Latest News

Trump’s global tariffs ‘victory’ may come at a high price

Published

10 months ago

2025/08/1

Priyan

In April Donald Trump stunned the world by announcing sweeping new import tariffs – only to put most on hold amid the resulting global financial panic.

Four months later, the US president is touting what he claims are a series of victories, having unveiled a handful of deals with trading partners and unilaterally imposed tariffs on others, all without the kind of massive disruptions to the financial markets that his spring attempt triggered.

At least, so far.

Having worked to reorder America’s place in the global economy, Trump is now promising that the US will reap the benefits of new revenue, rekindle domestic manufacturing, and generate hundreds of billions of dollars in foreign investment and purchases.

Whether that turns out to be the case – and whether these actions will have negative consequences – is still very much in doubt.

What is clear so far, however, is that a tide that was gently turning on free trade, even ahead of Trump’s second term, has become a wave crashing across the globe. And while it is reshaping the economic landscape, it hasn’t left the kind of wreckage in its wake that some might have predicted – though of course there is often a lag before impact is fully seen.

What’s more, for many countries, this has all served as a wake up call – a need to remain alive to fresh alliances.

And so, whilst the short term result might be – as Trump sees it – a victory, the impact on his overarching goals is far less certain. As are the long-term repercussions, which could well pan out rather differently for Trump – or the America he leaves behind after his current term.

For all the wrong reasons, 1 August had been ringed on international policymakers’ calendars. Agree new trading terms with the US by then, they’d been warned – or face potentially ruinous tariffs.

While White House trade adviser Peter Navarro predicted “90 deals in 90 days” and Trump offered an optimistic outlook on reaching agreements, the deadline always appeared to be a tall order. And it was.

By the time the end of July rolled around, Trump had only announced about a dozen trade deals – some no more than a page or two long, without the kind of detailed provisions standard in past negotiations.

REUTERS/Suzanne Plunkett/Pool U.S. President Donald Trump and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer hold a signed Trade Agreement during a meeting at the G7 summit — *The baseline 10% applied to most British goods raised eyebrows at first – but was a relief compared to the 15% rate on other trading partners [BBC]*

The UK was first off the blocks, perhaps inevitably. Trump’s biggest bugbear is, after all, America’s trade deficit, and trade is in broad balance when it comes to the UK.

While the baseline 10% applied to most British goods may initially have raised eyebrows, it provided a hint of what was to follow – and in the end came as a relief compared to the 15% rate applied to other trading partners such as the EU and Japan, with whom the US has larger deficits; $240bn and $70bn respectively last year alone.

And even those agreements came with strings attached. Those countries that weren’t able to commit to, say, buying more American goods, often faced higher tariffs.

South Korea, Cambodia, Pakistan – as the list grew, and tariff letters were fired off elsewhere, the bulk of American imports are now covered by either an agreement or a presidential decree concluded with a curt “thank you for your attention to this matter”.

Capacity to ‘damage’ the global economy

Much has been revealed as a result of this.

First, the good news. The wrangling of the last few months means the most painful of tariffs, and recession warnings, have been dodged.

The worst fears – in terms of tariff levels and potential economic fallout (for the US and elsewhere) – have not been realised.

*The greatest fears – the warnings of potential disaster – have receded [BBC]*

Second, the agreement of tariff terms, however unpalatable, reduced much of the uncertainty (itself wielded by Trump as a powerful economic weapon) for better – and for worse.

For better, in the sense that businesses are able to make plans, investment and hiring decisions that had been paused may now be resumed.

Most exporters know what size tariffs their goods face – and can figure out how to accommodate or pass on the cost to consumers.

That growing sense of certainty underpins a more relaxed mood in financial markets, with shares in the US notably gaining.

*Trump hailed the size of the agreement of the US with the EU – but these are not the tariff-busting deals equated with tearing down trade barriers in the past [BBC]*

But it’s for the worse, in the sense that the typical tariff for selling into the US is higher than before – and more extreme than analysts predicted just six months ago.

Trump may have hailed the size of the agreement of the US with the EU – but these are not the tariff-busting deals we equated with tearing down trade barriers in previous decades.

The greatest fears, the warnings of potential disaster, have receded. But Ben May, Director of global macro forecasting at Oxford Economics, says that US tariffs had the capacity to “damage” the global economy in several ways.

