US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said the proposed US-India trade deal is “incredibly close”, with negotiations down to technical details and an agreement expected in a matter of weeks rather than months.

In an exclusive interview with Network18 in Mumbai, Rubio said both sides must agree on every detail before announcing the deal, given the importance of the bilateral relationship.I think we're down to some technical details that have to be worked out.

Technical details matter because there has to be agreement. Both sides have to agree that the language means the same thing.

So it's down to that level.MARCO RUBIO, SECRETARY OF STATE, USA Asked whether there was a deadline for the agreement, Rubio said he was not personally negotiating the deal, which is being handled by the US trade representative. However, he said he had been closely following the process.“I know, and have been very involved in watching it happen, that it is something we anticipate seeing in a matter of weeks, not months,” he said.

Rubio did not specify a date for the announcement, stressing that the agreement must be finalised in full before it is made public.US-India trade deal: Better rates and mutual benefitsOn whether India could secure better trade rates than other countries, Rubio said the purpose of a trade agreement was to improve the terms available to the two sides. However, he emphasised that the broader objective was to establish a sustainable trade relationship. The purpose of making a deal is to have better rates than what you have now.

But the more important thing is about ensuring that our trade relationship is sustainable.MARCO RUBIO, SECRETARY OF STATE, USA Rubio acknowledged that India and the US would continue to defend their respective national interests in trade negotiations.

He said differences were inevitable, but common interests and the broader relationship between the two countries could help bridge them.“The difference is when you are friends, when you are allies, and when you have so much in common. That's what allows you to bridge those differences and come up with something that's mutually beneficial,” he said.

He added that a sustainable agreement, whether with India or another country, must work for both sides.“There are things that you're not going to like in it, but the preponderance of it is good for you, and that's what we aim to achieve here,” Rubio said. Russian oil, sanctions complicate trade negotiationsThe trade discussions come amid differences over US sanctions and tariffs linked to countries buying Russian oil. Asked about the US approach to Russian oil purchases and the potential impact of sanctions on India, Rubio said Washington had to balance its efforts to pressure Russia over the war in Ukraine against the wider economic consequences.

He said sanctions do not affect Russia alone but can also affect countries that conduct business with it.“There's a balancing act there,” Rubio said, adding that pressure intended to influence the countries involved in the war could sometimes have a negative impact on others.

Rubio also referred to US President Donald Trump's decision to use a national security waiver on the latest bill passed by Congress that called for increased tariffs and sanctions, including measures targeting countries continuing to do business with Russia.

He said the decision reflected the need to assess the wider implications of such measures.“It can't just be about—you know, you have to balance your interests in what's happening with Ukraine and Russia against the impact that it's having on a global scale,” he said. Rubio expressed hope that these issues could be addressed alongside progress on a trade agreement with India, while acknowledging the tensions involved. Rubio sees scope for deeper India-US cooperationBeyond trade, Rubio said India and the US had significant opportunities to expand cooperation, pointing to their shared interests and growing engagement through the Quad, the grouping comprising India, the US, Japan and Australia.

He said the relationship between the two countries had enabled them to navigate sensitive issues over the past year and a half. Rubio also highlighted the importance of energy cooperation, referring to his planned visit to Reliance Industries' refining operations in Jamnagar. He said Reliance had substantial refining capacity and had invested in expanding refining capacity in the US. He said there was scope for the company to help India diversify its energy supply while also supporting the US energy sector, particularly by refining supplies from the Western Hemisphere.

The trade deal, however, remains subject to the completion of negotiations. While Rubio's assessment points to progress, his remarks make clear that the agreement will be announced only after both sides have settled the outstanding technical details.

Secretary Rubio, you've been a well-wisher of India. You're a tall global leader. This is your second visit in a matter of a few months. Last time, you were in Delhi, you went to Agra and spent some quality time here. This time, you've skipped Delhi. You've come to Mumbai, and you're going to Jamnagar. What is the significance of this visit? What are you trying to achieve? This is a big country.

It's an important country, and I think, like any big country, I say to people, if you want to learn and see what's happening in the United States, you can't just go to Washington. You should probably try to go somewhere in the South, maybe somewhere out on the West Coast, and you probably need to get to New York and Chicago. And so, for us, I mean, I don't pretend that in my time as Secretary of State I'll get to see all of India or learn about every region, but I think it's important to see a country of this size and magnitude and to learn as much about it as you can. Mumbai, in particular, is the financial heart and soul of the country. It's where so many of the companies that are investing in and with the United States, and whom we want to do more trade with, are located. It's the financial lifeblood of the country, so it's logical to come here, and obviously, I look forward to coming back and seeing the country again.I told our media earlier today—they were asking why we were here because it's amazing.

