5 min readMay 1, 2026 06:39 PM IST First published on: May 1, 2026 at 06:39 PM ISTLast week, a major debate erupted over an observation of mine about oil imports from Iran and Russia at a conference in Washington DC. I was wrong on the facts about Russia because India never stopped importing oil from that country. I promptly apologised. Yet, the Congress Party used my observation to loudly reiterate its allegation that the Indian government had “surrendered” before the US. This is the pot calling the kettle black.The compression of oil imports from Iran had happened during the UPA-2 regime. Until 2010, Iran was India’s second-largest oil supplier, accounting for almost 15 per cent of total imports. But in 2012, the Obama administration came out with the NDAA Act and threatened India with sanctions if it didn’t stop buying oil from Iran. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made a special visit to India to force Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to fall in line. Singh succumbed to US pressure by reducing oil imports from Iran to less than 5 per cent. India also suspended oil shipments from Libya and Sudan. Unlike the churlish leadership of the Congress today, the mature BJP leadership did not call Manmohan Singh “Surrender Singh”. It understood the geopolitical complexities and reacted with restraint.AdvertisementAlso Read | There is a new logic to India-US ties. Delhi must adapt quicklyThe reaction to my observation came not only from the Opposition but also from a section of the supporters of the ruling party. Therein lies an important message for India-US relations, which, incidentally, was the main thrust of my speech at the DC conference. Unfortunately, that content was never publicised. I cautioned about the negative public perception in India of the US today. I underscored how the three important pillars of the relationship – geostrategic, geoeconomic and people-to-people – are all on shaky ground.The India-US relationship was based on a common geostrategic understanding about global challenges like China, Islamic terror, etc. Today, nobody understands the US’s geostrategic priorities. The international liberal order is crumbling, and it is not clear where the US stands on that issue. Not just India, even NATO partners and other European allies do not know its priorities in Ukraine, Gaza or elsewhere. Secondly, strong economic cooperation has been built over the last two decades between the US and India. Bilateral trade touched $220 billion, doubling in the last 10 years and making the US India’s largest trading partner. The last year, however, saw that partnership come under strain due to excessive tariffs imposed by the US. A new H1B visa regime puts enormous pressure on US companies with Indian employees. Even the people-to-people relationship, a key pillar, is undergoing considerable stress due to migration-related debates in the US. Online and personal intimidations are growing, causing concern to the Indian diaspora.Given these challenges, I suggested “three mutuals” to improve bilateral relations – mutual respect, mutual sensitivity and mutual interest. Ironically, these were the three points made by India to Chinese officials a couple of years ago. Mutual respect is a key missing element in the relationship at present. Comments like “hellhole”, “gangsters with laptops”, coming from the highest offices, vitiate the atmosphere. Mutual sensitivity, too, is important. When India talked about strategic autonomy, it was ridiculed or reviled. But the US wants to engage with any country for its own interest without bothering about the sensitivities of others. Finally, we need to redefine what is in our mutual interest as two long-time friends.AdvertisementNone of what I said was tantamount to surrender. On the contrary, it was a clear assertion that a reset is needed in the relationship. It is in the long-term interest of a peaceful world that the two countries have huge stakes in the relationship.you may likeThere is a visible dearth of a good Indian hand in the US administration today. Fortunately, that gap can be filled by the dynamic US ambassador to India, Sergio Gor. After John Kenneth Galbraith in the early 1960s, who had a close relationship with President John F Kennedy and Robert Blackwill in the early 2000s, who was close to President George Bush, it is Ambassador Gor who has great proximity to the White House. That helps. In just a few months, Gor has made his presence felt by actively engaging with different stakeholders.India has important relationships with several major powers. The relationship with the US stands out as the most significant among them. In the current climate of uncertainty, India maintained a principled and well-thought-out “strategic restraint”. The Opposition should appreciate that and come out of its “surrender” politics.The writer, president, India Foundation, is with the BJP