Core Points - India has adopted a notable "cold treatment" towards the U.S. by ignoring multiple phone calls from President Trump, signaling a shift in its diplomatic strategy and a desire for greater autonomy on the global stage [2][3] - The cancellation of the U.S. trade delegation visit further emphasizes India's strategic pivot towards multilateral platforms like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, indicating a move away from reliance on the U.S. [3] - India's response to U.S. tariffs has been robust, with the imposition of punitive tariffs reaching up to 50%, significantly impacting key export sectors such as textiles, pharmaceuticals, and automotive parts [5][7] - The Indian government has introduced a $2.7 billion export subsidy plan to mitigate the effects of U.S. tariffs and is promoting domestic consumption through initiatives encouraging citizens to "buy Indian" [7][9] - India is actively seeking to diversify its trade relationships, evidenced by its increased contributions to the BRICS New Development Bank and efforts to negotiate free trade agreements within South Asia [9][12] - The agricultural sector remains a critical area for India, with the government firmly opposing U.S. demands to open its dairy market, as this would threaten the livelihoods of millions of farmers [11] - India's energy strategy includes a strong reliance on Russian oil, which is cheaper than Middle Eastern alternatives, and efforts to reduce dependence on the U.S. dollar for energy transactions [11][12] - The trade relationship between India and the U.S. is under strain, with the bilateral trade target of $500 billion by 2030 now appearing unrealistic, while cooperation with China and Russia is gaining momentum [12][13] - The U.S. may have underestimated India's resilience and the speed of global geopolitical shifts, as India seeks to assert its independence in the face of unilateral U.S. policies [13][15] - The evolving dynamics suggest that India is no longer a passive partner to the U.S., but rather is pursuing its own strategic interests in a multipolar world [15]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the article highlights the contrasting responses of India and China in purchasing Russian oil amid U.S. sanctions, with India significantly reducing its orders while China capitalizes on the situation to secure large quantities at favorable prices [1][3][5] - India's daily procurement of Russian oil plummeted from 1.18 million barrels to 400,000 barrels, a staggering decline of two-thirds, while Chinese companies locked in over 10 million barrels during the same period [3][5] - The article suggests that the differing outcomes stem from the U.S. sanctions policy, which appears to be more lenient towards China due to its significant economic power and strategic importance [3][5][9] Group 2 - The article emphasizes that China's ability to navigate the sanctions is rooted in its strong industrial capabilities and financial independence, allowing it to maintain a robust energy supply chain [5][9][11] - China's procurement strategy involves purchasing higher-quality ESPO crude oil, with over 60% of transactions conducted in local currency, thus mitigating risks associated with U.S. dollar-denominated financial sanctions [9][11][13] - The article points out that China's energy procurement approach reflects a diversified strategy, continuing to source oil from over 40 countries, which helps reduce reliance on any single supplier [13][15] Group 3 - The ongoing competition for Russian oil illustrates a broader shift in the global energy landscape, with Asia emerging as a new center for energy trade, as evidenced by the combined 65% share of Russian oil exports to China and India [15][17] - China's actions in the energy market are seen as part of a larger strategy to influence global trade rules and promote a cooperative international relationship, moving away from power-based politics [17][19] - The article concludes that the ability to maintain composure and strategic foresight in challenging situations is a hallmark of true global leadership, as demonstrated by China's approach to energy procurement [19]

Group 1 - The rise of the BRICS mechanism highlights the declining global influence of Western countries, with Global South nations moving from the periphery to the core of global governance [1] - Trump's recent threat to impose an additional 10% tariff on countries aligning with "anti-American policies" signals a direct confrontation with the BRICS mechanism [1][3] - The definition of "anti-American policies" is subjective and can be manipulated by the U.S. to suppress dissenting nations, as seen in the criticism of U.S. tariffs by BRICS nations [3] Group 2 - Trump's tariff strategy aims to isolate BRICS countries and deter other nations from joining this cooperative framework, despite the recent successful BRICS summit in Brazil [5] - India's unexpected support for the joint statement at the BRICS summit indicates a strategic shift towards collaboration within the BRICS framework to counter U.S. pressure [5] - The U.S. tariff threats are part of a broader defense of dollar hegemony, while BRICS initiatives like local currency settlements challenge the dominance of the dollar [7] Group 3 - The successful BRICS summit and India's changing stance signal a united response from the Global South against unilateralism, potentially leading to a new international balance [7]