Published: 4th August 2025 | The English Chronicle Online
Donald Trump has dramatically escalated his rhetoric on the Russia-Ukraine war, vowing to impose a 100 per cent tariff on exports to the United States from any country that continues to purchase Russian oil in defiance of Western-led sanctions. The threat, aimed largely at India, underscores Trump’s efforts to force a negotiated peace between Moscow and Kyiv, even as it raises the stakes for global trade and energy diplomacy.
The former U.S. president, who is seeking re-election in 2026, issued the warning through a top aide, Stephen Miller. In a statement, Miller said that Trump wanted a “tremendous relationship” with India and its prime minister, Narendra Modi, but made clear that such friendship would not come at the cost of financing a war the West is trying to end. “We need to get real about dealing with the financing of this war,” Miller said. “All options are on the table — diplomatic, financial, and otherwise — to end the conflict in Ukraine.”
The announcement marks a significant shift in tone, particularly given Trump’s historically warm relationship with Modi and previous calls for closer India–U.S. economic ties. But with the war in Ukraine grinding into its fourth year and Moscow showing no signs of backing down, Trump’s strategy appears to hinge on using America’s economic leverage to choke off international revenue streams sustaining the Kremlin — particularly through oil exports.
India, however, remains defiant. Officials in New Delhi have made clear that the country will not be turning off the taps on Russian oil anytime soon. According to government sources quoted by Reuters, India considers its oil supply arrangements with Russia part of long-term contracts that cannot be summarily disrupted. “It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight,” one official told the news agency on Saturday.
Russia has emerged as India’s largest supplier of crude oil, accounting for around 35 per cent of India’s total imports. Between January and June 2025 alone, Moscow exported approximately 1.75 million barrels of crude oil to India per day — a slight increase from the previous year. These volumes have continued despite widespread Western sanctions and repeated calls for nations to reduce their economic ties with the Kremlin.
Indian officials have defended the purchases by arguing that they have helped stabilise global energy prices. “If India had not been buying from Russia, global oil prices would have surged uncontrollably,” one official said, noting that Indian refiners are procuring Russian oil at prices below the cap imposed by the European Union. Unlike Iranian and Venezuelan crude, Russian oil itself is not under direct U.S. or EU sanctions but is subject to price controls aimed at limiting Moscow’s wartime revenue.
The standoff highlights a growing rift between Washington and New Delhi over the geopolitical ramifications of the war. While the U.S. and its NATO allies have spent billions supporting Ukraine militarily and economically, India has maintained a policy of strategic neutrality — avoiding direct condemnation of Russia, continuing trade, and calling for diplomatic dialogue over confrontation.
Trump’s latest posture could put that balancing act under renewed strain. Imposing a 100 per cent tariff on Indian exports — which include key goods such as pharmaceuticals, electronics, and textiles — would severely disrupt bilateral trade, which has grown rapidly over the past decade and now exceeds $160 billion annually. It could also alienate a major U.S. partner in the Indo-Pacific at a time when Washington seeks to counterbalance Chinese influence in the region.
It remains unclear whether Trump’s threats are part of a calculated negotiating strategy or a genuine policy he would pursue if re-elected. But for now, India is holding its ground, determined to prioritise energy security and price stability over what it views as externally imposed moral imperatives.
As the war in Ukraine drags on, Trump’s proposed tariff regime adds a new layer of complexity to an already tangled geopolitical web — one that pits principles against pragmatism, and global peace efforts against national interests
