Mistrust and disagreements over privacy have impeded a partnership that could transform the global digital economy.

FREMONT, CA: Despite their strategic partnership's advancements in the twenty-first century, the United States and India have had trouble achieving digital convergence. Even though many American technology companies are placing significant bets on India's digital ecosystem and many Indian engineers are working in Silicon Valley, the two nations are diverging more on issues like data governance, competition regulation, and digital trade. Washington and New Delhi risk missing a golden opportunity to alter their relationship and the global digital economy. The US-India conflict related to technology is not new, but tensions have intensified over the years. Washington has raised objections to New Delhi's actions to limit cross-border data flows, control nonpersonal data, oust American payment and e-commerce firms, and increase internet shutdowns since 2017. Indian officials have chastised the United States for not regulating tech companies or changing its immigration laws. New Delhi has also expressed concern over actions taken by American businesses, such as the suspension of services in Russia following its invasion of Ukraine.

Officials need to make resolving these differences a priority, even if a digital connection between India and the United States may never provide complete alignment. A success might serve as a blueprint for the United States to collaborate with other Asian nations that have similar reservations about American technology to India but also seek foreign investment. Even if it necessitates difficult compromises, bringing India closer to Washington's alignment on digital policy would be advantageous from an economic and geopolitical standpoint. It needs to be acknowledged that the US and India have a tech trust deficit before they can engage in productive discussion on digital concerns. Within the framework of bilateral trade negotiations, efforts to address these difficulties are hampered; in a global setting, it restricts American engagement with India through the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, the Biden administration's new initiative to compete in Asia. The framework for U.S.-India collaboration is likely to concentrate on supply chains, which Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has underlined while avoiding its elements related to digital trade. The tech trust deficit has caused digital initiatives to be placed under a security umbrella, with a focus on emerging technologies rather than on issues like cross-border data flows and foreign investment. This is true even within the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, which includes Australia, India, Japan, and the United States.

The United States and India should seek a so-called digital handshake to overcome policy gaps and develop institutional mechanisms to spur progress to reverse their lack of tech trust. Both nations can learn from the European Union, which established Trade and Technology Councils (TTCs) with the United States and India separately to create a forum for the highest political levels to debate digital concerns. Last month, the EU-U.S. TTC had its second meeting, which included cabinet-level representatives from the fields of diplomacy, trade, and technology. The EU-India TTC was announced during the most recent visit of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to New Delhi, and it is anticipated to have a similar structure. Such high-level discussions on digital concerns are still lacking in Washington and New Delhi. The long-running United States-India Information and Communication Technology Working Group interaction bring together midlevel representatives from the Indian Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and the United States Department of State, which are not natural equivalents. The Trade Policy Forum, on the other hand, annually brings together cabinet-level trade ministers from both nations, but it only discusses digital trade problems as part of a discussion on services. Because of this, even the most significant conflicts receive insufficient attention, and both parties pass up chances to address points of agreement.