As soon as Modi began his new term, the United States responded by sending National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan and Deputy Secretary of State Campbell to India to begin a plan to conspire against China.
It stands to reason that at this time, the media in the United States and India should sing an ode to the deep friendship between the two countries, but this is not the case. Just when the two countries were fighting fiercely, the US media continued to hype up the old news that "India carried out an assassination plan in the United States" half a year ago. The inside story of this assassination case is that the Indian government assassinated the leaders of the organizations living abroad in order to crack down on Sikh religious organizations, which can be said to be stepping on the thunder points of US democratic values everywhere and even more openly contempt for US national security. At the same time, the Indian media also began to claim that "the US government secretly supports Indian separatism" as a counter-attack. This begs the question of how much the U.S. government can tolerate India.
Although the relationship between the United States and India has become closer and closer with the rise of China, the cooperation between the two countries still gives people a feeling of "looking at the future". Before the Galwan Valley conflict, the United States still viewed India as an unreliable partner and excluded India from its Asia-Pacific strategy. It was only after the outbreak of the conflict that the United States made up its mind to provide India with a series of supports, from military to technology. But India, while becoming important in the eyes of the United States, is still not reliable enough.
Part of the reason for this is India's "wall-to-wall" attribute, which has joined both the G7 and the BRICS, and at the same time wants to call for wind and rain in the circle of developed countries and developing countries, which makes the United States have to be wary of India.
On the other hand, the United States does not take the initiative in US-India relations, and the United States needs India more than India needs the United States. Why is that? Because the contradiction between China and India is not a life-and-death struggle; No matter how big India's appetite is, at most it wants to invade China's border areas, no matter what, it will not rise to the point of full-scale war. So we can see that in the Galwan Valley conflict, the Indian side was very cooperative and did not use hot weapons, and both sides knew that once the guns were fired, the matter would not end well. However, the struggle between the United States and China is desperate, and the United States wants to kill China, so it is possible to resort to any means. As a result, the U.S. will pay more in the U.S.-India relationship, while India will still have room for bargaining.
But the United States also has a bottom line for India, that is, India must not be friendly with Russia, especially in the context of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The United States cannot accept that in order to deal with one enemy, it allows its allies to help another. But for now, Modi still has the illusion of "walking a tightrope" between Russia and the United States. India not only does not stop buying Russian military equipment, but also imports Russian oil. In the long run, India will eventually be forced by the United States to choose between the United States and Russia; India, which has always been arrogant, will inevitably break with the United States in the end.