The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has firmly rejected recent claims by a senior US official that a bilateral trade deal between India and the United States fell through because Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not call President Donald Trump. The ministry labeled the characterization as inaccurate and reaffirmed India's ongoing interest in a fair agreement.
US Official's "Blunt and Personal" Account
US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, in a recent podcast interview, offered a pointed critique of the stalled trade negotiations. He suggested that India had "missed the train" because, unlike leaders from several other nations, PM Modi did not place a call to President Trump within a given three-week period. Lutnick attributed the failure to sign a deal to timing, political hesitation in New Delhi, and what he described as Trump's intentionally competitive approach to negotiations.
India's Strong Rebuttal and Factual Clarification
Responding to these remarks, MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal stated that the portrayal of discussions was "not accurate." He provided a detailed timeline, noting that both nations were committed to negotiating a trade agreement as far back as February 13 last year.
"On several occasions, we have been close to a deal," Jaiswal said, emphasizing that India remains keen on a "mutually beneficial" trade pact between the two complementary economies. He also revealed a key detail to counter the narrative about communication gaps: "Incidentally, the PM and President Trump have also spoken on the phone on eight occasions in 2025, covering different aspects of our wide-ranging partnership."
Ongoing Negotiations and Future Prospects
Formal talks for the India-US trade deal commenced in February of last year. Since then, the two countries have conducted five rounds of official-level talks, in addition to discussions at the ministerial level. Despite the public exchange, India's official position remains focused on future engagement. The MEA spokesperson concluded by saying India looks forward to concluding the agreement, underscoring a continued diplomatic channel for negotiation.
The exchange highlights the complex and often sensitive nature of high-stakes international trade diplomacy, where public statements can shape perceptions even as closed-door discussions continue.
