On October 14, 2025, US federal prosecutors charged Ashley Tellis, a prominent 64-year-old scholar and long-time government advisor specializing in India policy, with retaining classified information and allegedly meeting with Chinese officials. The case marks a dramatic turn for one of Washington’s most influential voices on South Asian affairs and raises profound questions about espionage, geopolitical competition, and the stability of the US-India strategic partnership at a critical juncture in global politics.
Tellis faces up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine if convicted. His arrest on October 11—the same day he was allegedly due to fly to Rome—signals the seriousness with which US authorities are treating the allegations. The case also underscores growing tensions between the Trump administration and India, as well as the intensifying great power competition between the United States and China in the Indo-Pacific region.
Who is Ashley Tellis?
Ashley Tellis is no minor figure in American foreign policy circles. For more than two decades, he has occupied influential positions at the intersection of government service and elite think-tank research. As a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, one of the world’s most prestigious policy research institutions, Tellis has shaped American thinking on India and broader Asian strategic issues.
His most significant contribution to US-India relations came during the George W. Bush administration, when he played a crucial role in negotiating the US-India civil nuclear deal. That agreement was heralded as a landmark achievement in building ties between the world’s two largest democracies, representing a strategic pivot toward closer US-India cooperation. For this work, Tellis earned considerable respect in both Washington and New Delhi.
More recently, Tellis has served as an unpaid advisor to the State Department, continuing to influence American policy toward India from within government circles even while maintaining his independent position at Carnegie.
The Charges and the Evidence
According to a criminal affidavit unsealed by federal prosecutors, Tellis allegedly retained more than 1,000 pages of classified documents—some marked top-secret, others secret—in his home. This retention is, in itself, a serious violation of federal law governing the handling of classified material. For someone with Tellis’s security clearance and experience, such negligence represents either a grave lapse in judgment or something more deliberate.
The allegations take a more sinister turn when considering the alleged meetings with Chinese officials. The affidavit describes multiple encounters between Tellis and Chinese government representatives at a restaurant in Fairfax, Virginia, a suburb of Washington DC that sits near numerous federal facilities and intelligence installations. These were not casual chance meetings; they were apparently deliberate, repeated encounters.
Most damning are the specific details surrounding these meetings. In one instance, Tellis allegedly entered the restaurant carrying a manila envelope but did not appear to leave with it—a detail that investigators clearly believe suggests a document handoff. On two other occasions, Chinese officials presented Tellis with gift bags, a practice that in intelligence tradecraft often signals compensation or favor exchange.
Perhaps most incriminating is an incident on the evening of September 25, when Tellis entered the State Department building where he held his advisor position and appeared to print documents related to US Air Force techniques from classified files. The timing—late in the evening, when fewer staff members are present—and the specific targeting of sensitive Air Force information suggest this was not routine work.
A Contradiction in Tellis’s Career
What makes this case particularly puzzling is Tellis’s apparent ideological contradiction. While he helped forge what many saw as a cornerstone of the post-Cold War US-India strategic alignment, in recent years Tellis has become increasingly critical of American enthusiasm for India as a strategic partner.
In a notable essay published in Foreign Affairs, one of the premier journals of American foreign policy analysis, Tellis argued that India frequently pursues policies at odds with American interests. He specifically pointed to India’s deepening relationship with Russia and its ties to Iran—both sensitive issues for the United States. More provocatively, Tellis expressed skepticism that India would ever achieve the strategic heft to match China’s power and influence in Asia.
This critique was not merely academic theorizing. By questioning the premise of the US-India strategic partnership, Tellis was essentially arguing that one of the Biden and now Trump administrations’ central strategic assumptions—that India was a reliable counterweight to Chinese power in Asia—was fundamentally flawed.
The Trump Administration Context
The timing of these charges is also significant in light of current US-India tensions. In August 2025, President Trump imposed substantial tariffs on India, specifically citing the country’s continued purchases of oil from Russia. This action represented a direct challenge to Indian sovereignty and New Delhi’s stated policy of maintaining strategic autonomy in its foreign relations.
