India's Mittal Says His Satellite Venture Is Ahead of Musk's Starlink

Newsmakers and market movers, this is "The Pulse with Francine Lacqua." Good morning and welcome to "The Pulse." I am Francine Lacqua in New Delhi for Bloomberg's New Economy Forum.

The shift in global trade order has been a central theme at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum in New Delhi, and India's top diplomat says countries must adapt to a changing relationship with the U.S., as Washington redefines how it engages with the world. Canada is also looking to deepen economic ties with India and hopes to finalize a trade deal by the end of the year. It is part of a broader push to diversify trade partnerships amid the global uncertainty. Canada's foreign minister said relations between the countries had improved.

This is a complex relationship with many layers. Trade, investment, of course, and then the strategic areas, critical minerals and energy. We signed an agreement, $6.2 billion between Canada and India back in February. This is the type of work we are doing at various levels to ensure an integrated and growing relationship.

Also speaking at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum, India's foreign minister told us trade negotiations with the Trump administration are at an advanced stage.

I think a lot of what America is doing is revising its alliances, the terms of its trading relationships. So the sentiment is most strongly felt vis-à-vis Europe, to some extent, some countries in East Asia. We have many issues we are working on with the United States, but we don't have an issue of the terms of alliance because we are not an ally. We are a country that has a strong strategic partnership with the U.S., but a partnership is a partnership, it is not an alliance. So in our case, for the last 20-odd years, we had worked out what we felt were convergences, overlaps, a shared common interest with the U.S., and we had agreed that we would pursue that. I don't think that has fundamentally changed.

I think what is happening is, in many cases, I mean, let's go through the issues which you talked about. The U.S. has a fundamentally different approach to the use of tariffs. But even that is a symptom of something else. The U.S. is today determined to re-industrialize and reset the terms of access to its economy. And that is what the whole tariff debate is about, and the two are connected: access to the American economy and the re-industrialization of America. And therefore, what is happening is every, you know, every significant economy is getting into a negotiation with the United States on this issue. We are not alone in this. In our case, we are pretty far advanced in the process of negotiation.

You are doing a trade agreement, aren't you? You had an initial, but you are still waiting for the final after that?

Well, I think we are waiting for a few things. I don't, honestly, I wouldn't be comfortable spilling the beans in public.

It is a small, select audience.

Thank you. I can see that, with a small select camera there. But having said that, look, here's the issue. When countries negotiate with an economy like the United States, obviously, one part of it is what you work out between yourselves and the U.S., and one part of it is, how do you fare vis-à-vis competitive economies? That part of it is not entirely clear because not everybody has worked out a deal. So, I think people, the trade ministers, USTR there, and the trade ministers, our commerce and industry minister, they are working on that, ironing it out. My sense is that this is an issue which is heading towards a landing point.

That is India's foreign minister speaking to Tom Micklethwait. Meanwhile, Switzerland is still working to secure a binding trade deal with the U.S. amid uncertainty over Washington's tariff policies. Swiss pharmaceutical exports faced tariffs of up to 15%, although companies like Roche, Novartis have secured exceptions. In August, the two countries completed negotiations on an upgraded trade agreement that would limit tariffs on almost all Swiss exports to China. I am joined by Switzerland's State Secretary for Economic Affairs and the country's top trade negotiator. Thank you for joining us on Bloomberg. Busy negotiations, especially when you focus on trade. There is an understanding between Switzerland and the U.S., but it does not seem to have anything binding on trade. How comfortable do you feel telling your companies that this is the way, that it will be capped at 15%?

Since we managed to conclude this deal, or agree on a joint statement in November, which actually put us at 15%, the U.S. has respected that deal. That is actually what the Swiss government is asking for. We want to have certainty. We want to have calmer waters, because you know, when Liberation Day started, it's been up and down, which makes it very difficult for Swiss exports to price goods going into the U.S. market. That is our biggest risk. So far, the U.S. has respected the 15% all-in. We still have a mandate by the government to conclude something legally binding, so conversations are ongoing. For us, it is actually important that we now implement what we have promised to do within the joint statement. That is why in July, the Swiss government gave a unilateral declaration on progress and what the next steps are of implementation.

