PM Modi should not accept Rubio’s invitation to the White House | American Business Institute

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio began a four-day official visit to India on May 23, 2026, visiting Kolkata briefly before continuing to New Delhi, where he met Prime Minister Narendra Modi and handed him an invitation to visit the White House. Prime Minister Modi is expected to delay such a visit until President Donald Trump leaves office.

Trump’s handling of US-India relations during his second term froze, if not reversed, 25 years of partnership. But if Trump’s insult was blatant, Rubio was complicit, even if his sleights were subtle. The May trip was Rubio’s first visit to India as secretary of state, but he has already visited 31 other countries. India is the world’s most populous country and its largest democracy, but Rubio found time to visit St. Kitts and Nevis and Suriname before India. There was no shortage of opportunities: he was in Japan and South Korea and could have continued; he even visited Malaysia twice.

To be fair, Rubio faces a pit in front and a ditch behind. He wants to keep his job while Trump removes other cabinet members he considers disloyal or who question him. The situation is reminiscent of an old Iraqi joke: during a press conference, a journalist asks Deputy Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz if elephants can fly. “Of course not,” he replies. The journalist then shouts: “But His Excellency Saddam Hussein, the President of the Republic of Iraq, said they could. Without missing a beat, Aziz joked, “Of course they can, but only very slowly.” » Even though Rubio’s desire to run for president is an open secret, he probably also believes he can manage the mess within the administration.

The problem for Prime Minister Modi, however, is that, faced with the choice between his principles and his ambition, Rubio always chooses the latter. Rubio was unable to prevent Trump’s accession of Marshal Asim Munir, nor the tariffs imposed by Trump against India. As a senator, Rubio long defended Ukraine, but turned on President Volodymyr Zelenskyy when Trump and Vice President JD Vance berated him in the Oval Office, later gratuitously demanding that Zelenskyy apologize to Trump. The same dynamic is at work in West Asia, where Rubio supports Trump’s efforts to negotiate with Hamas and Iran, despite a history of contrary steps before the administration.

Rubio may be sincere in his personal beliefs and may want to repair U.S.-India relations, but he won’t be able to do that until he is President Marco Rubio. In the meantime, his words make no sense.

If Prime Minister Modi came to Washington and visited Trump in the Oval Office, he would risk repeating the Zelensky trap. The same old Trump allies who once lobbied for Pakistan are still whispering in the president’s ear. In the power structure of the Trump administration, old friends are more influential and powerful than secretaries or national security advisers. If Trump used Prime Minister Modi as a backdrop to launch a compromise on Kashmir or a plan to resolve the “1,500-year-old” border conflict between India and Pakistan, Rubio would not remain silent; rather, he would demand that Prime Minister Modi apologize if the Indian Prime Minister cited facts or corrected Trump.

Trump’s modus operandi is to test the loyalty of his aides by forcing them to betray their friends. Prime Minister Modi should not put himself in this position if Trump decides that Rubio must pass one of his arbitrary loyalty tests by insulting India or praising Pakistan.

There is a common lie in the West that it is never wrong to speak up. This is false. Poorly designed diplomacy can cause lasting damage.

Certainly, Indians are unhappy with Trump’s red carpet treatment of Munir, but they should not try to compete with Trump’s favorite terrorist. Prime Minister Modi should instead play the long game. He is not a supplicant; his presence is a privilege that Trump does not currently deserve.