You know, the media wants us to go to other parts of the world sometimes, not here. I said we actually don't come enough. If you think about the importance of this relationship, not only am I glad I'm here, but I'm glad there's a congressional delegation in town at the same time. And I know we've sent people here. The Attorney General has been here, the Commerce Secretary has been here, and I expect to be back.

Since we are in Mumbai, the commercial capital, let's get down to business. The trade deal between India and the US: today, you said it is very, very close. How close is close? Is there a deadline? Yeah, I felt that way before. And with these deals, it's always important that every detail be totally agreed upon before it's announced, because you can't afford for a relationship of this magnitude to be threatened by announcing a deal and then it turning out that the deal wasn't finalised. But it's incredibly close.

I think we're down to some technical details that have to be worked out. Technical details matter because there has to be agreement. Both sides have to agree that the language means the same thing. So it's down to that level.I'm not personally negotiating. It's up to our trade representative, but I know, and have been very involved in watching it happen, that it is something we anticipate seeing in a matter of weeks, not months. And do you think that India can expect some better rates than others?

Obviously, the purpose of making a deal is to have better rates than what you have now. But the more important thing is about ensuring that our trade relationship is sustainable. The foreign policy of the United States and the trade policy of the United States are driven by a recognition that every country has national interests. We fully expect not just India, but every country we interact with, to defend and fight for what's good for them, and we're going to fight for what's good for us. The difference is when you are friends, when you are allies, and when you have so much in common. That's what allows you to bridge those differences and come up with something that's mutually beneficial.

For a trade deal with India, or any country for that matter, to be sustainable in the long term, it has to be an agreement that is good for both sides. There are things that you're not going to like in it, but the preponderance of it is good for you, and that's what we aim to achieve here. And I can't wait until we do it because we have so many things we can work together on. America imposes sanctions and tariffs on countries like India for buying Russian oil, but America itself is buying diesel now from Russia to cool pump prices, probably ahead of the midterms.

How do you see this change and the shift in strategy, and how do you explain this broader picture? What's interesting about it is—and I'm not saying the war in Ukraine is not important.

It is, and it's something that's now going into its fifth year. It's very problematic in that regard. But even the people who pressure us—I could do this interview in another part of the world, and they'd be asking us why we're not imposing more sanctions. And people don't realise that sanctions come with consequences because sanctions aren't just on Russia; they are on anyone who does business with Russia. So there's a balancing act there.

There always is, between, on the one hand, trying to pressure the countries involved in this war to enter into an agreement and, on the other hand, recognising that when you apply that pressure, sometimes it spills over and has a negative impact on other countries. It's one of the reasons why, despite criticism from Democrats and others, the President chose to use a national security waiver on the latest bill that Congress passed, which called for increases in tariffs and sanctions, including tariffs on specific countries that are still doing business with Russia.

And the President chose to use a national security waiver to avoid implementing those measures immediately because he recognises that these things have to be looked at in their totality. It can't just be about—you know, you have to balance your interests in what's happening with Ukraine and Russia against the impact that it's having on a global scale. So hopefully, between that and a trade agreement with India, these issues will be resolved. But I understand the tension exists, and I understand it's the sort of balancing act that we have to work through.

One issue that concerns us, is that a few days back, there was a plot to attack a Hindu temple in the state of Illinois. The Indian government has also drawn attention to racist hostility, anti-India sentiment and anti-India hate.

How do you see this, towards a community that is known for academic excellence, a low crime rate, and is actually a part of the great American story? Unfortunately, I would just say that this is not unique to the United States. It happens in every society in the world because it's endemic to the human condition. There's ignorance and there's hatred, and it happens. You see these attacks in different parts of the world for different reasons. Some are motivated by terrorism; others are motivated by hatred, and the United States is not immune to that.I do not believe, nor have I ever perceived, that anti-Indian sentiment in the United States is widespread or deep.

But I must also tell you that, like any large and complex society, there are individuals within our country, sadly, who are stupid, dumb, ignorant or hateful. And what I am very proud of is the way these communities react when it happens, and I don't just mean the Indian American community, I mean the community that surrounds them and how they rally around them and reject it.I remember a few years ago, we had a horrifying incident involving a Sikh community in Wisconsin and how the community rallied to support them.

So these things happen. We have a rise in anti-Semitism in the United States. We've seen that as well. It's very disturbing. So these are things that we address and reject. I think the important point is that the majority of the country speaks with moral clarity about how wrong these things are, and that those of us in positions of authority never do anything that is, in any way, encouraging or excusing them, or looking the other way.

One more question: Is this US stance towards Pakistan—as US senator in 2025, you had said that you would introduce a bill to cut US security aid to Pakistan if it sponsored terror against India. Has that changed? Has that policy changed at all? We're against terrorism anywhere in the world.

