India-U.S.: A Century of Distrust
Let us unpack the historical baggage, and understand why this distrust persists in 2025.
Introduction
India’s suspicion of the United States isn’t a recent phenomenon—it’s a story rooted in decades of broken promises, geopolitical flip-flops, and strategic missteps. From the World Wars to the Cold War and beyond, India has often found itself on the losing end of American policies.
1. The World Wars: Promises Made, Promises Broken
During World War I and II, India—still under British colonial rule—contributed massively to the Allied cause. Over 2.5 million Indian soldiers fought in WW2 alone, while India’s financial contributions were staggering, estimated at £2 billion (roughly 1,500 tons of gold in today’s terms).
U.S. leaders like Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt initially supported India’s push for self-governance. India was therefore founder member of the League of Nations and the United Nations despite it not being truly independent (just like in the case of Australia, NZ, Canada and South Africa). Yet, when push came to shove, both prioritized their alliance with Britain, leaving India high and dry.
After WW2, the U.S. floated the idea of India joining the UN Security Council ahead of China. China, i.e. PRC was not offered as it had chased out the US and Allies supporting Chiang Kai-shek, i.e. Taiwan.
India declined—partly due to its non-aligned stance and distrust of Western motives—paving the way for the People’s Republic of China to take the seat in 1971.
Citations:
The Indian Army in the Two World Wars by Kaushik Roy (2011).
FDR and the End of Empire by Christopher O’Sullivan (2012).
UN Archives on Security Council history.
2. Post-War Betrayal: The Marshall Plan and Britain’s Default
Post-WW2, Britain owed India a massive debt for its wartime contributions. Some estimates peg this at £1.3 billion, meant to be repaid as part of reconstruction efforts bolstered by the U.S.-led Marshall Plan. This was part of the negotiation for Marshall Plan. But the U.S. backtracked on pressuring Britain to settle this debt, leaving India high and dry as it stepped into independence in 1947. This “first British default” cost India dearly, undermining its early economic stability.
The Soviet Union seized this opportunity, embedding itself in India’s political fabric. By the 1950s, KGB agents reportedly outnumbered their global counterparts in India, influencing everyone from bureaucrats to Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s inner circle.
Citations:
The Economic Consequences of Independence by Tirthankar Roy (2018).
The Mitrokhin Archive by Christopher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin (1999).
3. The 1960s: Wheat, Wars, and Nuclear Dreams
In the 1960s, India faced famine and accepted U.S. wheat under the PL-480 program. What arrived was barely edible—Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri famously urged Indians to skip a meal rather than eat it. This deepened India’s skepticism of American aid.
Meanwhile, JFK opened a dialogue with India promising a thaw in relations. It was hamstrung by KGB presence in Indian Government. JFK proposed a nuclear partnership and Security Council seat, but his assassination in 1963 halted progress. India’s nuclear and space pioneers, like Homi J. Bhabha, also died mysteriously in 1966, stalling its ambitions.
After JFK’s death, the U.S. armed Pakistan with cutting edge weapons of the time including Patton Tanks, forcing India into an unaffordable arms race. The USSR stepped in with weapons but no technology transfers, keeping India dependent.
Citations:
India’s Food Crisis and PL-480 by B.M. Bhatia (1970).
JFK’s Forgotten Crisis by Bruce Riedel (2015).
4. The 1970s and 1980s: Proxy Wars and Terror
The 1971 genocide of Bengalis by Pakistan Army in East Pakistan was ignored by the US and the US and the UK Aircraft carrier fleet was almost at the doorstep of India to scuttle the liberation of Bangladesh. The Soviets stepped in to keep these fleets out of the fight.
Miffed at this, the U.S. tilted toward Pakistan during the Shimla Accord, ensuring India gained little despite holding 93,000 Pakistani POWs.
Pak simultaneously created a break-India strategy called death by thousand cuts. The US encouraged Pak to push drugs and weapons into India. Pak chose two routes - the smuggling gangs in Mumbai and porous borders in Punjab.
Later, the Carter-Kissinger duo armed Mujahideen fighters in Afghanistan, some of whom Pakistan redirected into India’s Punjab and Kashmir under its “death by a thousand cuts” strategy. Drugs, weapons, and terrorism flooded India’s borders, tacitly encouraged by U.S. support for Pakistan.
Citations:
The Blood Telegram by Gary J. Bass (2013).
Ghost Wars by Steve Coll (2004).
5. The 1990s: Sanctions and Missed Opportunities
The Clinton era offered hope—economic reforms and talks of integrating India into global nuclear regimes. One important part of Clinton olive branch was to get India into Missile Technology control regime and Nuclears Supplier Group and Non-proliferation treaty and Nuclear Test ban treaty agreements. These would shut the Indian nuclear program. India resisted signing these treaties. The deadline for everyone was 1998 or 1999. If India was to be a credible nuclear power, it had to test nuclear weapons and gather enough data so that future tests were not required.
By 1997 India was ready to show-case its expertise in Missiles and Nuclear bombs. As the US, Russia, France and other countries conducted a series of tests to collect and computerise all the data for development of future nuclear weapons, India too conducted nuclear test.
When India tested nuclear weapons in 1998, rejecting treaties like the NPT, the U.S. imposed crippling sanctions. Supercomputers, dual-use tech, even industrial fasteners (screws and nuts) were denied, setting India’s defense back decades. Meanwhile, India honored its Soviet-era debts in full, despite the rouble’s collapse, a principled stance that cost it economically.
Citations:
India’s Nuclear Bomb by George Perkovich (1999).
IMF and World Bank archives (1990s).
6. The 21st Century: A Rocky Reset
Post 2001, George W. Bush Jr. made a decisive shift towards India. This was the main reset of relations with due confidence building between both countries.
Obama continued this expanding both civil and military relations. As relations were improving with Obama pursuing the Look-East policy encouraging ASEAN to take strong stance against China. However, Obama suddenly switched to pro-China policy and sacrificed the interest of ASEAN to China in a dramatic flip-flop hurting many in ASEAN, particularly Philippines.
At the same time, U.S. State Department actions, from funding conversion rackets to pushing “woke” agendas, encouraging regime change actors through NGO funding and subverting elected governments, fuel India’s wariness.
Citations:
The India-US Nuclear Deal by Harsh V. Pant (2008).
Contemporary news analyses (e.g., Foreign Policy, 2016-2020).
Conclusion
India’s distrust of the U.S. is a tapestry woven from historical betrayals, strategic misalignments, and unmet expectations. Each era—whether colonial, Cold War, or modern—adds a thread. Understanding this is key to decoding India’s cautious dance with the world’s superpower in 2025.