It's been a fraught relationship with the U.S. administration. At some point, tariffs went up to 39%. What did you learn about the best way of dealing with President Trump?

For us, we are a small country, politically speaking, so it's important we remain calm and cool-headed and try to understand what the U.S. needs for us to get across the finishing line. I think we stuck to the principle, although 39%, of course, was hefty, and we felt singled out. But I think sticking to being calm and cool-headed and seeing how we can make this relationship win-win has helped us to then get to a 15% all-in deal.

Swiss business leaders gave President Trump a gold bar and a Rolex clock when they came to the White House to negotiate a trade deal. There has now been concern by certain parties about why that was. What do you think happens next?

I think it is important to stick to the facts. They did not give it to President Trump. They accompanied the gift, and it is a gift to the American people. It is duly registered at the White House. If all things go well, it will end up in a presidential library. I think this is very important. These business leaders are very serious business leaders, so of course, they had their compliance looking up and down if this was a common practice gift and the way to go about it. And I feel very confident. It is a private sector initiative, but I feel confident that they have kept within the margins of the law.

Do you think it is common practice? We have also seen gifts of planes?

We did not gift a plane, and the Swiss government did not gift anything. It was a private sector initiative. I have been assured by these business leaders that they had their compliance look into it. I repeat, it is not a personal gift, it is a gift to the people of the U.S.

Talk to me about pharmaceuticals. This is a huge relationship. Some of your companies are exempt. How do you see that relationship going forward? Are you confident tariffs will not be put on?

There are a lot of exceptions still valid when it comes to pharmaceuticals. Our life science sector is actually taking advantage of these exceptions, which have been actually there ever since kind of April. So that has been an element of stability in the trade relationship. We have two large companies which decided to do a so-called company deal. And then if you look at our joint statement, we have also managed to secure a roof at 15% all-in for everything that is not exempt. Is this an ideal situation? No, of course, we would prefer to go back to the status quo. Part of why we've been successful in overcoming certain difficulties is we try to understand what drives the U.S., and we have a certain understanding that being, you know, self-sufficient when it comes to drug manufacturing is a key objective. Swiss companies are already very present in the U.S. market and are manufacturing in the U.S. market and will continue to do so, and have actually increased their investment because it is an important market to them. Not everything can be, although I would wish, but not everything can be manufactured in Switzerland. This is, I think, a win-win situation.

Talk to me about China. You have been trying to reinforce a lot of these trade ties with China. How problematic is it whilst you are trying to properly sign a deal with the U.S.? Do you feel like you never have to choose?

So far not, but who knows. But I mean, we, of course, have been quite forward about our modernization of the trade deal. And we have informed our friends. For us, it is a rebalancing exercise, because Switzerland abolished unilaterally industrial tariffs, so it meant China had great access to the Swiss market. Everybody has great access to the Swiss market because we actually believe that having great access to the Swiss market will protect our industrial production. Now we told the Chinese, since you have had such great access since 2024, we would like to have equal access. So that sounds very much like something maybe Ambassador Greer would also say. I think people have understood what our motivation is behind it, and the Chinese have understood and have agreed to modernize our free trade agreement.

On free trade deals, you have what is an interesting but I imagine a difficult job. We've seen Switzerland sign deals with Mercosur, Southeast Asia. Is that independent of the U.S.?

Yes and no. The EU is by far our most important trading partner. Even in just neighboring regions, France, southern Germany, northern Italy, and they are more important than exports going to China. We are in a drive to diversify our relationships, also looking at growth rates. What we are particularly keen on in India is a young population. Switzerland not only sells high-end industrial goods, but we also sell watches, food, shoes, chocolate, etc. So having a young population is an interesting growth potential for our companies. So yes, we are looking into diversifying, but we have to be quite reasonable. The EU remains the largest trading partner for Switzerland. The U.S. is number two, China number three. With the rest of the world, there is promise. And we want to make this promise available to our exporters.