The prosecution of Tellis, conducted by Lindsey Halligan, the US attorney for Virginia’s eastern district, must be viewed against this backdrop. Halligan has become known for pursuing charges against critics of Trump, which raises questions about whether this case represents straightforward law enforcement or whether it reflects broader political tensions between the Trump administration and India.
The apparent contradiction—arresting a figure known for criticizing India while simultaneously pressuring India through tariffs—suggests a more complex dynamic. It may indicate that both the US legal system and the administration are responding to what they perceive as genuine threats to American security, or it may suggest that political considerations are influencing prosecutorial decisions.
China’s Role: Strategic Opportunity or Opportunism?
The alleged Chinese involvement in this case presents a classic picture of intelligence service tradecraft. If the allegations are accurate, Chinese officials were systematically cultivating Tellis over time, building a relationship through multiple meetings at a neutral location. The gift-giving and the apparent document transfer suggest a sophisticated operation designed to extract sensitive information about US military capabilities and strategic thinking toward Asia.
For China, acquiring information about US Air Force techniques and the thinking of influential US policymakers regarding India-China competition would be highly valuable. Understanding American strategic assumptions about India’s role as a counterweight to China could inform Beijing’s own strategies for managing the India problem and potentially identifying opportunities to drive wedges between Washington and New Delhi.
The timing and method suggest this was not a hasty or amateur operation but rather the kind of long-term intelligence cultivation that career intelligence officers undertake.
Implications for US-India Relations
If Tellis is convicted on espionage-related charges, the political fallout for US-India relations could be substantial. Despite his recent public criticism of the US-India strategic partnership, Tellis remains closely associated with the Bush-era nuclear deal—the foundational document of modern US-India cooperation.
For India, the case presents a dilemma. New Delhi has invested considerable political and strategic capital in aligning with the United States as a counterweight to China. The arrest of a prominent architect of US-India cooperation, particularly on espionage charges involving China, will inevitably raise questions in Indian policy circles about the reliability of American partnerships and the wisdom of closer strategic alignment.
Conversely, the Indian government might view this as validation of its long-held concerns about Chinese espionage and intelligence operations, potentially strengthening New Delhi’s resolve to cooperate more closely with the United States on security matters. However, Trump’s tariff actions have already created friction, and this case will complicate efforts to rebuild trust.
Regional Security Implications for Singapore
Singapore’s position in this drama, while not directly mentioned in the charges, is deeply relevant to understanding the case’s significance and implications.
Strategic Positioning in US-China Competition
Singapore occupies a precarious position as a hub in the Indo-Pacific strategic competition between the United States and China. As one of Asia’s most developed economies and a crucial node in global supply chains, Singapore maintains careful balance in its relationships with both great powers. The Tellis case demonstrates how the US-China rivalry extends into the realm of intellectual property, strategic information, and influence over key thinkers and policymakers.
For Singapore, the case reinforces the reality that great power competition is not merely military or economic—it extends into the realm of intelligence operations and information warfare. Singapore’s own intelligence and security services must remain vigilant about similar operations that might target sensitive information about Singapore’s defense relationships or economic strategies.
implications for the US-India-Japan-Australia Quad
Singapore is deeply invested in the stability and effectiveness of the Quad—the informal strategic grouping of the United States, India, Japan, and Australia. The Tellis case, by raising questions about the solidity of US-India cooperation, creates uncertainty about the Quad’s trajectory. If US-India relations deteriorate, the Quad’s effectiveness as a counterweight to Chinese expansionism would be compromised.
For Singapore, a weakened Quad is strategically problematic. Singapore relies on US commitment to regional stability and the Quad framework to maintain a balance that prevents any single power from dominating Southeast Asia. The country has been a vocal supporter of Quad activities and has allowed Quad members to conduct operations from Singapore.
Intelligence and Espionage Concerns
The Tellis case underscores a reality that Singapore’s government is acutely aware of: all nations, great and small, are targets of foreign intelligence operations. China’s alleged cultivation of Tellis—a mid-level but influential figure—suggests that Beijing casts a wide net in its intelligence gathering operations.
