From the Opinions Editor: India needs a well thought out trade strategy, but first it needs a China strategy
Dear Express Reader
Over the past 11 years, the Narendra Modi government has taken several steps to shore up the economic momentum, and put the country on a higher growth trajectory. But, despite its efforts to ensure macroeconomic stability, revive private sector investments and boost household consumption, growth has been less than spectacular. Between 2014-15 and 2024-25, the economy grew at an average of just 6.2 per cent. Now, in its third term, whether pushed by Donald Trump's tariff war or the imperatives of growth, the government is making a determined effort to sew up trade agreements, hoping they will help embed the country into global supply chains, catalyse exports, and push up growth.
A trade deal has been struck with the UK, and talks are proceeding with the US and the EU, with many of the issues that have previously held back these agreements being either resolved or sidestepped. These agreements will ensure greater market access and bring down tariffs, improving competitiveness of exports. But the question is: Will these trade deals be enough? Can they alone facilitate India's deep integration with global supply chains? Can the country emerge as a major production hub without integrating more closely with the supply chains that run through South and East Asia which form a vital part of global production systems?
The case of Apple is instructive. The dramatic scaling up of the Apple ecosystem in the country — the company has recently said that iPhones sold in the US market will be mostly sourced from India — is a remarkable development. It is a consequence of both the government's production linked incentive scheme and the firm wanting to diversify its production bases away from China.
Now, Apple provides a supplier list — a list that represents 98 per cent of the company's direct spend for materials, manufacturing and assembly of its products worldwide. This would include suppliers not only those involved in the production of the iPhone but also in other Apple products. As per this list, in 2023, 156 of the company's suppliers had manufacturing locations in China, 42 suppliers were located in Japan, 35 in Vietnam and 33 in South Korea, and 14 in India.
Two years later the numbers would have changed slightly — as per a recent report there are now more than 20 component suppliers in India — but, they would still point towards the centrality of South and East Asia, and China in particular, to the global production system — a fact that cannot be ignored. If India wants to be a part of the production chain of other Apple products and grab a greater share of the value addition in the production process, it would need the smooth flow of components/materials into the country and more component manufacturers to be located here. And therein lies India's conundrum. What is India's China strategy? Should the country also be a part of RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership) and CPTPP (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership)?
In 2019, India chose not to be part of RCEP — the trade agreement that spans China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand and the 10 ASEAN member states (Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam). The decision to not join was in large part attributed to concerns over China. But the trade relationship with China has only deepened since. And that is the reality, contrary to the desire of reducing the dependence on China. In 2018-19, before India withdrew from RCEP, its trade deficit with China stood at $53.5 billion. By 2024-25, it had surged to $99.2 billion, without RCEP. India, though, is not alone. Even as the US has tried to reduce its reliance on China, its deficit with the country, though it has declined in recent years, stood at a staggering $295 billion in 2024. And this does not account for rerouting of exports through other countries.
But, it's not just about companies like Apple. The issue around rare earth minerals — used in a range of sectors such as smartphones, TVs, EV cars, solar panels and jet engines — underlines China's centrality to the global production system. This reality cannot be wished away. China accounts for 90 per cent of global processing of rare earths. With the country placing restrictions on its exports, EV manufacturers in India have reportedly sought the government's intervention in the matter. If these supplies continue to be restricted, India's EV push, and thus its efforts in shifting towards a cleaner vehicle fleet, risk being affected. And that won't be the only sector that is likely to be impacted. There are some reports which suggest that the government has raised the issue of export curbs on rare earth minerals and magnets with China. But it's not just India. Even the US has been affected. In fact, one of the key aspects of the US-China agreement that was announced by Donald Trump is the upfront export of full magnets, and any necessary rare earths by China.
It is difficult to see companies move their production to India on the scale that is needed for the country to emerge as a manufacturing powerhouse unless they can be sure of stable trade relations, of supply chains working smoothly, of the seamless movement of components/personnel from other jurisdictions. India needs a well thought out trade strategy. The lack of clarity partly explains the sluggish pace of investments in the country by domestic as well as foreign firms — both of whom seem to be more inclined to invest in other jurisdictions presumably because the risk-return matrix is not as favourable in India. A clear strategy should give these firms the confidence needed to invest in the country.
