NEW DELHI/WASHINGTON — After five rounds of trade negotiations, Indian officials were so confident of securing a favorable deal with the United States that they even signaled to the media that tariffs could be capped at 15%.

Indian officials expected US President Donald J. Trump to announce the deal himself weeks before the Aug. 1 deadline. The announcement never came.

New Delhi is now left with the surprise imposition of a 25% tariff on Indian goods from Friday, along with unspecified penalties over oil imports from Russia, while Mr. Trump has closed larger deals with Japan and the European Union (EU), and even offered better terms to arch-rival Pakistan.

Interviews with four Indian government officials and two US government officials revealed previously undisclosed details of the proposed deal and an exclusive account of how negotiations collapsed despite technical agreements on most issues.

The officials on both sides said a mix of political misjudgment, missed signals and bitterness broke down the deal between the world’s biggest and fifth-largest economies, whose bilateral trade is worth over $190 billion.

The White House, the US Trade Representative office, and India’s Prime Minister’s Office, along with the External Affairs and Commerce ministries, did not respond to e-mailed requests for comment.

India believed that after visits by Indian Trade Minister Piyush Goyal to Washington and US Vice-President JD Vance to Delhi, it had made a series of deal-clinching concessions.

New Delhi was offering zero tariffs on industrial goods that formed about 40% of US exports to India, two Indian government officials told Reuters.

Despite domestic pressure, India would also gradually lower tariffs on US cars and alcohol with quotas and accede to Washington’s main demand of higher energy and defense imports from the US, the officials said.

“Most differences were resolved after the fifth round in Washington, raising hopes of a breakthrough,” one of the officials said, adding negotiators believed the US would accommodate India’s reluctance on duty-free farm imports and dairy products from the US.

It was a miscalculation. Mr. Trump saw the issue differently and wanted more concessions.

“A lot of progress was made on many fronts in India talks, but there was never a deal that we felt good about,” said one White House official.

“We never got to what amounted to a full deal — a deal that we were looking for.”

OVERCONFIDENCE
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who visited Washington in February, agreed to target a deal by fall 2025, and more than double bilateral trade to $500 billion by 2030.

To bridge the $47-billion goods trade gap, India pledged to buy up to $25 billion in US energy and boost defense imports.

But officials now admit India grew overconfident after Mr. Trump talked up a “big” imminent deal, taking it as a signal that a favorable agreement was in hand. New Delhi then hardened its stance, especially on agriculture and dairy, two highly sensitive areas for the Indian government.

“We are one of the fastest growing economies, and the US can’t ignore a market of 1.4 billion,” one Indian official involved in the negotiations said in mid-July.

Negotiators even pushed for relief from the 10% average US tariff announced in April, plus a rollback of steel, aluminum and auto duties.

Later, India scaled back expectations after the US signed trade deals with key partners including Japan, and the EU, hoping it could secure a similar 15% tariff rate with fewer concessions.

That was unacceptable to the White House. “Trump wanted a headline-grabbing announcement with broader market access, investments and large purchases,” said a Washington-based source familiar with the talks.

An Indian official acknowledged New Delhi wasn’t ready to match what others offered.

South Korea, for example, struck a deal just before Mr. Trump’s Aug. 1 deadline, securing a 15% rate instead of 25% by offering $350 billion in investments, higher energy imports, and concessions on rice and beef.

COMMUNICATION BREAKDOWN
“At one point, both sides were very close to signing the deal,” said Mark Linscott, a former US Trade Representative who now works for a lobby group that is close to the discussions between the two nations.

“The missing component was a direct line of communication between President Trump and Prime Minister Modi.”

A White House official strongly disputed this, noting other deals had been resolved without such intervention.

An Indian government official involved in the talks said Mr. Modi could not have called, fearing a one-sided conversation with Mr. Trump that could put him on the spot.

However, the other three Indian officials said Mr. Trump’s repeated remarks about mediating the India-Pakistan conflict further strained negotiations and contributed to Mr. Modi not making a final call.

“Trump’s remarks on Pakistan didn’t go down well,” one of them said. “Ideally, India should have acknowledged the US role while making it clear the final call was ours.”

A senior Indian government official blamed the collapse on poor judgment, saying top Indian advisers mishandled the process.

“We lacked the diplomatic support needed after the US struck better deals with Vietnam, Indonesia, Japan and the EU,” the official said.

“We’re now in a crisis that could have been avoided.”

Mr. Trump said on Tuesday he would increase the tariff on imports from India from the current rate of 25% “very substantially” over the next 24 hours and alleged that New Delhi’s purchases of Russian oil were “fueling the war” in Ukraine.

Talks are ongoing, with a US delegation expected in Delhi later this month and Indian government officials still believe the deal can be salvaged from here.

“It’s still possible,” one White House official said.

The Indian government is re-examining areas within the farm and dairy sectors where concessions can be made, the fourth official said. On Russian oil, India could reduce some purchases in favor of US supplies if pricing is matched.

“It likely will require direct communication between the prime minister and the president,” said Mr. Linscott.