Singapore, as a regional financial and strategic hub with access to sensitive information about global markets, supply chains, and security arrangements, is undoubtedly a priority target for Chinese intelligence services. The case serves as a reminder of the ongoing threat landscape and reinforces the importance of robust counterintelligence operations.
Implications for Singapore’s Technology and Financial Hub Status
Singapore’s position as a global financial center and increasingly important technology hub means that the country attracts sophisticated intelligence operations. The Tellis case, involving alleged attempts to acquire sensitive defense information, demonstrates that espionage operations extend beyond traditional military secrets to include technological capabilities and strategic assessments.
For Singapore’s business and technology communities, the case highlights the importance of cybersecurity, information security, and personnel vetting. Companies operating in Singapore, particularly those with ties to defense, telecommunications, or critical infrastructure, must maintain vigilance against attempts to recruit employees or extract sensitive information.
Regional Trust and Alliances
Singapore’s security posture depends on maintaining strong, trusting relationships with key alliance partners, particularly the United States. The Tellis case, by raising questions about the reliability of US-India cooperation, creates uncertainty about the broader network of security partnerships in the region.
However, the case also demonstrates that the United States takes espionage seriously and is willing to prosecute even high-profile figures when national security is at stake. This could be reassuring to Singapore and other close US allies, suggesting that America will vigorously protect sensitive information and pursue those who compromise it.
Economic and Trade Implications
Singapore’s economy is deeply integrated with both the United States and regional powers, including India. The rising tensions between Washington and New Delhi—manifest in Trump’s tariffs and now this espionage case—create uncertainty for Singapore’s business environment.
If US-India tensions escalate, regional trade patterns and supply chains could be disrupted. Singapore, as a crucial transshipment hub and financial center for Asian trade, would likely feel these effects. Companies operating in Singapore would need to navigate more complex geopolitical circumstances and potentially adjust their supply chain strategies.
The Broader Question of Strategic Autonomy
Singapore’s long-standing policy of maintaining strategic autonomy while cooperating with multiple partners becomes more complex in an environment of intense great power competition. The Tellis case illustrates how individuals, institutions, and information can become entangled in great power struggles. For Singapore, this reinforces the importance of careful, strategic engagement with all parties while maintaining clear boundaries and protecting sensitive national interests.
The Broader Context: Trust and Espionage in Great Power Competition
The Tellis case reflects a broader pattern of intensifying intelligence operations in the US-China rivalry. In recent years, there have been multiple cases of individuals allegedly compromised by Chinese intelligence services, from scientists and researchers to corporate employees and government officials. What distinguishes the Tellis case is his prominence and influence.
If someone of Tellis’s stature and access can be compromised, it raises troubling questions about the vulnerability of the American national security establishment to foreign intelligence operations. It also suggests that Chinese intelligence services have become increasingly sophisticated in their targeting of high-value individuals with significant influence over policy.
Legal and Political Questions
Several questions remain unanswered or contested. First, what is the full extent of the information that Tellis allegedly retained or transmitted? The affidavit mentions Air Force techniques, but the 1,000 pages likely contained information on multiple topics. The scope of the alleged breach will be crucial to assessing the damage to national security.
Second, what was Tellis’s motivation? Did he deliberately seek to provide information to Chinese intelligence services, or was he cultivated over time without fully understanding what was happening? Was he motivated by ideology, financial incentives, or a belief that he was serving a greater good? Understanding motivation is essential to comprehending the threat landscape.
Third, to what extent did his recent public criticisms of the US-India strategic partnership influence or reflect possible contact with Chinese intelligence? Were his Foreign Affairs essay and other critiques his own independent analysis, or had he been influenced by interactions with Chinese officials?
Fourth, what is the relationship between this prosecution and Trump administration policies? Is this a straightforward espionage case, or are political considerations influencing the timing and vigor of the prosecution?
The Tellis Case as a Symptom of Declining American Hegemony
The Ashley Tellis case represents far more than a single espionage incident. It is a crystalline manifestation of the broader erosion of American hegemony and the corresponding rise of competing powers, particularly China, in the post-Cold War international order. The case illuminates several critical dimensions of this historical transition.