“They are obviously raising prices in the US and squeezing household incomes,” he says, adding that the policies would also reduce demand around the world if the world’s largest economy ends up importing fewer goods.

Winners and losers: Germany, India and China

It’s not just about the size of tariff, but the scale of trading relationship with the US. So while India potentially faces tariffs of over 25% on its exports to the US, economists at Capital Economics reckon that, with US demand accounting for just 2% of that nation’s gross domestic product, the immediate impact on growth could be minor.

The news is not so good for Germany, though, where the 15% tariffs could knock more than half a percentage point off growth this year, compared to what was expected earlier in the year.

That’s due to the size of its automotive sector – unhelpful for an economy that may be teetering on the brink of recession.

*India became the top source of smartphones sold in the US recently, after fears of what may lie in store for China [BBC]*

Meanwhile, India became the top source of smartphones sold in the US in the last few months, after fears of what may lie in store for China prompted Apple to shift production.

On the other hand, India will be mindful that the likes of Vietnam and the Philippines – which face lower tariffs when selling to the US – may become relatively more attractive suppliers in other industries.

Across the board, however, there’s relief that the blow, at least, is likely to be less extensive than might have been. But what has been decided already points to longer-term ramifications for global trading patterns and alliances elsewhere.

And the element of jeopardy introduced into a long-established major relationship with the US, lent added momentum to the UK’s pursuit of closer ties with the EU – and getting a trade deal with India over the line.

For many countries, this has served as a wake up call – a need to remain alive to fresh alliances.

A very real political threat for Trump?

As details are nailed down, the implications for the US economy become clearer too.

Growth in the late spring there actually benefitted from a flurry of export sales, as businesses rushed to beat any higher tariffs imposed on American goods.

Economists expect that growth to lose momentum over the rest of the year.

Tariffs that have increased from an average of 2% at the beginning of the year to around 17% now have had a notable impact on US government revenue – one of the stated goals of Trump’s trade policy. Import duties have brought in more than $100bn so far this year – about 5% of US federal revenue, compared to around 2% in past years.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he expected tariff revenue this year to total about $300bn. By comparison, federal income taxes bring in around $2.5tn a year.

American shoppers remain in the front line, and have yet to see higher prices passed on in full. But as consumer goods giants such as Unilever and Adidas start to put numbers on the cost increases involved, some sticker shock, price rises, loom – potentially enough to delay Trump’s desired rate cut – and possibly a dent to consumer spending.

*If the current tariffs trigger a foundational realignment, the results may not ultimately break in favour of the US [BBC]*

Forecasts are always uncertain, of course, but this represents a very real political threat for a president who promised to lower consumer prices, not take actions that would raise them.

Trump and other White House officials have floated the idea of providing rebate checks to lower-income Americans – the kinds of blue-collar voters who have fuelled the president’s political success – that would offset some of the pocketbook pain.

Such an effort could be unwieldy, and it would require congressional approval.

It’s also a tacit acknowledgment that simply boasting of new federal revenue to offset current spending and tax cuts, and holding out the prospect of future domestic job and wealth creation is politically perilous for a Republican party that will have to face voters in next year’s midterm state and congressional midterm elections.

The deals yet to be hammered out

Complicating all this is the fact that there are many countries where a deal is yet to be hammered out – most notably Canada and Taiwan.

The US administration has yet to pronounce its decisions for the pharmaceuticals and steel industry. The colossal issue of China, subject to a different deadline, remains unresolved.

Trump agreed to a negotiating extension with Mexico, another major US trading partner, on Thursday morning.

Many of the deals that have been struck have been verbal, as yet unsigned. Moreover it is uncertain if and how the strings attached to Trump’s agreements – more money to be spent purchasing American energy or invested in America – will actually be delivered on.

In some cases, foreign leaders have denied the existence of provisions touted by the president.

*Trump’s overarching aim – to return production and jobs to America – may meet with very limited success [BBC]*

When it comes to assessing tariff agreements between the White House and various countries, says Mr May, the “devil is in the detail” – and the details are light.

It’s clear, however, that the world has shifted back from the brink of a ruinous trade war. Now, as nations grapple with a new set of trade barriers, Trump aims to call the shots.

