On April 23, the prominent conservative think tank the Hudson Institute hosted a conference titled “The New India Conference”. The event brought together what it described as “leading intellectuals” from India, though in reality most of the Indian participants were drawn from the Hindu nationalist movement, particularly the RSS and its political affiliate, the BJP. Notably absent were voices representing the many diverse streams of thought that characterise the Indian public sphere. The Hudson conference asserted that India’s importance to American interests had never been greater, yet argued that knowledge gaps had increased, leading to India (read the Hindu nationalist movement) being misunderstood in the US.
The conference drew early attention due to a controversy involving Ram Madhav, an RSS ideologue, who portrayed India’s foreign policy as strikingly deferential to the US, suggesting that India had complied with US demands on everything from oil purchases from Iran and Russia to high tariffs with little resistance. The backlash in India was swift, with critics across the political spectrum challenging both the accuracy of his claims and the image of subservience they projected. Madhav issued a prompt apology, acknowledging that India had not in fact ceased buying Russian oil and had protested against the US tariffs. The episode became a flashpoint in India’s public discourse, and while it does highlight what critics of the Narendra Modi government describe as an inexplicably accommodating posture towards the US, it ultimately obscured a more consequential dimension of the conference: the gross misrepresentation of Hindu nationalism.
The conference was framed around the idea that India is undergoing a transformation: that there is a “New India” that the US does not fully understand. According to this narrative, a knowledge gap in Washington, DC, is contributing to friction in bilateral ties. Yet, in substance, the event reflected a deeper concern within segments of the US strategic establishment: that a weakening relationship with India could undermine broader geopolitical objectives, particularly efforts to balance or contain China. For many in the US policy community, India remains a critical strategic partner. As a result, the conference seemed less about understanding India in all its complexity and more about recalibrating the US approach to ensure that the partnership remains intact despite neglect from the Donald Trump administration.
The early morning sessions were largely dominated by diplomatic platitudes, including routine and standard opening remarks from the Indian Ambassador. The final two sessions, however, were the most revealing ones. I would strongly encourage anyone concerned about US-India relations—or interested in understanding the contours of this so-called New India and its posture towards the US—to watch them. Both sessions are available on YouTube, and indeed, the entire conference proceedings can be watched there.
Advocates of strong US-India relations
Notably, prominent advocates of strong US-India relations were among the key voices at the event. These included Kurt Campbell, who was in charge of the Indo-Pacific region and was referred to as the Asia tsar in the Joe Biden administration, and Lisa Curtis of the Center for a New American Security, who most recently was the leading author of a report titled Repairing the Breach, which examined the growing distance and deteriorating state of US-India relations. Their presence and their interventions highlighted the strategic anxiety with regard to India-US relations among a segment of the Washington, DC, elite.
Campbell was arguably the standout voice: articulate in explaining India’s economic strengths and strategic value and unusually candid in conveying Indian frustration at President Donald Trump’s dismissive posture towards India and the erosion of initiatives such as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad). The Quad, which comprises the US, India, Australia, and Japan, was active during the Biden administration, with regular leaders’ summits that emphasised India’s centrality to global politics by showcasing Prime Minister Modi alongside the US President and the Prime Ministers of Japan and Australia. The decline in the frequency of these engagements has clearly reduced India’s visibility—and that of Modi—on the centre stage of world politics since the beginning of Trump’s second term.
This story was originally published in frontline.thehindu.com. Read the full story here.