Take care,
Ishan
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
21 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Israel-Iran conflict: Trump open to regime change in Tehran after his administration said that wasn't the goal
Following the US military strikes on three key nuclear sites in Iran, President Donald Trump on Sunday called into question the future of Iran's ruling theocracy. While Washington maintains that it is not seeking regime change in the Islamic Republic, Trump's more ambiguous remarks have fuelled speculation. On Sunday, the US military launched strikes on three key sites in Iran, raising urgent questions about the status of Tehran's nuclear programme and how its weakened military might respond. The strikes marked a significant escalation, coming after over a week of Israeli attacks aimed at systematically dismantling Iran's air defences, offensive missile systems, and nuclear infrastructure. The US and Israeli officials said American stealth bombers and the 30,000-pound (13,600-kilogram) bunker-buster bomb - capable of reaching Iran's deeply buried nuclear facilities - offered the best chance of neutralising fortified sites. Trump announced the strikes, and Iran's state-run IRNA confirmed that the targets included Fordo, Isfahan, and Natanz nuclear sites. The Pentagon claimed the strikes had 'devastated' Iran's nuclear programme, aligning the US with Israel's ongoing military campaign. Meanwhile, Iran's foreign minister declared that the country reserves the right to retaliate, as tensions mount and the international community urges restraint to prevent a wider regional conflict. According to the Washington-based group Human Rights Activists, Israeli strikes across Iran have killed at least 950 people and wounded 3,450 others. Of the dead, the group identified 380 civilians and 253 members of the security forces.
India Today
25 minutes ago
- India Today
Trump floats regime change as Iran fires dozens of missiles on Israel
The United States dropped massive bunker-buster bombs on Iran's three nuclear sites, igniting one of the most serious military confrontations with Tehran since the Islamic Republic's 1979 founding. The world is watching anxiously after the United States joined Israel to attack Iran, escalating the US deployed powerful bunker-buster bombs on the Fordow nuclear facility, located deep inside a mountain. In response, Iran vowed to defend itself, while Israel and Iran exchanged missile strikes. Iran's President, Masoud Pezeshkian, said the US must "receive a response" for a serious act of Donald Trump questioned the possibility of regime change in Iran following military strikes against Iranian military sites. Following the strike, he praised the military's operation. The B-2 stealth bombers involved in the attack safely returned to their Missouri base. On the international front, the United Nations Security Council convened to address the crisis, with Russia, China, and Pakistan urging an immediate ceasefire and renewed diplomatic DEVELOPMENTS IN THE ISRAEL-IRAN CONFLICT The B-2 stealth bombers that dropped massive bunker-buster bombs on Iran's nuclear sites have returned to their home base in Missouri. According to the Associated Press, seven B-2 Spirit aircraft landed on Sunday at Whiteman Air Force Base, located around 73 miles southeast of Kansas City. This base houses the 509th Bomb Wing -- the only US unit equipped to fly B-2 bombers. advertisementOn a clear but breezy afternoon, the first four aircraft made a loop around the base before approaching the runway from the north. A second group of three bombers followed and landed within the next ten minutes. The UN Security Council met to discuss US strikes on Iran's nuclear sites as Russia, China and Pakistan proposed the 15-member body adopt a resolution calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire in the Middle East. "The bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities by the United States marks a perilous turn," UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told the Security Council on Sunday. "We must act -- immediately and decisively -- to halt the fighting and return to serious, sustained negotiations on the Iran nuclear programme." Hundreds of protesters took to the streets of New York City against the United States' airstrikes on Iran. Within a day of President Trump's confirmation on attacks on three Iranian nuclear facilities, various groups organised a demonstration through Midtown. advertisementThe march began at Times Square and ended at Columbus Circle, with participants holding flags and signs that read, "Stop the war in Iran," "Hands off Iran," and "No new war in the Middle East." Protesters condemned the strikes, calling them as acts of aggression rather than diplomatic efforts. They said fears that this could undermine any future chances for a global nuclear non-proliferation agreement. A day after striking Iran's nuclear facilities, US President Donald Trump questioned whether there could be a change of government in Iran. In a series of social media posts, Trump praised the US military for the successful operation and stated the current Iranian regime may not be capable to make "MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN." "It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!" Trump wrote on Truth Social, referring to his slogan "Make Iran Great Again." advertisementTrump congratulated the US military, saying, "There is not another military in the World that could have done this. NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE! Thank you for your attention to this matter." The United Nations nuclear watchdog confirmed that underground entrances to tunnels at Iran's Isfahan nuclear site were damaged in the US bombings. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released a statement confirming the extent of damage to Iran's major nuclear sites -- Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan (Isfahan). According to IAEA chief Rafael Mariano Grossi, several parts of these facilities were hit during overnight airstrikes carried out by the United States. Must Watch
