Key Highlights:
- President Trump asks European Union to impose tariffs of up to 100% on India and China as part of strategy to pressure Russia over Ukraine war
- India imports approximately 40% of its crude oil from Russia despite already facing 50% US tariffs
- Economic experts predict Trump tariffs on India and China could reduce India’s GDP growth by 0.5-0.6% in fiscal year 2025-26
Opening Overview
President Donald Trump has intensified pressure on the European Union to join America’s economic campaign against Russia by proposing tariffs of up to 100% on India and China, two of Russia’s largest oil customers. The unprecedented demand emerged during a Tuesday conference call with senior EU officials in Washington, marking a significant escalation in the administration’s strategy to cut Moscow’s revenue streams. Trump tariffs on India and China represent a crucial test of transatlantic unity in confronting Russia’s military actions in Ukraine, with the US President stating he would mirror any European measures against the two Asian economic powers.
The proposal comes as Trump’s frustration mounts over the slow progress in brokering a Ukraine-Russia ceasefire, which he once promised to achieve “within hours” of taking office. Current Trump tariffs on India and China already stand at 50% and 30% respectively, but the President’s latest push for coordinated European action signals a dramatic shift toward broader economic warfare. The strategy targets the financial lifeline that Russian oil sales provide to Moscow, with US officials emphasizing that cutting off revenue sources remains essential to pressuring Vladimir Putin’s regime.
India and China have emerged as Russia’s most critical oil markets since Western sanctions began, with both nations capitalizing on deeply discounted Russian crude to meet their energy needs. The effectiveness of Trump tariffs on India and China as a diplomatic tool now faces scrutiny as global energy markets adapt to geopolitical pressures.
Trump’s Proposal to Escalate Tariffs on India and China
- Trump calls for 100% tariffs on India and China to pressure Russia over oil purchases
- US willing to mirror EU tariffs, potentially creating unprecedented levy increases on imports
President Trump made his extraordinary request during a video conference with EU sanctions envoy David O’Sullivan and other European officials gathered in Washington. The timing reflects mounting White House impatience with diplomatic efforts to end the Ukraine conflict, particularly as Russia continues its military operations despite existing sanctions. Trump tariffs on India and China represent the administration’s belief that only severe economic pressure on Russia’s key oil customers can force Moscow to negotiate.
“The source of the money for the Russian war machine is oil purchases by China and India. If you do not get at the source of the money, there’s no way to stop the war machine,” a US official explained to Reuters. The administration’s strategy hinges on coordinated transatlantic action, with Trump emphasizing that America would only proceed if European partners committed to parallel measures. This conditional approach highlights the importance of unified Western action in maximizing pressure on Russia’s economy.
The discussions included participation from US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and officials from the State Department and US Trade Representative, demonstrating high-level commitment to the initiative. Ukraine’s Prime Minister also joined the session, underscoring the direct connection between Trump tariffs on India and China and battlefield dynamics in Eastern Europe. The proposal builds on existing Congressional support, with 85 Senate co-sponsors backing legislation that would enable secondary tariffs on countries trading with Russia.
Trump’s intervention during the EU meeting represents a calculated escalation designed to test European resolve in confronting Russia’s revenue sources. The President’s willingness to implement matching tariff increases signals serious commitment to the strategy, despite potential economic consequences for American consumers and businesses.
India’s Continued Import of Russian Oil Amid Sanctions
- India imports about 40% of crude oil from Russia despite facing existing US tariffs
- Economic incentives driving India’s energy decisions despite mounting international pressure
India has dramatically transformed its energy landscape since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, increasing Russian oil imports from less than 1% of total crude purchases in 2022 to approximately 37% in 2024. By May 2025, Russian crude constituted 40% of India’s oil imports, reaching a record 1.95 million barrels per day. This shift occurred despite escalating Trump tariffs on India and China, demonstrating New Delhi’s prioritization of energy security and economic pragmatism over alignment with Western sanctions.
The financial incentives driving India’s decision remain compelling, with Russian crude trading at approximately $68 per barrel compared to Iraqi crude at $70 and Saudi Arabian crude at $73 in April 2025. These price differentials have generated estimated savings between $10.5-25 billion for India during 2023-2024, though analysts note the benefits primarily boost refinery margins rather than significantly reducing consumer prices. India’s Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman defended this approach in September 2025, stating that India would continue purchasing Russian oil based on what “suits us best” economically.
Recent data from Kpler shows India imported 2.08 million barrels per day of Russian crude in June 2025, representing an 8% month-on-month increase and the highest level since July 2024. This surge occurred despite existing Trump tariffs on India and China, highlighting India’s commitment to maintaining energy independence. Major refiners like Reliance Industries account for approximately one-third of total Russian imports, processing discounted crude into high-value products for global export markets.
India’s strategic approach reflects broader commitments to energy diversification and economic self-interest, even as diplomatic tensions with Washington intensify. The country’s heavy reliance on imported oil, with approximately 85% dependency on foreign sources, drives this pragmatic stance toward securing affordable energy regardless of geopolitical considerations.
