‘Russia lost an oil client, which is India': What Donald Trump said before meet with Putin; ‘secondary sanctions would be devastating…'
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Earlier today, Trump described his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska as "very productive." However, he noted that some important issues are still unresolved, and no formal agreement has been made yet.
Ahead of the meeting with Putin, Trump told Fox News that Russia has lost India as an oil customer while discussing the economic implications of Putin engaging in negotiations.
When questioned about the economic aspects of Putin's talks, Trump highlighted India's involvement, saying, "Well, they lost an oil client so to speak, which is India, which was doing about 40% of the oil, China as you know is doing a lot...and
if I did secondary sanctions, it would be devastating from their standpoint. If I have to do it, I'll do it, maybe I won't have to do it," Trump said during the interview on Air Force One ahead of his talks with Putin.
Trump's remarks came after his recent decision to implement a 50% tariff on India's exports to the US, citing India's oil trade with Russia as the reason.
A few days earlier, on August 7, the US President had announced an additional 25% tariff on India and suggested that further "secondary sanctions" might be imposed related to the same issue.
When questioned about why India was being targeted for additional sanctions when other countries, like China, are also purchasing Russian oil, Trump had responded, "You're going to see a lot more...You're going to see so much secondary sanctions."
He had also suggested that the US administration might impose similar sanctions on China. When asked about potential tariffs on China similar to those on India, Trump replied, "Could happen.
Tired of too many ads? go ad free now
Depends on how we do. Could happen."
Also Read |
50% tariffs and India's reaction
Last week, Trump signed an Executive Order imposing an additional 25 percent tariff on imports from India. The White House order cited national security and foreign policy concerns, along with other trade laws, stating that India's imports of Russian oil pose an "unusual and extraordinary threat" to the United States.
Following the order, the total tariff on Indian goods will rise to 50 percent.
The initial duty will be implemented on August 7, with an additional levy taking effect 21 days later. This additional charge will apply to all Indian goods imported into the US, except for those already in transit or those that qualify for specific exemptions.
In response to this announcement, the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) described the US's decision as "unfair, unjustified, and unreasonable," and stated that New Delhi will take "all necessary actions to safeguard its national interests."
Also Read |
The MEA's official statement noted, "Recently, the United States has targeted India's oil imports from Russia. We have already clarified our stance on these matters, emphasizing that our imports are driven by market factors and aim to ensure the energy security of India's 1.4 billion people."
The statement further expressed, "It is highly regrettable that the US has chosen to impose additional tariffs on India for actions that many other countries are also undertaking in their own national interest. We reiterate that these actions are unfair, unjustified, and unreasonable. India will take all necessary actions to protect its national interests," the MEA emphasized.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
13 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Trump administration wants to end U.N. peacekeeping in Lebanon; Europe pushing back
The future of U.N. peacekeepers in Lebanon has split the United States and its European allies, raising implications for security in the Middle East and becoming the latest snag to vex relations between the U.S. and key partners like France, Britain and Italy. At issue is the peacekeeping operation known as UNIFIL, whose mandate expires at the end of August and will need to be renewed by the U.N. Security Council to continue. It was created to oversee the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon after Israel's 1978 invasion, and its mission was expanded following the month-long 2006 war between Israel and the militant group Hezbollah. The multinational force has played a significant role in monitoring the security situation in southern Lebanon for decades, including during the Israel-Hezbollah war last year, but has drawn criticism from both sides and numerous U.S. lawmakers, some of whom now hold prominent roles in President Donald Trump's administration or wield new influence with the White House. Trump administration political appointees came into office this year with the aim of shutting down UNIFIL as soon as possible. They regard the operation as an ineffectual waste of money that is merely delaying the goal of eliminating Hezbollah's influence and restoring full security control to the Lebanese Armed Forces that the government says it is not yet capable of doing. After securing major cuts in U.S. funding to the peacekeeping force, Secretary of State Marco Rubio signed off early last week on a plan that would wind down and end UNIFIL in the next six months, according to Trump administration