State Secretary, I think you are stepping down next year?

Yes.

Is that a relief? What will you do next?

I have been very blessed in life that I have been able to reinvent myself a couple of times. I used to work at Foreign Affairs, then I got into trade, and all of a sudden, geopolitics is interesting, even for the private sector. So I am very blessed that I can reinvent myself next year, and I thought I seized the opportunity.

Thank you so much for giving us a little bit of your busy schedule, because I know there is a lot going on in trade at the moment, especially in India. State Secretary for Economic Affairs. Middle East tensions ramp up as Aramco's executive headquarters are hit in a missile attack. We will have plenty more on that next, and we will also be speaking to our chief editor, John Micklethwait. This is Bloomberg.

Welcome back. This is "The Pulse." I am Francine Lacqua at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum in New Delhi. We heard from India's top diplomats, who think that countries must adapt to a change in relationship with the U.S. as Washington redefines how it engages with the world. India's foreign minister spoke to our very own John Micklethwait. John is here with me now. It was a great interview. He was quite funny because he was kind of, it was very diplomatic and feisty at the same time. What is his country's relationship with the U.S. today?

I think it was quite interesting. I have not watched it again. As I sat there, I asked him about Carney. There is this idea that the middle powers, India does not like being described as a middle power.

Nor does Europe.

But sort of the Carney approach you take, Canada, and in Europe, and in places like India and Singapore, and it could all work quite well. He was saying that was my idea. We were there first. We were the people who thought there should be a non-aligned center. He said Carney is copying me. I am slightly exaggerating what he said, but that is effectively what he said with a smile.

We had Prime Minister Narendra Modi. It felt a bit like a rally. He talks about trade.

It wasn't quite that.

This is a country that will have elections. It is a big country trying to be a developed economy by 2047. What are the main challenges?

On the streets here, you have people, the young, very high rates of urban unemployment. Somebody told me, I had dinner, urban unemployment amongst youth is about 50%. That is a lot. You have a lot of disaffected young people. More generally, I think you have India stuck in that zone where it is sort of, it should be getting on better with the U.S., and the U.S. should try to get India on side, because there is no competition with China that you can imagine America winning in this area of the world without having India on its side. You look at what the Trump administration has done to India, and it has not exactly been a friendly policy. I asked about that.

We have seen that with many countries, right? Switzerland. Will the midterms change anything?

No, I don't think in foreign policy. If the midterms happen, if the Democrats sweep and get the Senate, which many people I think think is increasingly likely, that does not constrain Trump on foreign policy. To some extent, every president, we have watched this several times. You watch a president in his second term go in repeatedly towards foreign policy, especially if you get clobbered in Congress, it makes it even more likely. I think everyone outside America who is looking at America and thinking Trump will be curtailed abroad, I think there could be a surprise.

This is one of the most important gatherings to talk about the world economy. When you catch up with world leaders and chief executives, what do they ask you? It must be about geopolitics and inflation.

I think there is a global conversation. They are worried about inflation and interest rates and what happens, and the fact that things don't seem to be working. All these things that happen coming out of Washington, the most recent one, sort of Trump saying to Ukraine, you have to accept this deal with Russia yet again, and Zelensky saying that, all these things cause problems for chief executives. I think that is one big zone, that the way that politics is relentlessly interfering in our lives. Even what you and I talk about, politics keeps on pushing the economy. The other bit I think for people coming here is generally India. There are a lot of people who have come here to sort of look and see, look at the long-term story for India is so good. You have this demographic push behind India. You have an amazing amount of entrepreneurial people. You have these companies. But there does seem to be these restraints. There is always a reason why India's not quite getting there, and the most recent one is, I would think, people thinking what India was really good at was services, software services, things like that, and now that is going to get held up because that is the sort of thing AI interferes in. For what it's worth, the Indians pushed back quite strongly and say we are actually employing more people to do these things.

