India and Brazil Hit With Record-High US Tariffs
India has emerged as one of the two nations facing the harshest US tariff regime under President Donald Trump, with duties reaching an unprecedented 50%. Brazil shares this distinction, both countries now bracing for the economic impact.
For India, a 25% tariff on exports to the US took effect this week, with another 25% set to be enforced on August 28. Trump has described the second tranche as a “penalty” for New Delhi’s continued oil imports from Russia.
According to data compiled by The New York Times, Syria ranks next with a 41% rate, followed by Laos and Myanmar at 40%. Among these top five, India is by far the largest economy — and the only one facing such a sharp escalation tied directly to Russian energy trade.
Trump’s Justification Faces Questions
Trump has repeatedly argued that countries purchasing Russian oil are “fueling the war machine” against Ukraine. However, critics point to glaring inconsistencies in this policy. Both the European Union and China — the latter being the world’s largest buyer of Russian energy — continue such imports without facing comparable penalties.
Adding to the skepticism, Trump is scheduled to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin in the coming weeks, with the Ukraine invasion expected to be a central topic. Observers note that any breakthrough deal with Moscow could weaken the stated rationale for targeting India and Brazil.
Diplomatic Pushback From New Delhi and Brasília
Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke by phone with Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva on Thursday, with the tariff issue reportedly high on the agenda. Lula has taken an openly combative stance against Trump’s trade measures, while India has maintained that Washington’s reasoning is selective and inconsistent.
The Modi government has stressed that sovereign nations have the right to determine their own trade partners. This position has found public backing from both Moscow and Beijing.
Russian presidential spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told AFP, “Sovereign countries have the right to choose their own trade partners,” in a direct nod to India’s stance.
China’s Sharp Rebuke
In a rare public swipe at Washington, Chinese Ambassador to India Xu Feihong criticized Trump shortly after the first 25% tariff increase on Indian goods took effect. Posting on X (formerly Twitter), Xu wrote: “Give the bully an inch, he will take a mile,” without naming the US president directly.
The ambassador also shared excerpts from a recent call between Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and a senior adviser to Brazil’s president, signaling a potential alignment of positions among nations affected by or opposed to the tariff policy.
A Negotiating Tactic in Disguise?
Some analysts believe the punitive duties are less about Ukraine and more about leverage in broader trade negotiations. Shashi Mathews, a partner at CMS INDUSLAW, told Financial Express that other major economies, including the US itself, continue to import Russian commodities.
“It appears that this was more of a negotiating tactic… to gain leverage in the ongoing trade negotiations, considering the tariffs kick in 21 days later,” Mathews said.
The US approach to China further supports this interpretation. Despite Beijing’s substantial Russian oil imports, Washington has kept tariffs on Chinese goods in the 10–30% range, with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick recently indicating that a pending trade deal deadline with China might be extended by another 90 days.
Strategic Alignments in a Multipolar World
The fallout from the tariffs is playing out against a backdrop of shifting global alliances. Russia and China have both voiced sympathy for India’s position, viewing it as part of a broader effort to counterbalance US dominance in global trade and geopolitics.
For Washington, however, the move signals an escalation in using tariffs not just as an economic instrument, but as a geopolitical lever. The coming weeks — particularly the outcome of Trump’s meeting with Putin — may determine whether the Russian oil argument remains the official justification, or whether it gives way to a recalibrated trade strategy.