We're against anybody who sponsors terrorism. In my new role, I'm no longer a senator. I'm the Secretary of State. I have to manage the foreign policy of the United States, and that does require us to have relationships with countries, including those with which we may have some disagreements. In the case of Pakistan, it's a country with which we have to have a relationship. It's a country that possesses nuclear weapons. It's a country that, from a geographic standpoint, we need to be able to interact with, much in the same way that the government of India has to have, and does have, a relationship with and meet with leaders from Iran.

So these are difficult things to balance, but they have to be part of our foreign policy. And I think, in a way, it could be a positive thing because if we have a relationship and we can speak to them, it could perhaps help us. It perhaps puts us in a position to help discourage the kinds of things that India is worried about. Earlier this month, you said that Iran had lost complete control of the Strait of Hormuz, but ships are being struck every now and then, and the war is spreading to Yemen and Saudi Arabia.

How do you see the situation evolving? President Trump has been saying that the war will be over after the midterms. Do you see military escalation, or do you see a deal in the offing? It's tough to make a deal with the Iranian regime. Unfortunately, they don't know how to make a deal, and they're controlled by radical Shia clerics. And I don't mean Shia clerics; I mean radical Shia clerics who are driven by theology. It's very difficult to make a deal with them. The Straits are, if you look at the amount of traffic and oil and energy flowing through there on any given night, at 80% to 100% of the levels seen before the conflict. Unfortunately, Iran is doing something, and that's really what people should be talking about.

What they really should be talking about is that we have a nation-state that is openly, openly saying, "We are targeting commercial vessels. We are trying to kill sailors who have nothing to do with war. We are trying to sink commercial ships." You haven't seen that since the Second World War. They are using Nazi U-boat tactics, and that's what the world should be rallying around and condemning. Every single night the United States defends shipping. The overwhelming majority of these drones and missiles that they are launching at ships are being destroyed.

Every now and then, unfortunately, one will get through and strike a ship. Luckily, for the most part, most of these ships are able to continue in transit. But every now and then, you do see an engine room hit, and every now and then, you see loss of life, including many Indian sailors who have lost their lives in these strikes because there's such a large number of Indian sailors out there. So it's something that we're worried about, but I think it's incumbent on Iran to stop doing it. In the meantime, we're going to continue putting extraordinary economic pressure on them because we know that every dollar they get access to, every resource they get access to, they don't use to better their lives, their people or their country.

They use it to sponsor terrorism. They use it to make missiles and drones to try to sink commercial vessels. There hasn't been a Quad leaders' summit since September 2024, and it's India's turn to host it now. Do you think this will happen anytime soon? Will President Trump travel to India for the next Quad summit? Our hope is that the Quad summit will occur before the end of this year. There's been an agreement that we're going to do it. We're going to do it in Manila at the ASEAN conference, where the four... We don't have the specific date yet, but that's going to happen, and we're very enthusiastic about it.

In fact, the first meeting I ever had as Secretary of State was a Quad meeting with the foreign ministers. That was literally the first meeting I ever had. As soon as I was sworn in, I went upstairs and we did it.I think since then, we've had seven or eight engagements. We're about to have another one in Atlanta at the G20, and we look forward to being part of that at the leaders' level meeting at ASEAN here in just a few weeks.

You've been in India this time and have met Foreign Minister Jaishankar. Could you give us a sense of the conversation between the two sides and what takes you to Jamnagar tomorrow, to Reliance?

On Jaishankar, I think we have a great relationship, and I've gotten to know him. As I said, it was the first meeting I had as Secretary of State. He was part of it at the time, and he was part of that first meeting.

So we've met—I don't know how many times. We must have met at least a dozen times because he has also come to the United States four times. We've seen him whenever we're in the same city at a gathering, a conference or what have you. We always make a point to meet, and so I think we've created a very positive and solid working relationship that's allowed us to navigate some delicate and sensitive issues over the last year and a half.

As far as moving forward with the relationship, I think we have extraordinary opportunities. I think we are aligned on so many different things. The Quad is one that's really gaining a lot of momentum, and because the Quad is not just a process by which we meet and agree to do certain things, you're now starting to see action.

You're now starting to see things happen, and that's what we're excited about for the leaders' meeting: it is at that meeting, they will be able to announce concrete actions, not just have a nice social gathering, but deliver something concrete. And the agenda in Jamnagar tomorrow? Reliance is a very important company. It has extraordinary refining capacity. Petroleum is useless if you don't refine it into usable products.

We think there's an opportunity for them to continue to help India diversify its supply chain and its energy supply. For example, Venezuela is increasing its energy production, and India has had a long history of being able to refine some of that. But Reliance is also one of the few companies that has actually invested in refining capacity in the United States. They've invested in increasing refining capacity within the United States. So, being so close, it made sense to go see their operation and spend some time talking to them about how we can work together more closely, especially when it comes to energy from the Western Hemisphere that can be refined here. I think that's helpful to India, but it's also helpful to us.