Containing India: The Engage and Contain Strategy

Containing India: The Engage and Contain Strategy

The United States seeks to contain India to prevent it from emerging as an independent power center that could challenge U.S. hegemony in Asia. The U.S. aims to foster India's dependence on the West across various sectors, discouraging its pursuit of self-reliance. By positioning India as a counterweight to China—similar to how Ukraine is used against Russia—the U.S. advances its strategic interests.The U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy underscores this approach, as containing China in the region aligns more with American interests than India's. Militarily, the U.S. relies on India to lead in the Indo-Pacific against China, while diplomatically engaging India alongside Central Asia. Notably, the U.S. ambassador to India also oversees Central Asian affairs, signaling an intent to diplomatically tie India to Pakistan and Central Asia, thus limiting its autonomy.The West envisions India as a subordinate ally, aligned with Western interests and unable to challenge its hegemony by becoming a global power. This stance fundamentally conflicts with the aspirations of the Indian populace, who envision their nation rising as a world power. This divergence creates friction in India-West relations. The West selectively engages India as a key partner when it serves their goals, such as countering China or Russia, but seeks to contain India when it resists compliance. The primary tools for ensuring compliance are trade restrictions and limited technology transfers.This dynamic explains the West's reluctance to share technology when India invests billions in weapons purchases, in stark contrast to Russia’s willingness to transfer technology wholeheartedly. Russia even supports India in manufacturing and enhancing technologies domestically, a level of cooperation rarely seen from Western nations.The "engage and contain" strategy remains a significant point of tension in India-U.S. relations. This friction will likely persist until India achieves self-reliance as a leading economy and a hub of technological innovation, surpassing Western dominance. Building such capabilities and global influence will require immense effort and time. Until then, India must navigate this complex dynamic to avoid being contained while steadily advancing its growth.