“Pick up the phone. Right now, we are in a lose-lose. But there is real potential for a win-win trade deal.” — Reuters

HIROSHIMA, Japan — Exactly 80 years since an atomic bomb was used in war for the first time, thousands bowed their heads in prayer in Hiroshima on Wednesday, as the city’s mayor warned world leaders about the nuclear warheads that still exist today.

The western Japanese city of Hiroshima was leveled on Aug. 6, 1945, when the United States dropped a uranium bomb nicknamed “Little Boy,” killing about 78,000 people instantly.

Hiroshima was the headquarters of some military units and a major supply base during World War Two. US war planners calculated that the surrounding mountains would concentrate the force of the bomb and enhance its destructiveness.

“Little Boy” unleashed a surge of heat reaching 4,000 degrees Celsius (7,200 degrees Fahrenheit) and radiation that killed tens of thousands more by the end of the year. It was followed by a plutonium bomb on Nagasaki three days later, and Japan’s surrender on Aug. 15.

Representatives from a record 120 countries and territories including nuclear superpower the United States, and Israel, which neither confirms nor denies having nuclear weaponry, attended the annual ceremony at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park for the milestone year.

After a moment of silence observed at 8:15 a.m., the exact time of the blast, mayor Kazumi Matsui called on leaders to heed the lessons of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and warned of the consequences of the global trend towards a military buildup.

“Among the world’s political leaders, there is a growing belief that possessing nuclear weapons is unavoidable in order to protect their own countries,” he said, noting that the US and Russia possessed 90% of the world’s nuclear warheads.

“This situation not only nullifies the lessons the international community has learned from the tragic history of the past, but also seriously undermines the frameworks that have been built for peace-building.

“To all the leaders around the world: Please visit Hiroshima and witness for yourselves the reality of the atomic bombing.”

Yoshikazu Horie, a 71-year-old tourist, expressed a similar sentiment.

“It feels more and more like history is repeating itself. Terrible things are happening in Europe… Even in Japan, in Asia, it’s going the same way, it’s very scary,” he said.

“I’ve got grandchildren and I want peace so they can live their lives happily.”

In the decades following the attacks, those who survived, called “hibakusha,” often faced discrimination as rumors spread that they carried diseases and their offspring could be tainted. Their numbers fell below 100,000 for the first time this year.

Japan, the only country to have suffered nuclear attacks, has stated its commitment to nuclear disarmament but is not a signatory or observer of the United Nations treaty to ban nuclear weapons. — Reuters

PANDEGLANG, Indonesia — At a shrimp farm in Indonesia, more than 16,000 kilometers (9,942 miles) from Washington, DC, US President Donald J. Trump’s import tariffs have left Denny Leonardo’s expansion plans in disarray.

Mr. Leonardo had aimed to add about 100 new ponds this year to his 150-pond farm on the southwestern tip of Java island, but was forced to reconsider when US orders dried up in the wake of Mr. Trump’s initial tariff threats in April.

And while the latest 19% tariff, agreed with Washington in July and due to take effect this week, is less than the initial 32%, Mr. Leonardo is counting the cost to his business.

“With the US pressuring Indonesia’s exports, everyone is eagerly looking for new opportunities to diversify, to reduce their dependence on the US,” the 30-year-old prawn farmer said after July’s announcement.

The United States is the biggest market for Indonesian prawns, buying 60% of the country’s $1.68 billion in shrimp exports last year.

Andi Tamsil, the head of Indonesia’s shrimp farmers’ association, estimates the 19% tariffs could see total exports plunge by 30% this year compared to 2024, putting the livelihoods of one million workers at risk.

Even with July’s agreement, most US customers are still putting their shrimp purchases on hold, said Budhi Wibowo, who heads an association of seafood businesses. He notes the new rates put Indonesia at a disadvantage against Ecuador, the world’s top producer of farmed shrimp, whose import tariff was set at 15%.

China is the world’s biggest importer of shrimp by volume, but Indonesians have preferred to sell to the US where they could get better prices, Mr. Budhi said.

Before the tariffs, China typically bought only 2% of Indonesia’s exports of the seafood.

Now the industry is having to work hard to promote its products to Chinese buyers.

In June, Mr. Tamsil, of the shrimp farmers’ association, traveled with a delegation of industry representatives to the southern Chinese city of Guangzhou to meet importers, restaurant owners and agri-commerce platforms. More trips are planned.

“We have a very big opportunity in China that imported around 1 million tons of shrimps,” Mr. Tamsil said. “Imagine if we could take just 20% of China’s import market.”

Mr. Budhi, of the seafood association, said Indonesia could also diversify exports to the Middle East, South Korea, Taiwan, and the European Union, especially as Jakarta is close to signing a free trade agreement with Brussels.

Back on his farm, Mr. Leonardo is confident his business, which he inherited from his father, can weather the US tariff storm. But it might not expand as quickly as he once hoped.

“I am optimistic that my company could survive because there will still be supply and demand. But for growth, I am not that optimistic,” Mr. Leonardo said. — Reuters