But history tells us that his overarching aim – to return production and jobs to America – may meet with very limited success. And America’s long-time trading partners, like Canada and the EU, could start looking to form economic and political connections that bypass what they no longer view as a reliable economic ally.

Trump may be benefitting from the leverage afforded by America’s unique position at the centre of a global trading order that it spent more than half a century establishing. If the current tariffs trigger a foundational realignment, however, the results may not ultimately break in favour of the US.

Those questions will be answered over years, not weeks or months. In the meantime, Trump’s own voters may still have to pick up the tab – through higher prices, less choice and slower growth.

***[BBC]***

JOHN G MABANGLO/EPA/Shutterstock A sailboat sails past a container ship at the Port of Oakland in Oakland, California — *The baseline 10% applied to most British goods raised eyebrows at first – but was a relief compared to the 15% rate on other trading partners [BBC]*

The UK was first off the blocks, perhaps inevitably. Trump’s biggest bugbear is, after all, America’s trade deficit, and trade is in broad balance when it comes to the UK.

While the baseline 10% applied to most British goods may initially have raised eyebrows, it provided a hint of what was to follow – and in the end came as a relief compared to the 15% rate applied to other trading partners such as the EU and Japan, with whom the US has larger deficits; $240bn and $70bn respectively last year alone.

And even those agreements came with strings attached. Those countries that weren’t able to commit to, say, buying more American goods, often faced higher tariffs.

South Korea, Cambodia, Pakistan – as the list grew, and tariff letters were fired off elsewhere, the bulk of American imports are now covered by either an agreement or a presidential decree concluded with a curt “thank you for your attention to this matter”.

Capacity to ‘damage’ the global economy

Much has been revealed as a result of this.

First, the good news. The wrangling of the last few months means the most painful of tariffs, and recession warnings, have been dodged.

The worst fears – in terms of tariff levels and potential economic fallout (for the US and elsewhere) – have not been realised.

*The greatest fears – the warnings of potential disaster – have receded [BBC]*

Second, the agreement of tariff terms, however unpalatable, reduced much of the uncertainty (itself wielded by Trump as a powerful economic weapon) for better – and for worse.

For better, in the sense that businesses are able to make plans, investment and hiring decisions that had been paused may now be resumed.

Most exporters know what size tariffs their goods face – and can figure out how to accommodate or pass on the cost to consumers.

That growing sense of certainty underpins a more relaxed mood in financial markets, with shares in the US notably gaining.

*Trump hailed the size of the agreement of the US with the EU – but these are not the tariff-busting deals equated with tearing down trade barriers in the past [BBC]*

But it’s for the worse, in the sense that the typical tariff for selling into the US is higher than before – and more extreme than analysts predicted just six months ago.

Trump may have hailed the size of the agreement of the US with the EU – but these are not the tariff-busting deals we equated with tearing down trade barriers in previous decades.

The greatest fears, the warnings of potential disaster, have receded. But Ben May, Director of global macro forecasting at Oxford Economics, says that US tariffs had the capacity to “damage” the global economy in several ways.

“They are obviously raising prices in the US and squeezing household incomes,” he says, adding that the policies would also reduce demand around the world if the world’s largest economy ends up importing fewer goods.

Winners and losers: Germany, India and China

It’s not just about the size of tariff, but the scale of trading relationship with the US. So while India potentially faces tariffs of over 25% on its exports to the US, economists at Capital Economics reckon that, with US demand accounting for just 2% of that nation’s gross domestic product, the immediate impact on growth could be minor.

The news is not so good for Germany, though, where the 15% tariffs could knock more than half a percentage point off growth this year, compared to what was expected earlier in the year.

That’s due to the size of its automotive sector – unhelpful for an economy that may be teetering on the brink of recession.

*India became the top source of smartphones sold in the US recently, after fears of what may lie in store for China [BBC]*

Meanwhile, India became the top source of smartphones sold in the US in the last few months, after fears of what may lie in store for China prompted Apple to shift production.

On the other hand, India will be mindful that the likes of Vietnam and the Philippines – which face lower tariffs when selling to the US – may become relatively more attractive suppliers in other industries.

Across the board, however, there’s relief that the blow, at least, is likely to be less extensive than might have been. But what has been decided already points to longer-term ramifications for global trading patterns and alliances elsewhere.

