India has been doing well with the United States’ Donald Trump administration. The same goes for EV-Maker Tesla and SpaceX’s satellite services divisions, both led by Elon Musk, who is widely regarded as President Trump’s confidant, a billionaire who shocked the United States by bringing chainsaws to the administration under the Department of Efficiency.
This is in stark contrast to the reactions of several other U.S. countries, which threaten punitive tariffs. Therefore, many find it ironic that another company owned by Elon Musk, a Weibo platform he took in 2022, was to sue the Indian government for attempts to censor free speech. The lawsuit filed last week was angry at what Xai’s chatbot Grok said on X.
Also read: Only Grok can judge you. This is scary, not that smart.
First, let’s clearly see that there are two separate questions here. One is an effective strategy to deal with the White House, and its conception of our greatness departs from the classic win-win free trade principle. Another is related to the different concept of free expression.
For New Delhi, it makes sense to avoid talking about toughness and focus on negotiating that India can meet U.S. reciprocity tariffs. Depending on whether these items are levied on individual items or product categories, the impact on our U.S.-bound exports will vary.
The sheer structural difference between the two economies will ensure that what we export to the United States has little overlap with what we import from it. So it doesn’t matter if New Delhi retains high import taxes on ready-made cars, India exports few cars to the United States, and Washington raises its own barriers for cars built here. But if mirror tariffs are imposed on club products such as cars and parts, then our automatic exports to the United States will be hit unless our obstacles are lowered.
Also Read: Nitin Pai: Trump’s tariffs achieve political goals even if they lack economic logic
The United States may also seek to consider imported Indian GST as an additional obligation. This is conceptually flawed. Our domestic producers undertake GST and need to import to pay the same interest rate in the level of competition environment. This must be explained to the U.S. negotiators. Often, bilateral conversations must be conducted in an atmosphere of rationality and intimacy, rather than one of confrontation and hostility.
While it is easy for the White House to deploy tariffs to achieve their goals in other areas outside of trade, India must not confuse different issues. In terms of freedom of speech, both Trump and Musk oppose any gag, which is part of their war on “Walkerism”, but in India, it’s a constitutional issue.
Also Read: Musk and his Maga critics’ freedom of speech on Microblog Platform are both wrong
The free speech curb adopted by India in the First Amendment does not restrict freedom of speech in the United States. However, the Indian government tends to make mistakes in reducing, while adopting the limitations of this fundamental right as set out in Article 19: “In the case of “India’s sovereignty and integrity, national security, friendly relations with foreign countries, public order, universal or moral friendship, or breach of contract, breach of contract, breach of contract, breach of contract, breach of contract, breach of contract, breach of contract, breach of contract, breach of contract, breach of contract or prejudice. ”
A provision of the Indian Information Technology Act seems to have caused the center to remove any latitude in online posts to be the legal challenge of X. Trump and Musk have made public investments in absolute freedom of speech and cannot reach a bilateral trade agreement with India. It is wise to remove it from the talks. What Grok can or can’t say is that the judiciary needs to be sure.
