Last updated:
The two leaders are now unlikely to meet in person for almost a year since they met in Washington DC in February – some people are finding this strange
Modi’s assertiveness against Trump has also eased China’s concerns that India is eager to become America’s proxy in the region. (File image/Reuters)
This June, President Donald Trump had invited Prime Minister Narendra Modi to stop by the United States while returning from Canada, but Modi declined.
The US then invited Modi to the Sharm el-Sheikh summit this month to celebrate Trump’s achievement in ending the Israel-Palestine war. He refused and sent a junior minister.
Trump is now at the ASEAN summit in Malaysia, where Modi chose not to go but attended virtually. This is only the second time in a decade that he has left ASEAN.
And in November the Prime Minister will travel to Johannesburg, South Africa for the G20 Summit. But the US President has already said that he will not attend this program.
The two leaders are now unlikely to meet in person for almost a year since their meeting in Washington DC in February – a move some people are finding strange. There is also no word yet on the schedule of the Quad summit.
Once hailed as a high-profile “bromance” between two strong leaders, the relationship between Modi and Trump has entered an awkward phase of diplomatic distance.
Meetings are less. Recently, there have been three phone calls between them but with no clear result. The public messaging is impressive – Modi praised Trump’s peace efforts and later called him a “good friend” – but beneath the layers, it sounds strained.
Why are they avoiding each other – or at least seem to be doing so?
The Modi-Trump relationship was very evident in 2019-2020. Vishal ‘Howdy Modi!’ Events such as the rally in Houston and the ‘Namaste Trump’ event in India indicated a warm public view of friendship.
The two leaders talked about big things: India-US trade, defense cooperation, expanding energy deals. For India, Trump was a partner as New Delhi wanted to elevate its global role; For the US, India was a major strategic partner in the Indo-Pacific region.
When Trump became President earlier this year, Modi met him in February. The two leaders vowed to meet next time in India for the Quad summit. But by May, cracks started appearing.
Trump claimed that he had stopped the India-Pakistan war after India launched ‘Operation Vermillion’ following the Pahalgam attack. Modi publicly denied this. By June, the relationship began to strain – those cracks now widening.
Why did such a situation arise? Many factors have contributed.
Trade and Fees: Under Trump’s leadership, America hit hard on the trade imbalance. India faces 50 percent tariffs and pressure to bow to US entry into India’s agriculture and dairy sectors. Modi has said that India will not compromise.
Energy and Russia: India continues to buy significant Russian oil; America is making it an issue of confrontation and demands reduction. For example, the Indian Foreign Ministry rejected Trump’s claim that India would “cut almost nothing” from Russian oil.
Diplomatic Optics: Both leaders have domestic bases that expect strength rather than retreat.
Strategic Autonomy vs. Alignment: India insists on its right to set its own course, sometimes called de-hyphenation, and is not seen as simply being aligned with the US.
These elements conspire to make a sweet, easy relationship more difficult. Now, the main question – why does it seem that Modi is avoiding Trump (or perhaps vice versa)? Let us know the main reasons:
Avoiding public embarrassment or mismatch of expectations. For example, for the upcoming 47th ASEAN summit in Kuala Lumpur, Modi opted to attend virtually rather than in person – widely interpreted as avoiding a face-to-face encounter with Trump. In fact, during his visit to Malaysia aboard Air Force One, the US President reiterated his claims regarding the India-Pakistan ceasefire and the purchase of Russian oil by India.
Indian officials have denied a phone call in which Trump claimed to have talked with Modi regarding Russian oil. Such public contradiction weakens the prospects of friendly relations.
Modi is clear and wants to show his base that India will not bow down to external pressure. It could be politically awkward to meet Trump with obvious signs of compliance. India prefers muscular optics.
Similarly, Trump thrives on the image of being in control; If a meeting does not give him a clear “win”, he may become less eager.
By not being overly eager to meet Trump, India has retained the advantage. If Modi meets too readily, it may appear as if India is surrendering.
Meanwhile, the tough trade and energy stance by the US suggests India wants to avoid it.
Relationships between leaders often extend beyond policy to personal dynamics. Official explanations (like schedule conflicts) may conceal more deliberate overtones.
For example, Modi declined a US invitation to visit Sharm el-Sheikh, citing the event, but analysts see a deeper diplomatic signal.
The event turned into a farcical “praise-fest” for Trump, showing that Modi would be better off leaving it out.
Trump called Pakistan Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif on stage to speak in Sharm el-Sheikh, where Sharif publicly flattered him, which was beyond praise under diplomatic protocol.
Sharif also recommended Trump again for the Nobel Peace Prize. Trump also asked Sharif on stage whether India and Pakistan would “get along very well” while Sharif thanked Trump once again for ending the India-Pakistan conflict earlier this May.
This would have been an uncomfortable scenario for the Prime Minister, who has repeatedly told Trump that the US had no role in the ceasefire between India and Pakistan during Operation Sindoor. Modi’s presence at the Sharm el-Sheikh event could have meant that he was personally listening to Trump’s false claims.
In short: avoiding a meeting may be less about not wanting to meet and more about not wanting to meet in an adversarial attitude. By remaining isolated, India can maintain flexibility; America could reset its approach instead of relying solely on personal chemistry.
Modi not going to ASEAN shows that there is still some work left to seal the India-US trade deal. India faces 50 per cent tariffs from the US – and Trump keeps making baseless claims regarding India.
Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal has said that India will not rush into signing a trade deal at gunpoint. He said trade deals should be seen as long-term partnerships based on mutual trust. His comments indicate India’s desire to maintain strategic autonomy.
The language used – “in no rush”, “no deal with a gun to our head” – is a diplomatic marker: India is striking a balance between striking a deal and not appearing to surrender.
Looking ahead, there are two broad scenarios:
Scenario A – Reset and Reconnection
If both leaders decide the relationship is too strategic to stray from, we could see a reboot: a meeting, followed by a trade or defense announcement, and a reset of optics.
Scenario B – Continuous Drift and Functional Diplomacy
Alternatively, personal warmth may remain low, but functional cooperation continues through ministries and agencies rather than leader-to-leader fanfare. India can diversify its partnerships with Russia, China and the BRICS, while maintaining stable US ties but avoiding dependence on the chemistry of one leader.
The conclusion is that leadership chemistry matters but is not everything. Institutions, trade structures, strategic frameworks matter even absent summit selfies.
In short: The presence of abstentions by Modi and Trump reflects a complex mix of trade frictions, energy politics, strategic autonomy, prestige, and diplomatic signaling.
This does not mean that India-US relations are breaking down – but it does mean that the easy possibilities of personal ‘bromance’ are gone for the time being, replaced by more cautious, transactional dynamics.
Look at both titles – did they meet? – and the subtext – why did they or didn’t they do it? Often the answer lies not in what was said, but in what was not said.
Aman Sharma, News Director, CNN News18 and News18 English, has over two decades of experience covering a wide spectrum of politics and the Prime Minister’s Office. He has written widely on politics, electricity etc…read more
Aman Sharma, News Director, CNN News18 and News18 English, has over two decades of experience covering a wide spectrum of politics and the Prime Minister’s Office. He has written widely on politics, electricity etc… read more
October 27, 2025, 07:00 IST
read more