And the element of jeopardy introduced into a long-established major relationship with the US, lent added momentum to the UK’s pursuit of closer ties with the EU – and getting a trade deal with India over the line.

For many countries, this has served as a wake up call – a need to remain alive to fresh alliances.

A very real political threat for Trump?

As details are nailed down, the implications for the US economy become clearer too.

Growth in the late spring there actually benefitted from a flurry of export sales, as businesses rushed to beat any higher tariffs imposed on American goods.

Economists expect that growth to lose momentum over the rest of the year.

Tariffs that have increased from an average of 2% at the beginning of the year to around 17% now have had a notable impact on US government revenue – one of the stated goals of Trump’s trade policy. Import duties have brought in more than $100bn so far this year – about 5% of US federal revenue, compared to around 2% in past years.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said he expected tariff revenue this year to total about $300bn. By comparison, federal income taxes bring in around $2.5tn a year.

American shoppers remain in the front line, and have yet to see higher prices passed on in full. But as consumer goods giants such as Unilever and Adidas start to put numbers on the cost increases involved, some sticker shock, price rises, loom – potentially enough to delay Trump’s desired rate cut – and possibly a dent to consumer spending.

*If the current tariffs trigger a foundational realignment, the results may not ultimately break in favour of the US [BBC]*

Forecasts are always uncertain, of course, but this represents a very real political threat for a president who promised to lower consumer prices, not take actions that would raise them.

Trump and other White House officials have floated the idea of providing rebate checks to lower-income Americans – the kinds of blue-collar voters who have fuelled the president’s political success – that would offset some of the pocketbook pain.

Such an effort could be unwieldy, and it would require congressional approval.

It’s also a tacit acknowledgment that simply boasting of new federal revenue to offset current spending and tax cuts, and holding out the prospect of future domestic job and wealth creation is politically perilous for a Republican party that will have to face voters in next year’s midterm state and congressional midterm elections.

The deals yet to be hammered out

Complicating all this is the fact that there are many countries where a deal is yet to be hammered out – most notably Canada and Taiwan.

The US administration has yet to pronounce its decisions for the pharmaceuticals and steel industry. The colossal issue of China, subject to a different deadline, remains unresolved.

Trump agreed to a negotiating extension with Mexico, another major US trading partner, on Thursday morning.

Many of the deals that have been struck have been verbal, as yet unsigned. Moreover it is uncertain if and how the strings attached to Trump’s agreements – more money to be spent purchasing American energy or invested in America – will actually be delivered on.

In some cases, foreign leaders have denied the existence of provisions touted by the president.

*Trump’s overarching aim – to return production and jobs to America – may meet with very limited success [BBC]*

When it comes to assessing tariff agreements between the White House and various countries, says Mr May, the “devil is in the detail” – and the details are light.

It’s clear, however, that the world has shifted back from the brink of a ruinous trade war. Now, as nations grapple with a new set of trade barriers, Trump aims to call the shots.

But history tells us that his overarching aim – to return production and jobs to America – may meet with very limited success. And America’s long-time trading partners, like Canada and the EU, could start looking to form economic and political connections that bypass what they no longer view as a reliable economic ally.

Trump may be benefitting from the leverage afforded by America’s unique position at the centre of a global trading order that it spent more than half a century establishing. If the current tariffs trigger a foundational realignment, however, the results may not ultimately break in favour of the US.

Those questions will be answered over years, not weeks or months. In the meantime, Trump’s own voters may still have to pick up the tab – through higher prices, less choice and slower growth.

***[BBC]***

All News Advertisement

Latest News

LPL 2026 Opening Game between Jaffna and Galle

Published

7 hours ago

2026/05/15

Priyan

The inaugural game of the Lanka Premier League 2026 will be played between the Jaffna and Galle teams, who emerged as the Champions and Runners-up respectively in the 2024 season.

The opening game is scheduled to be played on 17th July at the SSC Grounds, commencing at 7.30 p.m.

Prior to the start of the tournament opener, a spectacular opening ceremony will be held at the SSC Grounds in Colombo.

The Lanka Premier League 2026 will be played from 17th July to 8th August across four venues: SSC, Colombo; RDICS, Dambulla; PICS, Pallekele; and RPICS, Colombo.

