese malicious influence and power in Asia and ensuring stability in the Indian Ocean and South Asia. Indian and U.S. joint participation in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (the Quad), the informal grouping of Australia, India, Japan and the U.S., reflects the common interest in coordinating efforts across the Indo-Pacific region.

Both countries have expressed strong support for building “free and open spaces” – corridors for trade, commerce, and the exchange of services and partnerships – to make the supply chains linking the Indo-Pacific and the Indo-Mediterranean more robust and resilient. India and Italy have championed the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), which U.S. President Donald Trump has endorsed as “one of the greatest trade routes in all of history.” The two countries also participate in the India, Israel, United Arab Emirates and U.S. initiatives group (I2U2).

The steady progress of U.S.-Indian alignment has recently been derailed over the breakdown of trade talks.

The U.S. increasingly sees value in India coming under the umbrella of the Abraham Accords, a key initiative of the Trump administration to normalize relations between Israel and Muslim nations. The accords aim to promote stability, prosperity and security in the Middle East. Besides its traditional relations with Iran, India sees broad engagement in the Middle East and Africa as a crucial component of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “look West” policies. The U.S. and India also share a common interest in partnering on commercial economic development in East Africa.

Economically, Washington and New Delhi view their partnership as contributing toward prosperity in both countries in multiple sectors, including energy, manufacturing, technology, services and pharmaceuticals. India considers the U.S. and other Western partners crucial for arms trade, encompassing imports and the development of its defense and space sectors. It is gradually diversifying from its reliance on Russian weapons imports.

The Indian diaspora and Indian-American population − now over 5 million (already half the size of the Mexican diaspora, the largest in the U.S.) − is a rising political voice in America. Despite making up just 1.5 percent of the population, Indian Americans pay nearly 6 percent of income taxes.

India and the U.S. are currently governed by conservative majorities, but that is not one of the stronger bridges uniting the two countries. In practice, conservatives are not the majority among the Indian diaspora and Indian-Americans. Politically, Indian Americans are similar to Jewish Americans, tending to be more secular and liberal. A survey conducted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace before last year’s national elections concluded:

Indian Americans remain solidly behind the Democratic Party, though there is a modest uptick in support for Republican candidate and former president Donald Trump. …However, one in three survey respondents intends to vote for Donald Trump. This modest drift toward Trump appears to be driven by Indian American men, particularly young men born in the United States.

American conservatives politically and socially most closely align with Indians and American Hindus who adhere to Hindutva (Hindu-ness), a political ideology encompassing the cultural justification of Hindu nationalism. Hindutva is the core ideology of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), India’s governing political party under Prime Minister Modi.

At present, there is very limited formal and consistent engagement between Hindutva and the American conservative movement. The two have yet to defend each other or mutually stand up for the U.S.-India bilateral relationship, which is currently deteriorating due to trade disputes and diplomatic tensions.

Anti-Hindu rhetoric and activities targeting Indian Americans and India have not been considered a significant issue until recently. Most anti-Hindu activity in the U.S, against both people and places of worship, is more aimed at Hindutva or Hindu nationalism, which are often described as racist and anti-democratic movements responsible for the persecution of Christians and Muslims in India.

This is analogous to anti-Zionism discourse and actions. That said, there is little systematic recording of Hindu-hate in the U.S. What is more, the scope of the problem is highly disputed: from claims that Hindu-phobia was invented to cover up the crimes of Hindutva to concerns in the Hindu-American community that they are being more methodically and intentionally targeted.

There are probably more anti-Sikh and anti-Asian incidents than anti-Hindu incidents per year in the U.S. Instances cited are related to media bias, academic bias, temple attacks and desecrations, as well as online disinformation and deplatforming. There was, for instance, a recent spike in online activity during the May conflict between India and Pakistan.

In India, concerns related to anti-Hindu sentiments, particularly in the volatile public media, are often conflated with any strain in U.S.-India relations, for instance President Trump’s claim of negotiating an end to the May India-Pakistan conflict or changes to visa polices, particularly to the H-1B1 program.

Tensions have escalated further after the Trump administration imposed 50 percent tariffs on Indian goods in August, which was followed by Prime Minister Modi making high-profile appearances with the presidents of China and Russia.

President Trump has consistently charged India with “fueling Russia’s deadly assaults on Ukraine” by purchasing discounted crude oil. Senior trade adviser Peter Navarro, whom some consider Hinduphobic, even controversially referred to the conflict in Ukraine as “Modi’s war.”

Politically, the Hindu-American diaspora is not well-organized and there are only a few Hindu-American civil and religious liberty groups. They do not appear to closely cooperate or integrate with organizations combating hate against other religious groups, whether Christian, Muslim or Jewish. Some Jewish groups are dismissive of Hindu-American concerns.

As a solution to anti-Hindu agitation in the U.S., advocacy groups often promote responses similar to those used against antisemitism, such as increased education, combatting disinformation in the media and social networks, or federal grants for security of religious houses of worship.

In practice, these efforts have failed to adequately address a dramatic rise in hate crimes and anti-Semitic activities against American Jews. According to the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), in 2024, antisemitic hate crimes represented approximately 70 percent of all reported religion-based hate crimes. A stunning figure considering Jews make up only 2.4 percent of the U.S. population.

The Trump administration has adopted a more robust and muscular approach to combating anti-Jewish hate, focused on attacking the groups and networks organizing and supporting antisemitic and anti-Zionist activities. The administration is also prosecuting violations of the law under civil liberty and criminal statutes. It is seeking to revoke or bar visas for antisemitic and anti-Zionist activists, as well as remove or arrest potential radical extremists, terrorists and those providing material support to terrorism.

These instruments have not been used against anti-Hindu activists. President Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission, established on May 1, does not include a Hindu representative.

At the same time, there are increasing levels of anti-Hindu crimes in Canada and increasing clashes between Hindu and Sikh communities there. In November 2024, for example, there was a violent clash between rival religious groups in the town of Brampton, Canada.

According to a report in The Guardian, “members of the local community say they fear further violence between Sikh separatist activists [Khalistani movement] and Modi supporters, some of whom espouse Hindu nationalist ideologies.” The Khalistani movement is a Sikh separatist movement calling for an independent homeland, known as Khalistan, in India’s Punjab region. The religious agitation has the potential to spill across the border.

The issue here is whether the lack of strong cultural, religious and political bonds between the U.S. and India creates a potential strategic weakness that can be exploited. While the scope of the anti-Hindu movement in the U.S. does not appear to be as widespread as attacks on other groups, there is the possibility that activism against Hindu-Americans and India could be weaponized as organized political violence, such as with Black Lives Matter, against Jewish students on university campuses and against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.

Additionally, anti-Hindu fervor could fuel malicious geopolitical campaigns, such as activities supported by a confluence of leftist groups and foreign actors, including China and Islamist states and organizations. Both Pakistan and China, for instance, might view anti-Hindu agitation and straining U.S.-Indian ties as a strategic opportunity.

There are implications for anti-Hindu hate campaigns beyond the U.S. and India. Hindus are strongly represented in at least a dozen countries across Asia and Africa. Thus, the treatment of Hindu communities could have ripple effects internationally.

Contact us today for tailored geopolitical insights and industry-specific advisory services.