Trump’s New India Tariffs: A Closer Look at the Real Motive Behind the Sanctions

 NEW DELHI – On August 6, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order imposing a 25 percent tariff on a range of Indian goods, bringing the total tariff rate to an unprecedented 50 percent. The move, which gives India a 21-day window to respond, was officially justified as a punitive measure against New Delhi's continued purchase of Russian oil, which Trump claimed was "fuelling Russia’s war machine" in Ukraine.

However, a closer examination of the policy, along with the exemption clauses and the lack of similar sanctions against other nations, has led analysts to believe the tariffs are not merely about Russian oil. The complex geopolitical and economic factors at play suggest a more intricate strategy behind the White House's decision.

The Contradictory Logic of the Sanctions

While the stated reason for the tariff is India's Russian oil imports, the executive order contains a curious exemption: it does not apply to refined energy products like gasoline and diesel that are made from that same Russian crude. This means oil can be imported from Russia by India, refined, and then sold to the US market without the additional tariff.

Geopolitical strategist Brahma Chellaney described this loophole as "the height of hypocrisy," arguing that the policy "has little to do with Russian oil and everything to do with forcing a one-sided trade deal." Similarly, energy columnist Javier Blas pointed out that this exemption is a blanket carve-out for all US energy imports, allowing the very flow of Russian-derived products that Trump claims to be punishing to continue unhindered.

A Double Standard and Personal Grievances

The most striking contradiction, according to analysts, is the lack of similar sanctions against China, the world's largest buyer of Russian oil. Beijing's far greater oil purchases have not prompted any new tariffs from the Trump administration.

South Asia analyst Michael Kugelman described this selective targeting as a "double standard," suggesting that the decision may be less about trade volumes and more about Trump's personal grievances. Kugelman cited India’s public rejection of Trump's claims that he mediated a ceasefire between India and Pakistan as a possible source of ire, noting that this may have contributed to Trump's focus on India "on the trade and tariff front."

The disparity has even caused discomfort within the Republican Party. Former UN ambassador Nikki Haley publicly criticized the decision, stating that the US should not "give China a pass and burn a relationship with a strong ally like India."

The Official Rationale: A Different Perspective

Trump's trade adviser Peter Navarro offered a different explanation for China's exemption, noting that the US already has "over 50 percent tariffs on China" and does not want to "hurt ourselves." He was, however, unreserved in his criticism of India, calling it the "maharaja of tariffs." Navarro framed the new sanctions as a "pure national security issue," alleging that India's use of US dollars to pay for Russian oil indirectly funds the war against Ukraine.

Trade Brinkmanship and Geopolitical Context

Many analysts, including Brahma Chellaney, view the tariffs as an act of "coercive brinkmanship" designed to extract trade concessions from India. Chellaney argued that the 21-day ultimatum is a pressure tactic to force India into accepting a trade deal on US terms. Krystle Kaur, an adviser to NATO, echoed this sentiment, describing the move as "Donald Trump’s way of power play" that risks damaging the long-standing diplomatic relationship between the two countries.

Beyond trade, the decision is also being viewed through the lens of US policy toward the Ukraine conflict. Chellaney suggested that Trump's push for a ceasefire and his subsequent meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin are signs of a "growing desperation" to avoid a Western defeat in the war, which could "stain his legacy."

Looking Ahead: A Window for Negotiation

The 21-day implementation window is seen as a crucial period for backchannel negotiations. A US delegation is reportedly scheduled to visit India on August 25 for trade talks, providing a narrow opportunity to de-escalate the situation.

Michael Kugelman has warned that this crisis could be the "worst the relationship has faced over the last two decades." However, he also emphasized the fundamental strength of the US-India partnership, suggesting that its "multifaceted" nature and diverse areas of cooperation might be enough to withstand this severe shock.

The official narrative points to Russian oil as the reason for the tariffs, but the exemption of refined products, the lack of sanctions on China, and the broader geopolitical context all tell a more complex story of trade leverage, political grievances, and strategic brinkmanship.