The tournament is conducted by Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC), the owner of the LPL, in partnership with The IPG Group, the event rights holder.

Latest News

Trump and Xi conclude ‘very successful’ talks but no deals announced

Published

8 hours ago

2026/05/15

Priyan

The visit was defined more by warm rhetoric and symbolism than concrete announcements [BBC]

US President Donald Trump left Beijing after a two-day summit saying he had struck “fantastic trade deals, great for both countries”, but few details have emerged on what the two superpowers agreed.

Trump arrived for a high-stakes summit with Chinese leader Xi Jinping on Wednesday, accompanied by several CEOs: a high profile business delegation spanning agriculture, aviation, electric vehicles and artificial intelligence (AI) chips.

Trade was near the top of the agenda despite recent tensions over the Iran war, and businesses hoped for key deals as well as an extension of the tariff truce that is due to expire in November.

The visit was defined by warm rhetoric and symbolism. Trump was wooed with a packed itinerary that included an honour guard, a state banquet, and an invitation to the exclusive compound where China’s Communist Party leaders live and work.

The US President seemed impressed and invited Xi to the White House in September. He said talks had been “very successful”, while Xi called it a “historic and landmark” visit.

But neither side has announced trade breakthroughs or significant business deals.

President Trump, however, spoke to reporters aboard Air Force One and said that China has agreed to buy 200 Boeing jets, with a potential commitment to buy an additional 750 planes. The BBC has contacted Boeing for comment.

Trump also said American farmers will be happy with his trade deals because China would be buying “billions of dollars” of soybeans.

But there has been no confirmation of any deals or purchases from the Chinese.

If the Boeing orders are finalised, this would be the planemaker’s first major Chinese deal in nearly a decade. It was largely shut out of the world’s second-largest aviation market because of trade tensions between Beijing and Washington.

Asked about Trump’s earlier comments to Fox News in which he said deals had been made, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun only said that the “essence of China-US economic and trade relations is mutual benefit and win-win co-operation”.

He added that both sides should work to implement the “important consensus” reached by the two leaders and bring greater stability to bilateral trade ties and the global economy.

There are still questions over the trade truce agreed in October, when Washington suspended steep tariff increases on Chinese goods while Beijing eased back from restricting rare earth exports critical for manufacturing.

Suprisingly Trump told reporters on Air Force One that he and Xi did not discuss tariffs at all.

The White House however said both leaders agreed to establish a “Board of Trade” to manage the relationship without having to reopen tariff negotiations.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who had been leading trade talks for Washington, said in a pre-recorded interview with CNBC that he expected progress on a mechanism to support future investment.

US officials have cautioned, however, that there is a lot of work to be done before these announcements can go into effect.

One of the most closely watched moments came as Air Force One touched down in Beijing on Wednesday night.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk stepped off the plane ahead of senior officials including Pete Hegseth, Marco Rubio and Greer – a sign of the crucial economic agenda that lay ahead.

And Musk and US chipmaker Nvidia’s boss Jensen Huang stayed close to Trump during the welcome ceremony, and were prominent during the banquet.

Huang’s appearance was notable because he was not meant to be part of the delegation originally – but when he joined the trip, it fuelled speculation that AI and access to chips was a bigger part of the talks than previously thought.

With electric vehicles, AI and semiconductors becoming key battlegrounds in the US-China rivalry, both Tesla and Nvidia are very exposed to China.

Getty Images Nvidia founder and CEO Jensen Huang waves after a welcome ceremony for US President Donald Trump at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on May 14, 2026. — *Nvidia founder and CEO Jensen Huang at the Great Hall of the People [BBC]*

Tesla relies heavily on its Shanghai gigafactory and Chinese consumers, while Nvidia wants to be able to start selling advanced chips to China again, which is currently prohibited by US export controls.

US export controls are aimed at limiting China’s access to frontier AI capabilities, but Greer said they were not a major talking point at the summit.

Beijing, however, continues to push for greater access to advanced tech, while criticising what it sees as efforts to constrain its industrial development.

AI was expected to be a big part of conversations but there was no mention of it in readouts from the summit.

Last year’s tit-for-tat tariff war also hit American farmers, who want to export more soybeans, beef and poultry to China.