officials and congressional aides familiar with the discussions. It's another step as the Trump administration drastically pares back its foreign affairs priorities and budget, including expressing scepticism of international alliances and cutting funding to U.N. agencies and missions. The transatlantic divide also has been apparent on issues ranging from Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza and the Russia-Ukraine conflict to trade, technology and free speech issues. Europeans push back against a quick end to U.N. peacekeeping in Lebanon Israel has for years sought an end to UNIFIL's mandate, and renewal votes have often come after weeks of political wrangling. Now, the stakes are particularly high after last year's war and more vigorous opposition in Washington. European nations, notably France and Italy, have objected to winding down UNIFIL. With the support of Tom Barrack, U.S. ambassador to Turkiye and envoy to Lebanon, they successfully lobbied Rubio and others to support a one-year extension of the peacekeeping mandate followed by a time-certain wind-down period of six months, according to the administration officials and congressional aides, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private diplomatic negotiations. Israel also reluctantly agreed to an extension, they said. The European argument was that prematurely ending UNIFIL before the Lebanese army is able to fully secure the border area would create a vacuum that Hezbollah could easily exploit. The French noted that when a U.N. peacekeeping mission in Mali was terminated before government troops were ready to deal with security threats, Islamic extremists moved in. With the U.S. easing off, the issue ahead of the U.N. vote expected at the end of August now appears to be resistance by France and others to setting a firm deadline for the operation to end after the one-year extension, according to the officials and congressional aides. French officials did not respond to requests for comment The final French draft resolution, obtained by The Associated Press, does not include a date for UNIFIL's withdrawal, which U.S. officials say is required for their support. Instead, it would extend the peacekeeping mission for one year and indicates the U.N. Security Council's 'intention to work on a withdrawal.' But even if the mandate is renewed, the peacekeeping mission might be scaled down for financial reasons, with the U.N. system likely facing drastic budget cuts, said a U.N. official, who was not authorised to comment to the media and spoke on condition of anonymity. One of the U.S. officials said an option being considered was reducing UNIFIL's numbers while boosting its technological means to monitor the situation on the ground. The peacekeeping force has faced criticism There are about 10,000 peacekeepers in southern Lebanon, while the Lebanese army has around 6,000 soldiers, a number that is supposed to increase to 10,000. Hezbollah supporters in Lebanon have frequently accused the U.N. mission of collusion with Israel and sometimes attacked peacekeepers on patrol. Israel, meanwhile, has accused the peacekeepers of turning a blind eye to Hezbollah's military activities in southern Lebanon and lobbied for its mandate to end. Sarit Zehavi, a former Israeli military intelligence analyst and founder of the Israeli think tank Alma Research and Education Center, said UNIFIL has played a 'damaging role with regard to the mission of disarming Hezbollah in south Lebanon.' She pointed to the discovery of Hezbollah tunnels and weapons caches close to UNIFIL facilities during and after last year's Israel-Hezbollah war, when much of the militant group's senior leadership was killed and much of its arsenal destroyed. Hezbollah is now under increasing pressure to give up the rest of its weapons. U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said UNIFIL continues to discover unauthorised weapons, including rocket launchers, mortar rounds and bomb fuses, this week, which it reported to the Lebanese army. Under the U.S.- and France-brokered ceasefire, Israel and Hezbollah were to withdraw from southern Lebanon, with the Lebanese army taking control in conjunction with UNIFIL. Israel has continued to occupy five strategic points on the Lebanese side and carry out near-daily airstrikes that it says aim to stop Hezbollah from regrouping. Lebanon supports keeping U.N. peacekeepers Lebanese officials have called for UNIFIL to remain, saying the country's cash-strapped and overstretched army is not yet able to patrol the full area on its own until it. Retired Lebanese Army Gen. Khalil Helou said that if UNIFIL's mandate were to abruptly end, soldiers would need to be pulled away from the porous border with Syria, where smuggling is rife, or from other areas inside of Lebanon — 'and this could have consequences for the stability' of the country. UNIFIL 'is maybe not fulfilling 100% what the Western powers or Israel desire. But for Lebanon, their presence is important,' he said. The United Nations also calls the peacekeepers critical to regional stability, Mr. Dujarric said. UNIFIL spokesperson Andrea Tenenti said deciding on the renewal of the mandate is the prerogative of the U.N. Security Council. 'We are here to assist the parties in implementation of the mission's mandate and we're waiting for the final decision,' he said.