The Fragmentation of the American Alliance System
For nearly eight decades, the defining characteristic of the international system has been American primacy—what scholars term “Pax Americana.” This system was built on American military superiority, economic dominance, technological leadership, and the construction of a network of alliances and institutions that reflected and reinforced American interests and values.
A cornerstone of this system was the assumption that American allies would remain reliably aligned with Washington and that American-led institutions and frameworks would be the primary vehicles for addressing regional and global challenges. The US-India strategic partnership, formalized through the civil nuclear deal that Tellis helped negotiate, represented the apogee of American confidence in its ability to shape global alignments. India, a rising power with a population of 1.4 billion and significant regional influence, would be aligned with the United States against China.
The Tellis case exposes deep cracks in this assumption. Here we have a prominent American policy intellectual, someone deeply embedded in the American foreign policy establishment, who has become profoundly skeptical of the very strategic partnerships that define contemporary American grand strategy. More provocatively, Tellis appears to have been cultivated by China—the primary adversary the US-India partnership was designed to contain.
This is not merely a case of individual disloyalty. It reflects a fundamental shift in the global balance of power. China, having risen to become an economic superpower and a serious military contender, now possesses the resources and confidence to undertake sophisticated intelligence operations against American interests. More importantly, China has become attractive enough as an alternative pole that individuals within the American establishment can plausibly imagine that alignment with Beijing might serve their interests or the interests of the causes they care about.
The Decline of American Ideological Hegemony
One dimension of Pax Americana that has often been overlooked is ideological hegemony. Not only did the United States dominate militarily and economically, but American values—liberal democracy, free markets, individual rights—appeared to be the inevitable trajectory of historical development. The “end of history,” as Francis Fukuyama famously proclaimed, seemed to have arrived with American liberal democracy as the final form of human political organization.
The Tellis case suggests this ideological consensus has fractured. Tellis’s criticism of the US-India strategic partnership is not merely a policy disagreement among American experts. His skepticism about India’s commitment to American values and his doubts about India’s ability to serve as a counterweight to China reflect a broader erosion of American confidence in the universality and attractiveness of its model.
More significantly, Tellis’s apparent cultivation by Chinese intelligence services suggests that Beijing has successfully positioned itself as an attractive alternative not just to American military domination but potentially to American ideological and political influence. China’s model—authoritarian capitalism with emphasis on rapid development, technological innovation, and national strength—holds appeal to individuals and nations that question the sustainability or desirability of American-style liberal democracy.
The Limits of American Structural Power
The Tellis case also reveals the limits of American structural power—the ability to shape the international environment through institutions, rules, and norms. For decades, American dominance extended not just to hard power but to the ability to define the terms of international engagement, to set the rules of the game, and to create institutions that reflected American preferences.
The US-India civil nuclear deal represented an exercise of this structural power. It was an American initiative, negotiated according to American preferences, and fundamentally reshaped India’s international positioning. India accepted restrictions on its nuclear program and implicit alignment with American strategy in exchange for access to nuclear technology and American support.
Yet the Tellis case suggests that the rules of the game are shifting. China is operating with increasing confidence in the very regions and spheres where American structural power was once unquestioned. Chinese intelligence services are conducting sophisticated operations on American soil, apparently without fear of consequences. Chinese officials are meeting with American government advisors in restaurants outside Washington, exchanging gifts and documents with apparent impunity.
This is not to say China can now dictate international rules. Rather, it indicates that American structural power is no longer hegemonic. The international order is becoming multipolar, with multiple powers operating according to different logics, different institutions, and different rule sets. The Tellis case exemplifies this transition: a prominent American policy figure is caught between competing great powers, suggesting that even the American foreign policy establishment is no longer a unified pole but rather an arena where different international forces compete for influence.
The Erosion of American Institutional Competence
A critical component of American hegemony has been the perceived competence and reliability of American institutions—the military, intelligence agencies, State Department, and other organs of government that execute American strategy. The assumption was that these institutions, while imperfect, were fundamentally effective at defending American interests and executing American strategy.