According to US trade representative Jamieson Greer, deals on Chinese purchases of US agricultural products have been firmed up. But China’s foreign ministry did not confirm any such new deals, saying only that both sides had agreed to maintain stable trade ties and expand co-operation based on “equality, mutual respect and mutual benefit”.

The White House said the talks also touched on expanding Chinese market access for US companies and increasing Chinese investment in US industries.

While China is a major market for US companies, it is also a difficult operating environment because of regulation, red tape and geopolitical uncertainty.

But Beijing seemed to strike a positive note on this issue. Xi told US business leaders that China’s “doors will open wider” and that American firms would have “broader prospects” in the Chinese market, according to news site Xinhua.

He also called for expanded co-operation in trade, agriculture, healthcare, tourism and law enforcement, describing bilateral ties as “mutually beneficial” and delivering “win-win results”.

Taiwan, the US ally and self-governed island that Beijing claims, has largely been treated as one of several friction points between the US and China during trade talks over the past year.

But this time Beijing linked Taiwan to the broader economic relationship with the United States.

According to Beijing’s readout, Xi said the two sides had agreed to a “new positioning” for relations based on “constructive strategic stability”, but issued the now-familiar warning that Taiwan remained the most sensitive issue.

“The Taiwan question is the most important issue in China-US relations,” Xi warned during the talks, according to Chinese state media.

“If mishandled, the two nations could collide or even come into conflict,” he said.

Taipei would be watching closely but it’s hard to say yet if and how this will affect US collaboration with semiconductor companies in Taiwan, or its long-standing close relationship with the island.

The war against Iran and the resulting blockade of the Hormuz Strait was a key part of the agenda, and Trump entered the talks hoping for Chinese co-operation on the Iran conflict and the oil market.

Trump has said that China could use its influence to encourage Iran to stabilise flows through the Strait of Hormuz, a key global energy artery.

“[Xi would] like to see the Hormuz Strait open, and said ‘if I can be of any help whatsoever, I would like to help,'” Trump told Fox News.

The Chinese foreign ministry was more vague, and released a statement on Friday calling for “a comprehensive and lasting ceasefire”.

“Shipping lanes should be reopened as soon as possible in response to the calls of the international community,” it added.

Chinese readouts indicated that while the Middle East was discussed, details were limited.

Getty Images Members of the U.S. delegation and CEOs from various industries stand prior to a welcome ceremony for U.S. President Donald Trump outside the Great Hall of the People on May 14, 2026 in Beijing, China.

The conflict is a challenge for the Chinese economy too. Oil price volatility and repeated disruptions to supply routes have increased China’s import costs and pushed up prices across the world.

Trump has already invited Xi to the White House in September for a second summit.

Discussions between the two sides are expected to continue ahead of that summit, with the hope that the world’s two biggest economies can deliver a major breakthrough on trade that proved elusive this time around.

[BBC]

Latest News

India hikes fuel prices as Iran crisis bites

Published

8 hours ago

2026/05/15

Priyan

India has been heavily impacted by rising energy prices stemming from the US-Israel war on Iran [Aljazeera]

India has raised fuel prices by about 3 percent as the energy crisis driven by the Iran war and closure of the Strait of Hormuz starts to bite on the economy.

The government in New Delhi announced the 3 rupees ($0.03) per litre price hike on Friday, as it moved to offset losses triggered by the shortage of supply. Gasoline prices rose to 97.77 rupees ($1.02) a litre, while diesel climbed to 90.67 rupees ($0.94).

India is the world’s third-largest oil importer, with 90 percent of the oil it consumes coming from overseas, and about half of its usual crude supplies transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

This has seen the country heavily impacted by rising energy prices and supply disruptions from the US-Israel war on Iran.

However, New Delhi had been avoiding hiking retail fuel prices, making it one of the last major economies to pass higher crude prices on to consumers.

The increases come days after Prime Minister Narendra Modi urged Indians to adopt voluntary austerity measures, calling on them to work from home whenever possible, limit travelling abroad, and reduce purchases of gold.

Modi described saving fuel as an act of “patriotism” and encouraged greater use of public transport, carpooling, and lower fertiliser consumption.

Opposition leaders noted that Modi’s appeal came after the conclusion of a key round of state elections and that fuel prices were kept unchanged during the campaign. The polls ended this month, with Modi’s BJP winning two of four states and expanding its influence.

[Aljazeera]