the provided text discusses India‘s foreign policy under prime Minister Modi, particularly in relation to the US and China, and its implications for India’s military and diplomatic standing. Here’s a breakdown of the key points:

Critique of India’s Military and Diplomatic Response:

Military Constraints: The author argues that during a conflict (implied to be with Pakistan,given the context),Indian pilots were sent into battle without the ability to fire back due to “political constraints.” This suggests a lack of strategic autonomy or a desire to avoid escalation at the cost of military effectiveness.
Diplomatic Failure: Despite “energetic” diplomatic efforts, India received “surprisingly weak international endorsement” for its military actions. Most countries called for “mutual de-escalation,” wich the author interprets as equating India and Pakistan, thus undermining India’s position.

US-India Relations under Trump:

trump’s Agenda and Pakistan: The author highlights a stark contrast between President Trump’s praise for Pakistan’s Army chief, Asim Munir, for “not going into the war [with India]” and “ending the war,” and former President Obama’s stance on bringing terrorists behind the Mumbai attacks to justice. This suggests a perceived shift in US priorities that favors Pakistan over India.
Trade and Sanctions: The US announced a 25% tariff on Indian exports while continuing talks with Pakistan, indicating a tough negotiating stance towards India. Additionally, the US sanctioned Indian firms for trading Iranian petrochemicals at the same time as announcing a deal for a US firm to develop Pakistani oil reserves. The author views this as a important setback for Indian foreign policy.

Critique of Modi’s Foreign Policy:

personalized Foreign Policy and Image Building: The author criticizes the Modi government for personalizing foreign policy and prioritizing image-building, which they believe makes India susceptible to manipulation by partners and adversaries. This includes superficial gestures and “sweetheart deals.”
Over-reliance on the US and overcorrection with China: The government is accused of placing all its faith in the US when the “unipolar moment was clearly over.” Subsequently, it “overcorrected” by accommodating an aggressive China, ceding buffer zones in eastern Ladakh and accepting Chinese concurrence for Indian patrols.
China’s Support for Pakistan: During a conflict (Operation Sindoor), China provided “live inputs” on Indian operations to Pakistan, effectively turning India into a “testing ground for network-centric warfare and new weapons systems.” China also restricted critical exports to India and made moves into the northeast.
Comparison to Nehru’s Non-alignment: The author contrasts Modi’s approach with Nehru’s non-alignment, which sought investment and aid from both the US and USSR. Modi’s non-alignment, in contrast, has resulted in “economic and political penalties from both the US and China.”

Overall Argument:

The central argument is that India’s foreign policy under Modi has been flawed, leading to a weakened diplomatic position and military constraints. The author suggests that the government’s approach, characterized by personalized diplomacy, over-reliance on the US, and a miscalculation in dealing with China, has resulted in significant setbacks and penalties from both major global powers. the author, identified as a Congress member, presents this as a critique of the current government’s foreign policy decisions.