E-Paper
US midterm results: Implications for India and the world
This article is authored by KS Tomar, strategic affairs columnist and senior political analyst, Shimla.
Prefer HTon Google
The American midterm elections of November 3, 2026, have produced a political earthquake. The Democrats have wrested control of both the Senate and the House of Representatives from the Republicans, barely two years after President Donald Trump return to the White House. The result is a public rejection of his political style, economic policies, trade wars and increasingly controversial international interventions.
The significance extends far beyond American domestic politics. For India and the rest of Asia, the verdict could mark the beginning of a more complicated relationship with Washington. Governments that have been compelled to accommodate Trump's unpredictable decisions may now find greater room to negotiate, resist and reassess their strategic calculations.
The most immediate consequence is that Trump enters the final two years of his presidency as a weakened political leader. Although he retains the constitutional powers of the presidency, his ability to translate personal preferences into legislation will be severely restricted. The Democrats will control the congressional agenda, exercise oversight over the administration and scrutinise its financial and foreign policy decisions.
Trump’s midterm setback could intensify US pressure on India to conclude a bilateral trade agreement quickly, with Washington seeking an economic and diplomatic success to demonstrate that the President retains influence despite domestic political reverses. India must be wary of accepting an unequal arrangement under which it reduces or eliminates tariffs on American industrial and agricultural goods while the US retains its own tariffs without comparable concessions. The proposed framework also envisages $ 500 billion in Indian purchases of American goods over five years and could constrain New Delhi’s energy choices, particularly its imports of Russian oil. Beyond the immediate tariff question, the agreement raises concerns about WTO’s Most Favoured Nation principle and India’s credibility in the multilateral trading system. New Delhi should resist political pressure for a hurried deal and insist on genuine reciprocity, protection of its energy security and adequate policy space for domestic industry and development priorities.
For India, the outcome offers relief as well as uncertainty. New Delhi has had to navigate Trump's tariff threats, pressure over Russian oil, immigration restrictions and transactional diplomacy. A Democratic Congress could question the use of tariffs and demand transparency in trade negotiations. It also gives Indian officials more institutional channels to explain India's interests in technology, defence, energy and skilled-worker mobility.
Trump’s hostility towards South Asian immigrants appears to have added to MAGA Republicans’ electoral troubles in the November 3 midterm elections. A survey of Indian Americans showed 62% support for Democratic congressional candidates against just 19% for Republicans. Significantly, 25% of Indian Americans who voted for Trump in 2024 indicated a shift towards Democrats. Nearly 90% reported experiencing discrimination or knowing someone who had faced it. The alienation was reflected in the electoral success of Indian-origin Democrats. Ami Bera, Ro Khanna, Pramila Jayapal and Suhas Subramanyam were re-elected to the US House of Representatives, while Pia Dandiya won her first congressional election from Florida. Aruna Miller was also re-elected as Maryland’s lieutenant governor. Hostility towards H-1B professionals and immigration rhetoric contributed to the backlash, alongside concerns over inflation, jobs and health care. Racism may not have been the sole factor, but MAGA’s divisive politics has clearly alienated an increasingly influential Indian-American electorate.
Pakistan may find its warm access to Trump less valuable. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and army chief Asim Munir have cultivated a relationship with the president, giving Islamabad diplomatic visibility and a role in Gulf and Iran discussions. A 2025 trade arrangement and proposals involving minerals, drones and cryptocurrency reinforced that engagement.
Yet Pakistan's advantage rests on Trump's preferences and the military leadership's access. A Democratic Congress may scrutinise dealings with Islamabad, including human rights, democratic accountability and the rationale for cooperation. Washington will not abandon Pakistan, whose geography remains important, but proximity to Trump may no longer guarantee influence.
China will read the result with mixed feelings. Beijing may calculate that a weakened Trump has less leverage in trade negotiations and may be eager for diplomatic success. The Democrats are unlikely to give him a free hand in strategic compromises. Congressional concern over advanced technology, Artificial Intelligence, semiconductors, supply chains and Taiwan crosses party lines.
A Democratic majority could restrict Trump's room for manoeuvre. The danger for Asia is uncertainty over whether Washington can agree on a coherent China policy. Beijing may exploit divisions between the White House and Congress, but it cannot assume that Democratic lawmakers will favour a softer approach towards Chinese strategic ambitions.
The Iran war will be one of the sharpest tests. The conflict and its economic consequences, particularly higher energy costs, contributed to voter anger. Democrats can use hearings, funding conditions and legislative resolutions to demand a clearer strategy and congressional authorisation.
They cannot command military operations: Trump remains commander-in-chief. But scrutiny could make an open-ended campaign harder to sustain politically and financially. India, dependent on energy flows through the Gulf, has a direct interest in de-escalation and the security of the Strait of Hormuz.
Ukraine could benefit from the new balance. Trump has been reluctant to sustain direct American military and financial assistance, while many lawmakers retain bipartisan support for Kyiv. Democrats can bring aid measures to the floor, attach conditions to spending and scrutinise concessions to Moscow.
A presidential veto remains formidable, but a sufficiently broad bipartisan majority could override it. The result may not reverse Trump's policy immediately, but it strengthens those favouring continued support for Ukraine and resistance to Russian aggression.
European allies will draw encouragement. NATO governments have faced uncertainty over Trump's commitment to collective security, alongside tariff disputes and pressure to raise defence spending. A Democratic Congress can reinforce congressional support for NATO, Ukraine and transatlantic cooperation.
It cannot dictate every presidential decision or automatically remove tariffs imposed under executive authority. Nevertheless, European leaders may feel less isolated and more confident that important American institutions remain committed to alliances. They must still prepare for presidential unpredictability.
There is, however, a constitutional limit to the Democratic victory. Trump retains the veto, and Congress needs a two-thirds majority in both chambers to override it. Democrats are unlikely to command such numbers on every issue. The president can also use executive powers where legislation is unnecessary, although courts and existing statutes impose limits.
Control of Congress does not mean control of the presidency or an automatic reversal of policy. Trump may become more combative, using vetoes and executive orders to protect his agenda. Alternatively, concern for his legacy may persuade him to compromise.
The Democratic victory is a powerful check, not a transfer of executive authority. For India and the wider world, American policy will increasingly be shaped by a contest between two centres of power. Governments should cultivate relationships across American institutions, not rely on presidential assurances alone. The verdict has not ended Trump’s presidency, but has sharply curtailed his political power and dealt a major blow to his ambition of extending American dominance across the world.
(The views expressed are personal)
This article is authored by KS Tomar, strategic affairs columnist and senior political analyst, Shimla.
