India, Aug. 3 -- That this is not a good week for India-US relations is an understatement. With 25% tariffs, threat of a "penalty" for purchasing oil and military equipment from Russia, criticism for being a part of the Brics grouping, and sermons over an apparently "dead economy" and "obnoxious non-monetary trade barriers," US President Donald Trump has made clear that India, who he still calls a "friend", is high on his imagination. His irritation might even be personal. It's difficult to say. The conclusion of what appears to be a last-minute trade agreement with Pakistan, still with 19% tariffs, and a plan - the details of which are best known to the President - to develop untapped and "massive oil reserves" within Pakistan is striking, if not mystifying to global oil experts. Understandably, within India, anger has dimmed the vision for promise in a relationship that has transformed in the past two decades. Well known television anchors have selflessly advised the government to "draw a line" because, apparently, "Trump always chickens-out". Given that the Indian Parliament is in session, news channels have one sound bite after another on this crucial relationship, the state of the Indian economy, and much else. Friends in Washington D.C. who have spent a lifetime building trust between the two countries are appalled. "What is lost," argues Evan Feigenbaum, a former US official who played a key role in getting the US-India civil nuclear agreement across the line, "is trust that took 25 years of painstaking, hard, bipartisan work and a huge lift by advocates in both countries". Trust, the former official argues, is "hard to build, easy to lose". To be sure, within India, those who have remained sceptical, to put it mildly, of deepening US-India ties find themselves back in the limelight. Russian social media handles are electrified. "We stand with India" are lines being circulated on WhatsApp groups and through unattributable handles. There is little doubt that in some office corner in China, a disinformation campaign is on the loose. Yet, whilst fully acknowledging the complexities woven into these difficult days for Indian and American interlocutors who have battled hard for a better future, this is neither the time for India to engage in grammar wars - this can be left to anchors and pundits alike - or, in fact, give-up on the functional aspects of the relationship. Understandably, there will be an impulse to pause ties across the board. Politically, it might be prudent too. But this is the time to demonstrate a version of altruism keeping the future in mind. For US experts, the term altruism refers to some strange conceptualisation of benevolence. Supporting India without asking for something in return, they would argue, was the spirit that drove American officials to go out of their way to accommodate India's civil nuclear ambitions. Currently, the verve is to turn altruism on its head, and for India to give more than it gets - to get past Trump 2.0. Many in India will disagree with this conceptualisation. I do. But that's another matter altogether. What is needed is an altruism not to react to a President who may well be negotiating for a better day or determinately pushing India where it hurts. He may hit India with 30% tariffs next week. His negotiators and their counterparts within India, who in all likelihood had agreed on terms for the first tranche of the trade deal, may still prevail. It is impossible to tell. What is clear is that no one in the US, including those within the White House can second guess Trump's next move or tweet. What is required is for India to be lingually altruistic to a President, who only in part controls the temperature and shapes the trajectory of a relationship that has proliferated well beyond government ties. This is the real success of the US-India relationship: The creation of a wide and spirited ecosystem that is fusing ties that go well beyond the government and foreign military sales. This is not to say that the drum that beats within the White House is not important. It is not necessarily all-important. The trust that has been built may not, in fact, be that easy to lose. Neither can it be taken for granted any longer. But this will require persistent engagement at the functional level and within this broader ecosystem. There are some 1,500 American Global Capabilities Centres peppered across India. Cutting-edge American defence platforms are being assembled in Hyderabad. Every major American technology firm has deep investments in India. This number is only growing. India's space companies service contracts for the US Space Force. The lists of these intersections are almost countless. For India's own economic and technological growth, a good part of the future lies with the US beyond Trump. This, of course, does not mean taking the bait for geopolitical realignments, which the government seems firm on. And rightly so. In fact, in a couple of months, the US may even strike an agreement with Russia, turning the tide on the current pressure on oil sales. If the Quad summit takes place in October or November, there is still an opportunity to functionally streamline and add substance to the myriad of working groups from cyber and infrastructure to space and critical and emerging technologies. AI infrastructure deals are unlikely, as of this moment, to stop in their tracks. India will host the Global AI Impact Summit in February 2026. Every technology company in the world wants to be involved, and all American firms want to send their top brass to Delhi. This is an opportunity to further deepen an already invested ecosystem. In sum, there is no doubt that India is in a tight spot. But not an impossible one. As of this moment, there is nothing to suggest that all is lost. It is not. Yet, at the functional level from government to industry and from technology to investment portfolios, there is a need to engage - for the sake of a relationship that has the space and dexterity, at least for a little time, to bridge ties beyond normalcy. Notwithstanding all the noise on the television channels and in Parliament, it is in India's interest to be linguistically altruistic for the sake of a relationship that has the space and dexterity, at least for some time, to bridge ties beyond immediacy....