The Tellis case raises troubling questions about this institutional competence. How did Chinese intelligence services successfully cultivate a prominent American policy figure with security clearance and access to sensitive information? How did he manage to retain over 1,000 pages of classified documents in his home without detection? How did late-night printing sessions at the State Department go unnoticed?
These are not merely failures of individuals but potential indicators of systemic vulnerabilities. If someone of Tellis’s prominence and access could be compromised, what does that say about the effectiveness of American counterintelligence operations? What does it say about the vetting processes for individuals with access to sensitive information?
For allies and adversaries alike, these questions are significant. Allies wonder whether they can trust American intelligence about threats and opportunities. Adversaries recognize that American institutions may be more vulnerable to penetration and exploitation than commonly assumed. This erosion of confidence in institutional competence is a form of hegemonic decline that may ultimately be as consequential as military or economic decline.
The Rise of Competing Intelligence Capabilities
The Tellis case demonstrates that China has developed sophisticated intelligence capabilities that rival or exceed those of traditional Western powers in certain respects. The operation described in the affidavit—long-term cultivation, multiple meetings at neutral locations, careful assessment of motivation and vulnerability, apparent document transfers, gift-giving as compensation—reflects tradecraft honed through decades of practice and refined through contemporary operational experience.
More significantly, China appears to be conducting these operations with increasing confidence and scope. The Tellis case is not an isolated incident but rather one visible instance of what are likely hundreds or thousands of similar operations targeting American government, military, academic, and commercial institutions.
This represents a dramatic inversion of the Cold War pattern. During the Cold War, American intelligence agencies were generally acknowledged as superior in technical sophistication and global reach compared to Soviet counterparts. Soviet espionage was often clumsy and easily detected. American intelligence, by contrast, was viewed as highly sophisticated and effective.
Now, Chinese intelligence services appear to operate with comparable or superior sophistication in certain domains. They have access to vast resources, advanced technology for surveillance and communication, and extensive networks of potential assets cultivated through economic relationships, cultural connections, and ideological appeal. The rise of Chinese intelligence capability is symptomatic of the broader rise of China as a great power.
The Inadequacy of the US-India Partnership as an Anti-China Strategy
The Tellis case also highlights a fundamental problem with the American strategy of using India as a counterweight to China: India is not reliably aligned with the United States and does not share America’s strategic imperatives regarding China.
India, as Tellis himself has argued, pursues an independent foreign policy. New Delhi maintains significant economic and strategic relationships with Russia, a close alignment with Iran (despite American objections), and a pragmatic, non-ideological approach to China. India wants access to American technology and security cooperation, but India is not willing to subordinate its strategic autonomy to American preferences.
From the American perspective during the era of unipolar dominance, this was perhaps tolerable. India was moving in the general direction of alignment with American interests, and that was sufficient. But in an era of declining American hegemony and rising Chinese power, the ambiguity of India’s alignment becomes strategically problematic.
The Tellis case—with its suggestion that American policy figures are becoming skeptical of India’s reliability and its implication that China is actively cultivating American officials—reflects this strategic uncertainty. If the cornerstone of American Asia strategy (India as a counterweight to China) is itself uncertain and contested, then the entire strategic edifice becomes fragile.
The Trump Administration as a Symptom of Hegemonic Decline
The prosecution of Tellis and the broader Trump administration policies toward India must also be understood as symptoms of American hegemonic decline. Trump’s imposition of tariffs on India, apparently pursued with the same vigor as tariffs on China and other traditional rivals, reflects a different vision of American power than the one that characterized the previous era.
The old American hegemony relied on integrating allies into a rules-based international system and using economic and military leverage within that system to maintain influence. Trump’s approach is more transactional, more nationalist, and less concerned with maintaining the architecture of American hegemony. Instead, Trump pursues immediate, zero-sum advantages for American interests as narrowly defined.
This represents both a response to and an acceleration of hegemonic decline. It is a response because it reflects the reality that American power is no longer sufficient to maintain the elaborate system of alliances and institutions that characterized Pax Americana. It is an acceleration because the abandonment of this system—the embrace of nationalist, zero-sum policies—further erodes American soft power and the willingness of allies to accept American leadership.
