Letters to The Editor — February 4, 2026

Tariffs reduced

The decision by the U.S. President Donald Trump to reduce the U.S.’s tariff on India to 18% (Front page, February 3), all of a sudden, stems not from New Delhi’s decision to reduce oil imports from Russia, which it had already committed to the U.S. The perception is that it arises from the fact that New Delhi has entered into an extensive and exclusive trade agreement with the European Union. This agreement is a master stroke by New Delhi which appears to have made the U.S. clear its hazy vision.

A.V. Narayanan,

Chennai

The development spells hope and augurs well for the bilateral relationship between the two countries. However, there is no clarity on whether the tariff imposed for Russian oil purchases has been removed or not.

It is time that the America administration removes the tariff hurdles and lets relations between the two great democracies get back to normal.

Kosaraju Chandramouli,

Hyderabad

Frankly speaking, this nonagenarian quill-driver is of the opinion that India has been weak in dealing with the U.S. The American President is on cloud nine proudly proclaiming that ‘we agreed to a trade deal’. But what sort of an ‘amazing relationship’ is this?

India can be a friend of America but not a factotum to the U.S. at any cost whatsoever.

Mani Nataraajan,

Chennai

The cryptic announcement by the U.S. comes as a matter of immense relief, but marks yet another twist in the ‘blow hot, blow cold’ relations between the two nations. However, the caveats appear to be a glaring instance of direct intervention in the internal affairs of our country. Given the high degree of unpredictability when it comes to dealing with Mr. Trump, India needs to remain ever vigilant and tread with utmost caution while negotiating with Uncle Sam. The deal appears to be shrouded in mystery and the government must come up with a detailed/elaborate explanation.

B. Suresh Kumar,

Coimbatore

The Opposition’s remark about the Prime Minister and the trade deal is jarring and emblematic of reflexive political negativity. At a time when economic diplomacy warrants institutional restraint and strategic sobriety, such personalised commentary trivialises the complexity of bilateral negotiations. It is widely recognised that the Centre resisted the coercive trade architecture sought earlier by the Trump administration.

N. Sadhasiva Reddy,

Bengaluru