Marco Rubio Defends US Ties With Pakistan, Signals India Partnership Has Limits

Rubio met Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar in Mumbai on Tuesday. During the visit, he gave several interviews and addressed questions on US-Pakistan relations, India’s concerns over Pakistan’s growing proximity to the Trump administration, trade tariffs, and energy cooperation.

With Pakistan’s ties with the United States strengthening during Donald Trump’s second term, Indian journalists questioned Rubio about whether Washington’s position on Pakistan had changed.

Rahul Joshi of CNN-News18 asked Rubio about a statement he had made in 2025, when he was a senator. At the time, Rubio had said he would introduce a bill to cut US security assistance to Pakistan if the country sponsored terrorism against India.

Joshi asked whether Rubio’s position had changed and whether there had been any shift in US policy.

“We are against terrorism anywhere in the world. We are against all those people and countries that provide safe havens to terrorism,” Rubio said.

He added that his responsibilities had changed since becoming Secretary of State.

“I am no longer a senator; I am the Secretary of State. I have to conduct US foreign policy. To do that, we have to maintain relations with different countries, including those with which we may have disagreements on certain issues,” he said.

“Pakistan is a country with which we have to maintain relations. It has nuclear weapons. From a geographical standpoint, too, we need to maintain dialogue and contact with it, just as India has to maintain relations with Iran and hold meetings with its leaders,” Rubio said.

His remarks underlined Pakistan’s strategic importance to Washington and indicated that US policy would continue to be guided by American interests.

Former Indian Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal criticised Rubio’s comparison between US-Pakistan relations and India’s ties with Iran, describing it as unfortunate.

In a post on X, Sibal wrote, “This comparison is unfortunate. Comparing US relations with Pakistan to India’s relations with Iran does not stand up to factual scrutiny.”

He argued that Iran was not a major non-NATO ally of the United States and that India had not supplied weapons to Iran to maintain a regional balance.

“The US has supplied F-16 fighter aircraft and AMRAAM missiles to Pakistan,” Sibal wrote.

He also contrasted the two countries’ nuclear histories, saying India had played no role in Iran developing nuclear weapons, whereas, in Pakistan’s case, the United States had allowed the country to become a nuclear power.

Sibal further alleged that Washington was aware of Pakistan’s long-standing use of terrorism against India as state policy. He said Pakistan had provided shelter to Osama bin Laden for years and had been a principal patron of the Taliban.

By contrast, Sibal noted that the United States had designated Iran as a state sponsor of terrorism and imposed extensive sanctions on it, while no comparable action had been taken against Pakistan.

He also pointed to US restrictions affecting India’s participation in the Chabahar project.

Pakistan defence expert Zahid Mahmood offered a different interpretation of Rubio’s remarks. In a post on X, Mahmood wrote, “Pakistan can neither be ignored, intimidated nor isolated. New Delhi may sell fantasies of regional dominance and diplomatic isolation to its domestic audience, but propaganda cannot alter geopolitical realities.”

He added, “India’s arrogance, political theatrics and obsession with isolating Pakistan expose the limits of its diplomacy rather than its strength. India must abandon its hegemonic mindset and accept one reality: Pakistan is here to stay, and peaceful coexistence is not a favour but a necessity.”

Explaining the reasons for his visit, Rubio described India as a major global partner.

“First of all, India is the most populous country in the world. It is the world’s oldest democracy. It is also a strong geopolitical partner of the United States. I think we visit India far too infrequently. I genuinely believe we should come here more often,” he said.

However, several experts believe energy security was a central objective of Rubio’s current trip, which included Mumbai and the Jamnagar refinery in Gujarat.

In recent months, particularly following India’s Operation Sindoor, the Trump administration has shown greater confidence in Pakistan’s leadership, especially Field Marshal Asim Munir.

Rubio addressed concerns about Washington’s approach to Islamabad in an interview with The Indian Express. He was asked whether some people in India viewed the situation as a return to the Nixon-Kissinger era, when the US administration supported Pakistan’s military rulers.

“I wouldn’t use the example of the 1970s, because the world today is completely different from what it was then. At that time, there was the Cold War and a range of other circumstances that no longer exist,” Rubio said.

He stressed that Washington’s relations with other countries would not come at the expense of its partnership with India.

“Secondly, our relations with any country in the world are in no way at the expense of our relationship with India. I hope that my visit to India, our commitment to a trade agreement, all the conversations that have taken place so far and the work we are doing together serve as evidence of that,” he said.

Rubio said the United States needed to maintain ties with Pakistan but argued that those relations could also help prevent future conflicts.

