S Jaishankar: India Must Strategize Amid Global Tariff Volatility and Changing Geopolitical Landscape

S Jaishankar stated that India must strategize and continue rising amid global tariff volatility.

New Delhi:

External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on Monday highlighted how "tariff volatility" is overturning trade calculations globally, referencing economic disruptions caused by Washington's trade tariff policies.

During an event address, Jaishankar explored the "strategic consequences" of profound geopolitical landscape changes, including the concentration of one-third of global manufacturing in a single geography, an apparent reference to China.

"Consider the global landscape now and let us reflect on the intensity of the transformation and their implications. A third of global manufacturing has moved to a single geography, with attendant consequences for supply chains," he stated.

"There is rising anti-globalisation sentiment in many societies. Trade calculations are being overturned by tariff volatility," he added, indirectly referring to Washington's tariff policies.

Jaishankar was speaking at the inaugural Aravali Summit hosted by Jawaharlal Nehru University's School of International Studies celebrating its 70th anniversary.

The minister's comments on tariff volatility come amid deteriorating New Delhi-Washington relations after US President Donald Trump doubled tariffs on Indian goods to 50 percent, including a 25 percent additional duty related to India's Russian crude oil purchases.

"The global energy scenario has changed profoundly with the US becoming a major fossil fuel exporter and China a key renewable one. There are competing models on the harnessing of data and evolution of Artificial Intelligence which jostle with each other," he remarked.

He noted that Big Tech has become a significant independent player. New connectivity routes are emerging with strategic purposes, while the mobility debate seeks to reconcile skills, demand, and related social reactions.

The external affairs minister also identified sanctions application, asset "seizure," and cryptocurrency emergence as factors transforming global finance.

"Competition for rare earths and critical minerals has become visceral, even as technology controls have further tightened," he observed.

"The quality of weaponry and the nature of war itself has been transformed, making it more stand-off, more impactful and definitely more risk-prone," he continued.

Jaishankar also expressed concerns about "erosion in sovereignty" facilitated by "tech penetration and manipulation."

"Global rules and regimes are being revisited and at times, even discarded. Cost is no longer the defining criteria for economic transactions; ownership and security are equally so," he explained.

"End-to-end" risks are increasing, starting with production concentration, moving through limited supply chains, and ending with dependence on key markets. "A belief in balance of power is being replaced with actions based on margins of power.

"Cumulatively, the world is witnessing more competition and less compacts. The needle has shifted towards an intersection of interests and away from the promise of cooperation," he observed.

"It is driven by the weaponisation of everything, with less inhibition to use available tools. Now all nations face these predicaments," he added.

Jaishankar emphasized that while most countries struggle to cope or defend their interests, India must strategize and continue rising amid such volatility.

"The challenge for analysts and practitioners alike is to accurately read this complex and evolving landscape. Only then can we figure out how best India can calculate and respond," he stated.

"This is by no means a defensive stance. We have to safeguard our interests and yet, continuously advance up the global hierarchy. We have to de-risk our exposures and engagements and yet, take risks when necessary," he added.

Addressing a student's question about whether India's foreign policy is "agnostic or independent," Jaishankar replied, "To some extent, being agnostic and being independent." He continued, "Even in the past, if you refer to the Indo-Soviet relationship, what we did was in our national interest. At that time, we were boxed in by a US-Pakistan-China triangle. That was not the time to say let me be neutral and this side has as much value as that side. There was only one side—and that was our side. That side dictated that whatever we have to do in our national interest is best."

He concluded, "Even today we are sometimes pressed by countries citing some great principle of international law. I ask them—where were you when that principle applied to me? It is not my case that these principles don't matter, but in the final analysis, national interest comes over everything else."