It may not actually be the big LLMs, but it is the small companies that basically adapt. We have two very big active wars, Iran and Ukraine. Is capital finding its way to where it needs to be, just at a higher cost?

I think that is a very good description of what is happening. Yes, capital is still finding its way. But you have to imagine there is enormous demand from AI, particularly for all these data centers. You have every government in the world, it seems, needing to borrow more. You see what is happening in France. There are other countries in Europe, they are also going to need to borrow, including Britain. There is a lot of kind of bond market activity out there. I think your picture about capital still finding places to invest, the cost is going to keep going up, and that is what would worry me if I was running a large manufacturer, for instance.

We need to watch out for the next six months. John Micklethwait there, Bloomberg Editor-in-Chief. Turning to the geopolitical uncertainty in the Middle East. The Qatari Minister for Commerce and Industry told us earlier that things will get back to normal.

What is happening is not structural. It is not permanent. The IMF prediction is -14% this year, but almost a positive 19% next year, so everything we lose today we will gain back, and then some, hopefully.

The Minister of Commerce and Industry speaking a little earlier on. The Saudi government says Aramco's executive headquarters were hit yesterday in a missile attack by Yemen's Houthi militants, who have ramped up strikes on the kingdom in recent days, including targeting airports around the country, which has left at least 18 people dead. Let's get more from Will Kennedy. What can you tell us about the latest attacks?

It shows that Houthi attacks are continuing and seem to be hitting a broad range of targets across the country. The Aramco HQ, headquarters of what is the world's biggest company, were hit, and that is on the eastern side of the giant Arabian Peninsula, hundreds of miles away from Yemen and a long way from the Houthi strongholds in Yemen. It shows a concerted effort on the part of the Houthis and the determination to hit a variety of important sites to the Saudi economy.

Meanwhile, Iran attacks on ships in the Strait of Hormuz are escalating. What does that mean for energy flows?

Hormuz remains extremely contentious. We have reported over the last few weeks that flows of oil have been getting through at rates which are approaching those before the conflict started, but that is being done at an enormous cost in terms of how much people are paying for tankers, huge involvement from the U.S. military, and considerable risks to the ships and crews that are going through that strait. We are seeing that Iran is trying to escalate attacks on tankers. It has not had an enormous impact on flows yet, but it could, because the number of ships available to make those transits is under pressure.

Overall, it is impossible to say how this ends. Does this really escalate? When you look at the amount of money actually being spent on defense, or trying to defend Saudi airspace, or even help the ships pass through Hormuz, why is it so difficult?

Escalation is a light word here. I think there is a lot of fear of broader escalation across the region among oil traders. Oil back at $106 a barrel on the Brent contract, which is up a considerable amount in recent weeks and months. And I think that reflects not so much the current flows, but a fear that this situation will continue to escalate. We have seen big escalation from the Houthis in recent weeks. Iran could escalate because if it feels it is not getting enough traction by attacking ships going through Hormuz, it retains the ability to attack sites where they are loading oil. A lot of the premium we see in prices reflects that concern that Iran may decide to escalate.

Thank you so much. Will Kennedy, Bloomberg's News Director for EMEA. Coming up, a big haul for equity traders at Goldman Sachs going past expectations. We speak to the bank's President of Asia-Pacific ex-Japan. Kevin is joining us next, and this is Bloomberg.

Good morning, and welcome to "The Pulse." There's been a lot of great, great speakers joining us. And ahead of the U.S. CPI data due later, the New York Fed president has told Bloomberg that he sees one more rate hike this year as appropriate, but doesn't have any reason to believe more will be necessary. He also says he sees inflation approaching the 2% target next year. Meanwhile, speaking to Bloomberg on the sidelines of the IMF annual meeting, a member of the ECB Governing Council says he believes the central bank will likely need to hike again.