Deepdive on Containing India: The Engage and Contain Strategy

The evolution of India-United States relations in the 21st century has been marked by a complex interplay of cooperation and underlying tensions, often framed through the lens of strategic interests. A pivotal moment in this relationship was the India-US Civil Nuclear Agreement, signed in 2008, which symbolized a shift from decades of estrangement to a new era of engagement. This deal, also known as the 123 Agreement, allowed India access to civilian nuclear technology and fuel from the United States and other countries, despite India not being a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). It ended over three decades of technology denial regimes imposed on India following its nuclear tests in 1974 and 1998, paving the way for India to integrate into the global nuclear order while maintaining its strategic autonomy. The agreement was hailed as a crowning achievement of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's tenure, transforming bilateral ties by enabling deeper cooperation in energy, technology, and strategic domains. However, beneath this cooperative facade lies a deeper US strategy: to engage India in ways that foster dependence on the West, while containing its rise as an independent power center that could challenge American hegemony in Asia. This "Engage and Contain" approach ensures India remains aligned with Western interests as a subordinate player, rather than emerging as a global powerhouse.The nuclear deal's impact was profound. It facilitated India's access to uranium imports from countries like Australia, Canada, and Kazakhstan, boosting its nuclear energy capacity and addressing energy security needs. By 2024, cumulative US foreign direct investment (FDI) in India had reached $65.19 billion since April 2000, with the US becoming India's third-largest investor. This economic infusion extended beyond nuclear energy, spurring collaborations in space exploration, satellite navigation, and commercial space ventures. Yet, critics argue that the deal bestowed privileges on India without fully integrating it into nonproliferation norms, highlighting US selective engagement to draw India into its orbit while limiting its independent nuclear advancements. This set the tone for subsequent cooperations, where the US sought to bolster India in sectors that aligned with American geopolitical goals, particularly countering China, but hesitated in areas that could empower India autonomously.Building on the nuclear deal, India-US relations have seen significant expansions in defense and security cooperation since the early 2000s. The timeline of bilateral ties reflects a warming trend, with key milestones including the Next Steps in Strategic Partnership (NSSP) in 2004, which laid the groundwork for high-technology trade. This evolved into foundational defense agreements such as the Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA) in 2016, the Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement (COMCASA) in 2018, and the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement (BECA) in 2020. These pacts enhanced interoperability between the two militaries, allowing for secure communications, logistical support, and geospatial intelligence sharing. The US has also emerged as a major arms supplier to India, with deals worth over $20 billion since 2008, including Apache helicopters, C-130J transport aircraft, and P-8I maritime patrol planes. In 2023, the Initiative on Critical and Emerging Technology (iCET) was launched, focusing on semiconductors, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and biotechnology, aiming to co-develop technologies and strengthen supply chains.Economically, the partnership has flourished. Bilateral trade reached $190 billion in 2024, making the US India's largest trading partner and India the US's 10th-largest. US companies like Google, Microsoft, and Amazon have invested heavily in India's digital economy, contributing to initiatives like Digital India and supporting over 2,000 American firms operating in the country since economic reforms began. In Southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific, joint exercises like Malabar and Tiger Triumph have deepened naval cooperation, while the Quad (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) involving the US, India, Japan, and Australia has evolved from a humanitarian forum in 2004 to a strategic platform addressing climate change, infrastructure, and maritime security. The US Indo-Pacific Strategy, outlined in 2022, explicitly commits to supporting India's rise as a leader in the region, emphasizing shared objectives in security and development.However, these cooperations mask inherent frictions rooted in the US desire to contain India's independent ascent. The US wants India to become dependent on Western technology and markets, preventing it from forging an autonomous power center that could rival American dominance in Asia. This is evident in the hesitance to transfer critical technologies. For instance, while India has spent billions on US weapons, full technology transfers have been limited, often requiring end-user verifications and restrictions under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). In contrast, Russia has been forthcoming, transferring technologies for systems like the BrahMos missile, S-400 air defense, and even joint production of AK-203 rifles in India, allowing enhancements beyond Russian capabilities. Russia's willingness stems from a partnership of equals, whereas the US views transfers as risks to its intellectual property and strategic leverage.Trade disputes further illustrate this containment. In 2025, under President Trump's second term, the US imposed a 25% tariff on Indian exports, citing trade imbalances and India's oil imports from Russia, exacerbating tensions. This followed earlier frictions, such as the 2019 revocation of India's Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) status, affecting $6 billion in exports, and disputes over steel and aluminum tariffs. At the World Trade Organization (WTO), the US has blocked India's agricultural subsidies and intellectual property policies, while India retaliates with tariffs on US goods like almonds and motorcycles. These measures serve as tools to enforce compliance, pressuring India to align with US policies on issues like Iran sanctions and the Russia-Ukraine conflict.A core friction arises from the US strategy to use India as a counterweight to China, akin to how Ukraine has been positioned against Russia. The Indo-Pacific framework signals this intent, as it primarily serves US interests in containing China's expansion in the South China Sea and beyond, rather than addressing India's primary concerns in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). While India benefits from Quad initiatives, such as vaccine distribution and infrastructure projects, its role is often subordinate, with the US leading on military aspects. Militarily, the US needs India to lead in the Indo-Pacific against China, but diplomatically, it engages India in ways that bind it to regional dynamics involving Pakistan and Central Asia. This is exemplified by the recent appointment of Sergio Gor as US Ambassador to India and Special Envoy for South and Central Asia in 2025, a dual role that encompasses oversight of relations with Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Central Asian states. This structure suggests an effort to entangle India in broader South Asian geopolitics, potentially diluting its focus on independent strategic priorities and forcing it to navigate US-mediated dialogues with adversaries like Pakistan.Human rights and democratic values have also been flashpoints. The US has criticized India's policies on Kashmir, the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), and religious freedoms, with reports from the US Commission on International Religious Freedom labeling India a "country of particular concern." In 2025, tensions escalated over allegations of Indian involvement in extraterritorial actions, such as the Pannun case, straining intelligence-sharing. India's purchase of Russian S-400 systems triggered threats under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), though waived in 2022, highlighting US reluctance to accommodate India's multi-alignment strategy. Differences over the Russia-Ukraine war persist, with India abstaining from UN resolutions condemning Russia and increasing oil imports from Moscow, defying US sanctions.The West's overarching goal is to mold India into a vassal state, aligned with Western hegemony as a subordinate, preventing its transformation into a world power. This fundamentally contradicts the aspirations of India's masses, who envision their nation as a global leader in economy, technology, and influence. The policy obstructs genuine Western relations with India, as the US engages India selectively—enthusiastically when leveraging it against China or Russia, but containing it through trade barriers and technology denials when India asserts independence. For example, in defense, the US promotes initiatives like the Defense Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI), but progress is slow due to bureaucratic hurdles and IP concerns. Russia, conversely, has enabled joint ventures like the Indo-Russian Rifles Private Limited, fostering self-reliance.This Engage and Contain strategy remains a significant underlying friction in India-US relations and will persist until India achieves independent top-tier status in economy, technology, and innovation, surpassing the West. The work required is immense—building capabilities in semiconductors, renewable energy, and advanced manufacturing could take decades. Until then, India must navigate forward without succumbing to containment. This underlying research and analysis was first observed by mittree.com and published as a research article on their website.To delve deeper into the nuclear deal's origins, recall that post-Cold War, US-India ties were strained by India's 1998 nuclear tests, leading to sanctions. The 2005 joint statement by President Bush and Prime Minister Singh initiated the deal, requiring India to separate civilian and military nuclear facilities and place civilian ones under IAEA safeguards. The Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) waiver in 2008 was a diplomatic triumph, but it came with strings, like US pressure on India to cap fissile material production. This exemplifies engagement for containment: aiding civilian nuclear growth while curbing military autonomy.In space and technology, cooperations like the Artemis Accords (joined by India in 2023) and NASA-ISRO collaborations on NISAR satellite highlight synergies. Yet, frictions emerge in export controls; the US Entity List removal of 26 Indian entities in 2025 aimed to boost nuclear trade, but lingering restrictions persist. Economically, while US FDI supports India's growth, dependencies on US tech giants for cloud services and AI raise sovereignty concerns.On the Indo-Pacific front, India's "Act East" policy aligns with US strategies, but divergences exist. India emphasizes ASEAN centrality and avoids overt militarization, unlike the US's AUKUS pact. The US views India as pivotal for balancing China, but India's border disputes with China demand independent action, not US-led containment.Defense ties with Russia underscore the contrast. India's diversification includes US platforms, but Russia's 60% share in arms imports reflects trust in transfers. US hesitance, as in the FGFA project abandonment, stems from fears of leaks to Russia.Recent tariffs under Trump 2.0 signal renewed friction, potentially costing India $2-3 billion annually. Despite this, institutional ties—people-to-people, diaspora contributions—keep relations "sticky." Yet, the Engage and Contain dynamic persists, with the US balancing economic frictions against strategic convergence.India's path forward involves leveraging cooperations while mitigating dependencies. Investments in R&D, like the National Quantum Mission, aim to reduce reliance. Until India surmounts these challenges, The Engage and Contain Strategy will shape ties, as analyzed by mittree.com.