Economic Impact of US Tariffs on India
- Existing tariffs may reduce India’s GDP growth by 0.5% to 0.6% in fiscal year 2025-26
- Key Indian export sectors including textiles, steel, and automotive parts face significant challenges
India’s Chief Economic Adviser V. Anantha Nageswaran warned that current Trump tariffs on India and China could shave 0.5% to 0.6% from India’s GDP growth in the 2025-26 fiscal year. The existing 50% tariff structure, comprising a 25% secondary tariff and an additional 25% penalty related to Russian oil imports, directly impacts approximately 55% of India’s $87 billion in exports to America. This economic pressure tests India’s resilience while potentially affecting hundreds of thousands of jobs across key industrial sectors.
The tariff impact extends across multiple critical industries, with textiles, carpets, automobile parts, marine products, furniture, and steel facing the most severe challenges. Small and medium-sized enterprises, which form a significant portion of India’s export base, prove particularly vulnerable to these trade restrictions. Despite maintaining overall GDP growth forecasts between 6.3% and 6.8% for FY26, the sustained pressure from Trump tariffs on India and China creates uncertainty for long-term economic planning.
US imports from India dropped approximately 15% following tariff implementation, demonstrating immediate market responses to the trade measures. However, some Indian refiners have strategically increased American crude purchases, with Indian Oil Corporation and Reliance Industries securing 7 million barrels in August 2025 to help narrow the US trade deficit while maintaining some economic engagement. This tactical approach suggests India’s efforts to balance economic relationships despite political tensions.
Citigroup analysis indicates that combined US economic tariffs pose a 0.6-0.8% downside risk to India’s annual GDP growth, reinforcing concerns about prolonged economic consequences. The tariff structure’s focus on Russian oil trade connections means that Trump tariffs on India and China serve both economic and geopolitical purposes in the broader US strategy to isolate Moscow’s energy revenues.
EU’s Reluctance to Impose Tariffs on India and China
- EU officials cite legal and strategic concerns over implementing broad tariff measures
- Ongoing trade negotiations with India complicate potential tariff implementations
European Union officials have signaled strong reluctance to implement Trump’s proposed 100% tariffs on India and China, citing fundamental differences in how the bloc approaches trade policy compared to the United States. EU diplomats emphasize that the union handles tariffs differently from sanctions, requiring lengthy investigations to establish solid legal foundations before implementing such measures. “So far, there has been no discussion of tariffs, either on India or on China,” one EU diplomat told Reuters.
The EU’s hesitation reflects practical considerations beyond legal requirements, particularly the bloc’s ongoing efforts to finalize a comprehensive trade agreement with India. European officials worry that imposing punitive Trump tariffs on India and China would jeopardize years of careful negotiations and potentially damage long-term economic relationships. The timing proves particularly problematic as both sides near completion of trade discussions that could unlock significant economic benefits.
EU sources describe proposed tariffs as “risky and too broad,” preferring targeted sanctions on specific entities rather than sweeping trade measures. This approach allows flexibility to delist companies that cease business with Russia while avoiding broader economic disruption. The European strategy contrasts sharply with Trump’s preference for comprehensive tariff applications, highlighting fundamental differences in transatlantic approaches to economic pressure.
The divergence between US and EU positions on Trump tariffs on India and China reflects broader tensions over sanctions coordination and burden-sharing in confronting Russia. While both sides agree on the need to pressure Moscow, disagreements over methods could limit the effectiveness of Western economic measures. European officials remain skeptical about the political will within the European Parliament to support such aggressive trade actions, particularly given potential economic backlash from affected industries.
Closing Assessment
Trump’s push for European Union support in implementing up to 100% tariffs on India and China represents a pivotal moment in international efforts to economically isolate Russia. The proposal underscores the administration’s belief that coordinated Western pressure on Russia’s primary oil customers offers the most effective path to forcing Moscow’s hand in Ukraine negotiations. However, the mixed reception from European allies and India’s continued commitment to Russian oil imports highlight the complex realities of implementing economic warfare in an interconnected global economy.
The resistance from EU officials signals fundamental challenges in achieving the transatlantic unity necessary for maximum pressure campaigns. While Trump tariffs on India and China continue to create economic pressure, the unilateral nature of current US measures limits their effectiveness compared to coordinated international action. India’s strategic response, balancing energy security needs with diplomatic relationships, demonstrates how major economies can navigate superpower pressure while maintaining independent policy directions.
The ultimate success of Trump tariffs on India and China as tools of geopolitical influence depends on broader international cooperation and the willingness of target countries to prioritize political alignment over economic interests. As global energy markets continue adapting to geopolitical tensions, the effectiveness of economic pressure tactics faces ongoing tests in an increasingly multipolar world where traditional alliance structures encounter new challenges from economic pragmatism and strategic autonomy.
