US audacity, not reciprocity

The MEA states that the India-US joint statement remains the framework for the proposed interim agreement on reciprocal and mutually beneficial trade, and both sides will work toward finalising the agreement

- P Chidambaram

IT IS A kite.., it is a bird.., it is an airplane. ‘What is it?’ is the apt question for the joint statement issued by the governments of the United States and India on February 6, 2026. The joint statement has triggered endless speculation, and the Indian government’s contumacious evasion of the details has not helped to remove the cloud of doubt. Since Mr Trump is dealing the cards, the joint statement may not be of concern for US, but it is for India.

The joint statement issued was based on deception. Indian negotiators claimed repeatedly in 2025 that they were negotiating a Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA). The minister of commerce said numerous times that a BTA will be concluded in the near future; in fact, he said before the “end of the year.” As it turned out, the joint statement is not a BTA; it is not even an Interim Agreement; it is a framework for an Interim Agreement. We moved a mountain and we got a mouse.

Whither reciprocity?

After the joint statement was issued, both sides claimed that the deal was reciprocal. The claim is an insult to the reader’s intelligence.

Even a cursory reading of the joint statement will reveal that it is not based on reciprocity. Take a close look at the text of the joint statement (which I have largely copied below):