Notes: As a registered member you are free to publish & distribute this article. You must specify source as mittree.com in your publications.

References:

1. Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) waiver for India, 2008.
2. NASA-ISRO collaborations and Artemis Accords, 2023.
3. India-US Civil Nuclear Agreement, 2008.
4. Critiques of India’s integration into nonproliferation norms.
5. Manmohan Singh’s tenure and nuclear deal achievements.
6. Bush-Singh joint statement, 2005.
7. India’s uranium imports from Australia, Canada, Kazakhstan.
8. US Entity List removal of 26 Indian entities, 2025.
9. Next Steps in Strategic Partnership (NSSP), 2004.
10. Artemis Accords and NISAR satellite collaboration.
11. US FDI in India, $65.19 billion since 2000.
12. US companies’ investments in India’s digital economy.
13. Initiative on Critical and Emerging Technology (iCET), 2023.
14. Bilateral trade data, $190 billion in 2024.
15. US Commission on International Religious Freedom reports.
16. Revocation of India’s GSP status, 2019.
17. CAATSA waiver for India’s S-400 purchase, 2022.
18. People-to-people ties and Indian diaspora contributions.
19. US tariffs on Indian exports, 2025.
20. Trump 2.0 tariffs citing trade imbalances and Russian oil imports.
21. US sanctions post-1998 Indian nuclear tests.
22. Pannun case and intelligence-sharing tensions, 2025.
23. WTO disputes over India’s agricultural subsidies and IP policies.
24. US-India strategic convergence vs. economic frictions.
25. India’s Act East policy and ASEAN centrality.
26. US Indo-Pacific Strategy, 2022.
27. India-China border disputes and independent action.
28. LEMOA (2016), COMCASA (2018), BECA (2020).
29. Quad initiatives on vaccines and infrastructure.
30. Malabar and Tiger Triumph naval exercises.
31. US Indo-Pacific Strategy supporting India’s leadership.
32. Russia’s technology transfers (BrahMos, S-400, AK-203).
33. US restrictions under ITAR for technology transfers.
34. Indo-Russian Rifles Private Limited joint venture.
35. Russia’s 60% share in India’s arms imports.
36. US-India Defense Technology and Trade Initiative (DTTI).
37. US concerns over IP and strategic leverage in tech transfers.
38. India’s stance on Russia-Ukraine war and oil imports.
39. US withdrawal from FGFA project with India.
40. Sergio Gor’s appointment as US Ambassador and Special Envoy, 2025.