Trump wants EU to impose 100% tariff on India, China Azad News HD
A Bold Economic Gambit in Global Diplomacy
On September 10, 2025, media reports confirmed that U.S. President Donald Trump urged the European Union to impose tariffs of up to 100% on imports from India and China, a move he positioned as an aggressive strategy to squeeze the economic lifeline of Moscow amid the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.
Context: Russia's Oil Customers as Leverage
China and India continue to stand as major purchasers of Russian oil, helping fuel its wartime economy and prolong its military aggression in Ukraine. Trump and his aides believe that targeting these nations' trade flows could significantly undermine Russia's capacity to wage war
The Washington Conference Call
According to Reuters, this request unfolded during a conference call with EU officials, including sanctions envoy David O’Sullivan, who was in Washington to coordinate policy on Russia . Trump was reported to have said that the U.S. was ready to mirror such protections—effectively meaning that if the EU acted, Washington would follow suit
A Strategy Shift for Brussels
This proposal represents a significant escalation in the EU’s approach. Until now, Europe’s strategy relied largely on sanctions targeting Russia directly, not punitive tariffs aimed at third-party nations. Trump’s nudge could force the EU to reconsider its longstanding preference for sanctions over trade pressure
Nuance U.S. Signals: Tariffs and Overtures to India
Although Trump recommended this 100% tariff plan, he also signaled continued trade engagement with India. He posted on social media that the U.S. and India are working to resolve trade barriers, and expressed enthusiasm about upcoming talks with Prime Minister Modi
This mix of hardline pressure and diplomatic outreach highlights Trump's multi-faceted trade posture: he can escalate tariffs as coercion while still seeking renewed economic ties.
Cost to Markets—and Geopolitical Reactions
Financial Ripples in Oil Markets
Markets responded: analysts predicted that such drastic tariffs could disrupt global oil flows, but also potentially backfire by stoking higher inflation. Indeed, that same day, oil prices rose modestly—Brent crude gained 0.53%, while WTI increased 0.57%—due to a combination of geopolitical shocks and Trump’s tariff push .
Beijing and New Delhi Push Back
China swiftly rejected the approach, stating its opposition to being linked to the Russia issue and to coercive economic tactics.
India's response was more measured. While disappointed, Indian officials downplayed the threat, focusing instead on ongoing bilateral negotiations and long-term trade relationship goals
Political Echoes and Legislative Momentum
Rampant Discourse in Washington
U.S. commentators quickly weighed in. Former Trump economic adviser Larry Kudlow defended the president's tariff-heavy posture, saying that Trump is “fundamentally a ‘free trader’ and an ‘internationalist’,” albeit one who leverages tariffs to correct unfair foreign trade practices.
Lawmakers Press for Broader Measures
Meanwhile, legislative attention intensified. Senator Lindsey Graham, a prominent Republican, had previously warned of 100% tariffs on India and China if they continued buying Russian oil, aligning with Trump’s rhetoric Additionally, the bipartisan Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025 proposed in Congress would allow the president to impose up to 500% tariffs on imports from countries purchasing Russian energy, including India and China.
These developments mark a rising legislative willingness in Washington to support aggressive economic tools aimed at any nation enabling Russia’s wartime economy.
Strategic Implications and Repercussions
Let’s examine the multi-layered impact of Trump’s proposal:
1. Russia Under Strain—or Resilient?
Cutting off oil buyers could weaken Russia's war-making ability. However, in the short term, fallback markets or elevated oil prices may compensate, especially if demand remains strong.
2. India and China’s Strategic Posture
Facing punitive tariffs could push Delhi and Beijing to pivot further toward economic self-reliance, deepen cooperation with non-Western partners, and question the reliability of Western alliances in confronting great-power rivalry.
3. EU’s Diplomatic Tightrope
EU leaders must weigh the geopolitical benefits of joining such a tactic against potential economic blowback: rising prices, disrupted supply chains, and domestic political fallout—especially from countries still dependent on trade with China and India.
4. Global Trade Order in Flux
This scenario signals a new era where trade becomes a direct weapon in geopolitical conflict, bridging sanctions and trade policy. It also risks fragmenting international norms and dissolving multilateral structures like the WTO.
5. Precedence in Foreign Policy Tools
If tariffs on energy networks Persia pressure Russia to end its war, this may embolden future administrations to weaponize trade in other conflicts, setting a high-stakes precedent.
Balancing Coercion with Cooperation
Trump’s proposal reveals a paradox: aggressive competitiveness on one hand, and diplomatic softening on the other. Tariffs of this scale are rare—most historically hovering in the 10–25% range. Yet Trump frames them as instruments to hasten peace. His mixed messaging to India—warning with tariffs while arranging talks for trade relief—underscores the muddled nature of “pressure diplomacy.”
Concluding Thoughts
President Trump’s call for 100% tariffs on India and China serves as a stark illustration of how economic policy and geopolitics now intertwine. It's a bipartisan spectacle, with executive maneuvering, Congressional legislation, and Western allies all playing roles in this evolving creditor-debtor game over Russia.