India Today
25 minutes ago
- India Today
Russia and China, at UN Security Council, push for unconditional ceasefire in Middle East
The UN Security Council met to discuss US strikes on Iran's nuclear sites as Russia, China and Pakistan proposed the 15-member body adopt a resolution calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire in the Middle East."The bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities by the United States marks a perilous turn," UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told the Security Council on Sunday. "We must act – immediately and decisively – to halt the fighting and return to serious, sustained negotiations on the Iran nuclear programme."advertisementThe world awaited Iran's response on Sunday after President Donald Trump said the US had "obliterated" Tehran's key nuclear sites, joining Israel in the biggest Western military action against the Islamic Republic since its 1979 revolution. Russia and China condemned the US strikes."Peace in the Middle East cannot be achieved by the use of force," said China's UN Ambassador Fu Cong. "Diplomatic means to address the Iranian nuclear issue haven't been exhausted, and there's still hope for a peaceful solution."But acting US Ambassador to the UN Dorothy Shea told the council the time had come for Washington to act decisively, urging the Security Council to call upon Iran to end its effort to eradicate Israel and terminate its drive for nuclear weapons."Iran long obfuscated its nuclear weapons program and stonewalled our good-faith efforts in recent negotiations," she said. "The Iranian regime cannot have a nuclear weapon."advertisementRussia's UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia recalled former US Secretary of State Colin Powell making the case at the UN Security Council in 2003 that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein constituted an imminent danger to the world because of the country's stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons."Again we're being asked to believe the US's fairy tales, to once again inflict suffering on millions of people living in the Middle East. This cements our conviction that history has taught our US colleagues nothing," he OF INACTION 'CATASTROPHIC'Iran requested the UN Security Council meeting on UN Ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani accused Israel and the US of destroying diplomacy, said all US allegations are unfounded and that the nuclear non-proliferation treaty "has been manipulated into a political weapon.""Instead of guaranteeing parties' legitimate rights to peaceful nuclear energy, it has been exploited as a pretext for aggression and unlawful action that jeopardize the supreme interests of my country," Iravani told the UN Ambassador Danny Danon praised the US for taking action against Iran, saying: "This is what the last line of defense looks like when every other line has failed." He accused Iran of using negotiations over its nuclear programme as camouflage to buy time to build missiles and enrich cost of inaction would have been catastrophic. A nuclear Iran would have been a death sentence just as much for you as it would have been for us," he told the was not immediately clear when the council could vote on the draft resolution. Russia, China and Pakistan have asked council members to share their comments by Monday evening. A resolution needs at least nine votes in favor and no vetoes by the US, France, Britain, Russia or China to US is likely to oppose the draft resolution, seen by Reuters, which also condemns attacks on Iran's nuclear sites and facilities. The text does not name the United States or Israel."Military action alone cannot bring a durable solution to concerns about Iran's nuclear program," Britain's UN Ambassador Barbara Woodward told the council. "We urge Iran now to show restraint, and we urge all parties to return to the negotiating table and find a diplomatic solution which stops further escalation and brings this crisis to an end."UN nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi said that while craters were visible at Iran's enrichment site buried into a mountain at Fordow, "no one - including the IAEA - is in a position to assess the underground damage."advertisementGrossi told the Security Council that entrances to tunnels used for the storage of enriched material appear to have been hit at Iran's sprawling Isfahan nuclear complex, while the fuel enrichment plant at Natanz has been struck again."Iran has informed the IAEA there has been no increase in off-site radiation levels at all three sites," said Grossi, who heads the International Atomic Energy Watch