The prosecution of Tellis, conducted by an attorney known for pursuing Trump’s political critics, suggests that even the American justice system has become entangled in the broader political contestation surrounding the management of American decline. This is fundamentally different from the operation of independent institutions characteristic of American strength during the era of unipolar dominance.
Regional Powers Navigating the Transition
For regional powers like Singapore, India, Japan, Australia, and Vietnam, the Tellis case exemplifies the fundamental challenge of the current era: how to navigate a transition from a unipolar American-dominated system to a multipolar system with competing great powers.
During the era of Pax Americana, the calculus was relatively straightforward: alignment with the United States provided security and access to markets and technology. The costs of alignment were modest, and the benefits were clear. Today, the calculus is far more complex. American power is declining but still formidable. Chinese power is rising but remains uncertain in some dimensions. Both powers are competing for influence, and regional powers must manage relationships with both.
The Tellis case demonstrates that even prominent policy figures—individuals with deep expertise and long experience—struggle to navigate these ambiguities. Tellis helped create the architecture of US-India strategic partnership but has become increasingly skeptical of it. This intellectual uncertainty among the architects of American strategy suggests that the strategic consensus that long characterized American foreign policy is dissolving.
For Singapore and other regional powers, this dissolution of consensus is both an opportunity and a threat. It is an opportunity because it creates space for strategic autonomy and the ability to pursue independent policies. But it is a threat because it increases uncertainty and reduces the reliability of the security guarantees and economic arrangements that have characterized the post-Cold War era.
China as the Beneficiary of American Decline
The Tellis case ultimately benefits China. Whether Tellis actually transmitted sensitive information or whether the operation was designed primarily for intelligence gathering and relationship building, the case demonstrates that China is capable of conducting sophisticated operations against American targets and American allies. More importantly, it demonstrates that China is doing so with sufficient success that prominent American figures can be compromised.
From China’s perspective, the value of the operation may exceed the value of any specific information obtained. By successfully cultivating an American policy figure critical of the US-India partnership, Chinese intelligence potentially advances Chinese strategic interests in several ways. First, it provides insight into American strategic thinking about India and China. Second, it potentially influences that thinking by rewarding skeptics of close US-India alignment. Third, it demonstrates to Chinese leadership that America’s institutions are vulnerable to penetration, thus encouraging further operations.
More broadly, China has positioned itself as the rising power in a world where American hegemony is in decline. China’s economic growth, technological advancement, military modernization, and expanding global influence create an attractive alternative to the American-led order for nations and individuals uncomfortable with American dominance.
The Tellis case, by revealing vulnerabilities in American institutions and ambiguities in American strategy, further accelerates the narrative of American decline and Chinese rise. It contributes to a broader erosion of confidence in American institutional competence and strategic clarity.
Conclusion: The Tellis Case as Historical Marker
The Ashley Tellis case represents a watershed moment not just for US-India relations but for the international system itself. It marks the visible intersection of American hegemonic decline and the rise of competing powers, particularly China.
The case demonstrates multiple dimensions of this transition: the fragmentation of the American alliance system, the erosion of American ideological hegemony, the limits of American structural power, the rise of competing intelligence capabilities, and the fundamental strategic uncertainties that characterize the contemporary era.
For Singapore and other regional powers, the implications are profound. The era of relatively stable, unipolar American dominance is ending. In its place, a more complex, multipolar system is emerging in which multiple powers compete for influence and in which regional states must exercise sophisticated diplomacy to maintain security and prosperity.
The lesson of the Tellis case is not simply that counterintelligence and information security are crucial in an era of great power competition—though they are. The deeper lesson is that the entire architecture of international relations is undergoing fundamental transformation. In such an era, the protection of sensitive information, the vetting of personnel, and the maintenance of robust counterintelligence operations are indeed essential. But equally essential is the capacity to navigate between competing great powers, to maintain strategic autonomy, and to adapt to a fundamentally different international environment.
The age of Pax Americana is ending. The age of multipolarity, with all its uncertainties and dangers, is beginning. The Tellis case is not a cause of this transition but rather a symptom and marker of a historical epoch that is passing into history.