“Pakistan is a country with which we have relations, and we need to maintain those relations. In some ways, if we can help prevent steps that could eventually lead to conflict, that would be a positive thing. If we can use our influence in a positive way, that could help,” he said.

He added that India should have confidence that Washington’s engagement with Islamabad would not undermine its relationship with New Delhi.

“But everyone in India should have confidence that our relations with any country in the world, including Pakistan, will not come at the expense of our relationship with India. We do not view our relationship with India through that lens,” Rubio said.

The US Secretary of State also addressed concerns over American tariffs affecting India, saying they were not intended to punish or harm the country.

“None of these tariffs have been imposed to punish India or cause it harm. They are part of a broader foreign policy. Unfortunately, that policy also includes the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, which we want to see come to an end,” he said.

Rubio explained that legislation passed by Congress required the announcement of tariffs, but President Trump had refrained from implementing them because of the potential damage to relations with India.

“As you may have seen, under legislation passed by Congress, the announcement of tariffs is required. But the President does not implement them because he understands that doing so could harm a very important relationship with India,” Rubio said.

He described the issue as a balancing act, with Washington attempting to bring parties involved in the Russia-Ukraine war to the negotiating table while avoiding additional pressure on other bilateral relationships.

“It is part of a balance in foreign policy. It is difficult because, on the one hand, you want to bring the parties at war to the negotiating table, while on the other, imposing tariffs puts additional pressure on other relationships as well. There is a need to strike a balance, and the President is making every effort to do so,” he said.

Before his India visit, Rubio had said that it would be difficult for India to suddenly stop importing energy from Russia in a single day.

Last Friday, US President Donald Trump temporarily postponed certain sanctions that could have resulted in 100 per cent tariffs on India and four other countries for purchasing Russian oil and gas.

Against this backdrop, experts have highlighted energy cooperation and trade negotiations as key factors behind Rubio’s visit.

Geopolitical expert Velina Tchakarova said the main objectives of the trip were to finalise a trade agreement and discuss energy amid continuing disruption in the global order.

Tchakarova wrote that Rubio had indicated the trade agreement was nearly complete, with around 99 per cent of the work finished. Only a few words and provisions remained to be finalised, she said, adding that, according to Rubio, the agreement should be ready within weeks rather than months.

She suggested that the exemptions granted to India and other buyers, including China, regarding Russian energy exports were intended to prevent obstacles to trade and energy agreements.

According to Tchakarova, Rubio was encouraging India to purchase and refine more oil from countries other than Russia, particularly Venezuelan crude, given India’s capacity to process heavy crude oil. She linked this strategy to the planned visit to Reliance’s massive refinery in Jamnagar.

“If this plan succeeds, an interesting strategic equation could emerge around the use of India’s vast oil-refining capacity. Indian refineries could operate between two different geopolitical systems. One would be the American system, dependent on refined oil from Venezuela, while the other would be the ‘DragonBear’ system, comprising the China-Russia alignment and dependent on the refining of Russian oil,” she wrote.

Experts have said Rubio’s visit also signals a softer US approach to the impasse over energy security and trade.

International affairs expert Brahma Chellaney wrote on X that the visit was aimed at addressing energy security, corporate partnerships and trade-related deadlocks amid tensions in political relations between the United States and India.

“Rubio has chosen India’s financial capital, Mumbai, and the world’s largest oil refining complex in Jamnagar for his visit. The Ambani family will host him in Jamnagar. This makes it clear that he is emphasising practical cooperation rather than diplomatic differences,” Chellaney wrote.

He added that the approach could help advance energy cooperation, private-sector investment and economic ties while maintaining momentum in broader bilateral relations.

Tanvi Madan, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution think tank, also noted on X that both the Indian and US governments had referred to energy ties in their discussions.

Rubio’s Mumbai visit also included a trilateral meeting with Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar and UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed.

The UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the meeting as an effort to strengthen the strategic partnership and open new avenues for development and prosperity.

In a statement posted on X, the ministry said Abdullah bin Zayed had participated in the trilateral meeting with Jaishankar and Rubio in Mumbai.

The discussions focused on ways to expand cooperation among India, the United States and the United Arab Emirates in economic affairs, trade, investment, technology and artificial intelligence. The ministers also discussed shared strategic initiatives and efforts to promote security and stability at regional and international levels.

Rubio’s visit therefore brought several interconnected priorities into focus, including Washington’s engagement with Pakistan, its commitment to India, negotiations over trade tariffs and the search for energy cooperation. The discussions also highlighted the diplomatic balancing act facing the United States as it seeks to maintain strategic relationships across a region marked by competing interests.