Indian Minister of Commerce, Piyush, Goyal, said on Monday that the commercial policies of President Donald Trump could create “the opportunity of a life” for India.
“We are in a moment in history where India is well placed to turn the current situation into an opportunity,” Goyal said The global forum of India in Mumbai.
Goyal described India as sympathy with the impulse of President Trump for justice in supply chains and anxious to prove his rapidly growing economy can take a step forward to take the place of China.
“If someone asked me what the triggering point would be of where we are today and why we are going through this rotation, the starting point of this is actually in early 2000 when China was admitted as an WTO member, he said.
Not many Western analysts in 2025 look back in China’s accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2000 with hobby, Althhehegh have addressed the degrees of criticism of the move. For unconditional supporters of the “America First” policies of President Trump, letting China enter WTO was one of the sausage errors committed by the free world.
The BBC entitled A 2021 retrospective about China’s WTO membership as “how the West invited China to lunch.”
The article withdrew from the silly belief of former President Bill Clinton, common at that time, that letting China enter the WTO would free Beijing.
“When people have the power not only to dream, but to realize their dreams, they will demand a greater word,” Clinton rapply in 2000.
Nothing could have been further from the truth. On the other hand, China infected the free world with authoritarianism, convincing some Western experts and politicians that the autocratic government of a part was the most efficient significant of managing a high -tech economy.
“China’s adhesion to the upper table of world trade announced a massive global transformation. A powerful combination of the workforce arranged from China, its high -tech factories and the special relationship between the Chinese government and the Western multinational corporations changed.
Goyal said Bloomberg Television Haslinda Amin reporter in the Mumbai forum that, although India has some high tariffs, uses them largely in retaliation against unfair commercial practices by other nations.
“If we look at the United States, for example, our general rates can be 17%, but much of that is in products that we do not matter at all. Our applied rate on the US. UU. It is likely 7%or 8%is likely. It is not huge,” he said.
Goyal said that this was the reason why President Trump’s tariffs on India last week were lower than most Asian nations, not only the personal friendship between Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, although he allowed the two leaders to be in fact. “
Goyal also hinted that one of the reasons why India sees more opportunities than the danger in Trump’s policies is that India, unlike her great Chinese rival, is not an “export economy.” This means that India can lose proportionally less of its national income to tariffs.
China, as expected, did not enjoy listening to the Indian Minister of Commerce talking about the “opportunity of a life” while Trump was management China’s tariffs are until 145 percent, or maybe more.
China for the State Global times on Wednesday red Against Goyal’s “opportunistic mentality and criticized India for trying to” benefit from the competition between China and the United States “
“The comments of the Indian politician are simply echoing the rhetoric of the United States to discredit China, hoping to win favor with the Trump administration and pave the way for the next commercial negotiations of India-United States,” said the assistant professor of the University of Tsinghua, Xie Chao,.
Xie predicted that India’s concessions would simply “lead to the Trump administration to demand even greater commitments of India to compensate for the commercial deficit between the United States and India.”
Sichuan International Studies University Professor Long Xingchun reassured Global times Readers that India “cannot take the market that China leaves behind” because “there are lack of production capabilities”, its “production costs are high” and “depends largely on the Chinese supply chain.”
