Why US slaps tariffs on India but won’t dare with China: Devina Mehra connects the dots
“International bargaining, especially with someone like Trump, is only about relative strength, not ‘fairness,’” Mehra wrote in a Mint column.
- Sep 1, 2025,
- Updated Sep 1, 2025 1:36 PM IST
In trade wars, there’s no fairness, only muscle. China built it, India didn’t. That’s why Washington squeezes New Delhi, not Beijing.
Devina Mehra, founder of First Global, wrote in a Mint column that India’s struggle against US tariffs is less about policy “unfairness” and more about a blunt reality: China has accumulated overwhelming economic and strategic power while India has not.
The author of Money, Myths and Mantras: The Ultimate Investment Guide, dismissed the popular Indian narrative that the US should target Beijing instead, given China’s massive trade surplus and higher crude imports from Russia.
“International bargaining, especially with someone like Trump, is only about relative strength, not ‘fairness,’” Mehra wrote.
The gap between China and India is stark. Even if India manages 7% annual GDP growth while China’s growth halts—a highly unlikely scenario—it would still take about 25 years for India to catch up.
And Beijing hasn’t just relied on growth numbers; it has strategically positioned itself across industries and supply chains.
China dominates mining, raw materials, and manufacturing, while steadily climbing the technology ladder. Its control over rare earths, a result of decades of investment, gives it immense leverage.
Between 2000 and 2016, the Chinese Academy of Sciences published more than 2,000 papers on the subject, building both knowledge and capacity.
Meanwhile, China has surged ahead in high-tech industries. In the first half of 2025, Chinese automaker BYD sold more EVs than Tesla, with seven of the world’s top 10 EV brands now Chinese. Beijing spends 20–25 times more than India on R&D, pouring nearly half a trillion dollars annually into AI, quantum computing, biotech, and semiconductors.
India, by contrast, remains dependent. Its trade deficit with China has ballooned from $37 billion to nearly $100 billion in a decade, while exports have stagnated. Symbolic moves like banning apps have done little to alter the balance.
“China now holds most of the aces in any negotiation,” Mehra wrote. Quoting poet Rajinder Krishan, she likened today’s geopolitics to the “law of the jungle—whoever has the stick will get his way.”
Her warning is blunt: unless India focuses on long-term investments in technology, supply chains, and strategic industries, it will remain on the receiving end of global pressure—lamenting unfairness while others wield power.
In trade wars, there’s no fairness, only muscle. China built it, India didn’t. That’s why Washington squeezes New Delhi, not Beijing.
Devina Mehra, founder of First Global, wrote in a Mint column that India’s struggle against US tariffs is less about policy “unfairness” and more about a blunt reality: China has accumulated overwhelming economic and strategic power while India has not.
The author of Money, Myths and Mantras: The Ultimate Investment Guide, dismissed the popular Indian narrative that the US should target Beijing instead, given China’s massive trade surplus and higher crude imports from Russia.
“International bargaining, especially with someone like Trump, is only about relative strength, not ‘fairness,’” Mehra wrote.
The gap between China and India is stark. Even if India manages 7% annual GDP growth while China’s growth halts—a highly unlikely scenario—it would still take about 25 years for India to catch up.
And Beijing hasn’t just relied on growth numbers; it has strategically positioned itself across industries and supply chains.
China dominates mining, raw materials, and manufacturing, while steadily climbing the technology ladder. Its control over rare earths, a result of decades of investment, gives it immense leverage.
Between 2000 and 2016, the Chinese Academy of Sciences published more than 2,000 papers on the subject, building both knowledge and capacity.
Meanwhile, China has surged ahead in high-tech industries. In the first half of 2025, Chinese automaker BYD sold more EVs than Tesla, with seven of the world’s top 10 EV brands now Chinese. Beijing spends 20–25 times more than India on R&D, pouring nearly half a trillion dollars annually into AI, quantum computing, biotech, and semiconductors.
India, by contrast, remains dependent. Its trade deficit with China has ballooned from $37 billion to nearly $100 billion in a decade, while exports have stagnated. Symbolic moves like banning apps have done little to alter the balance.
“China now holds most of the aces in any negotiation,” Mehra wrote. Quoting poet Rajinder Krishan, she likened today’s geopolitics to the “law of the jungle—whoever has the stick will get his way.”
Her warning is blunt: unless India focuses on long-term investments in technology, supply chains, and strategic industries, it will remain on the receiving end of global pressure—lamenting unfairness while others wield power.