The Hindu
13 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Why we need a research-based social entrepreneurship course in Indian academia
India is making strides in digital innovation and financial growth, but still faces challenges such as unemployment, inequality, and the rural-urban gap. As a result, social entrepreneurship is becoming popular as a strong way to connect businesses with social impact. To fully realise its potential, universities need to include research-based, practical social entrepreneurship in their curricula. Recent data from the GUESSS India 2023 Survey shows a notable change in career goals among Indian university students: 33% are in the early stages of starting their businesses, while 4.8% are already running revenue-generating start-ups. However, 70% still intend to find jobs after graduation, although this figure drops to around 52% over five years. Despite this, Indian students exhibit the highest global entrepreneurial intent, scoring 4.6 on a scale of 7, compared to the global average of 3.7. Nearly 63% get initial investments or support from their universities. This reflects a rising interest among today's youth in having independence, social impact, and the chance to build something that not only creates profit but also tackles important national issues, going beyond traditional career paths. Transformative approach Social entrepreneurship is an increasingly recognised effective model to bridge the gap between social justice and economic development. Unlike traditional business models that prioritise market returns, social enterprises focus on serving underserved and neglected communities, offering scalable and sustainable solutions. Addressing the root causes of inequality — like access to clean water, quality healthcare, education, and decent livelihoods — drives social entrepreneurs. The Stanford Social Innovation Review points out that businesses focused on underserved and untapped markets can make a real social impact while still being financially viable. India's development issues — such as rural sanitation, clean energy, climate resilience, and women's empowerment — create a strong environment for social entrepreneurship projects. India has many innovative ventures that highlight successful social entrepreneurship. At IIM BAngalore, Saahas Zero Waste has turned the campus into a model of a circular economy by focusing on waste segregation, composting, and recycling. Tamil Nadu's Gramalaya NGO has enhanced sanitation, hygiene, and clean water access while building self-sustaining financing models for toilet construction. These stories go beyond programs and numbers; they focus on people. Research-led innovation Private universities bring together scholars from many fields. When they join forces to tackle real-world issues and turn their research into practical solutions, they can unlock the untapped potential of India's Ph.D.s. For instance, a public policy scholar studying poverty might collaborate with an engineering scholar to create a solution. A business scholar could then help expand this solution, leading to both academic success and positive social change. Universities should take an important role in encouraging such teamwork across disciplines to support social entrepreneurship. They should promote research that tackles social issues, moving from a purely theoretical activity into something that drives real change. Despite a growing start-up ecosystem, disruptive innovation is rare. Research scholars can improve socially driven innovation by applying their expertise to real-world problems. To become an 'impact nation,' India needs inclusive, non-urban-centred innovation. This means integrating social entrepreneurship into education, policy, and practice. The writer is Curator of Ph,D. VISTA Programme, Alliance University, Bengaluru.
Time of India
13 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump says no imminent plans to penalise China for buying Russian oil
US President Donald Trump said on Friday he did not immediately need to consider retaliatory tariffs on countries such as China for buying Russian oil but might have to "in two or three weeks." Trump has threatened sanctions on Moscow and secondary sanctions on countries that buy its oil if no moves are made to end the war in Ukraine. China and India are the top two buyers of Russian oil. The president last week imposed an additional 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods, citing its continued imports of Russian oil. However, Trump has not taken similar action against China. He was asked by Fox News' Sean Hannity if he was now considering such action against Beijing after he and Russian President Vladimir Putin failed to produce an agreement to resolve or pause Moscow's war in Ukraine. "Well, because of what happened today, I think I don't have to think about that," Trump said after his summit with Putin in Alaska. "Now, I may have to think about it in two weeks or three weeks or something, but we don't have to think about that right now. I think, you know, the meeting went very well." Chinese President Xi Jinping's slowing economy will suffer if Trump follows through on a promise to ramp up Russia-related sanctions and tariffs. Xi and Trump are working on a trade deal that could lower tensions - and import taxes - between the world's two biggest economies. But China could be the biggest remaining target, outside of Russia, if Trump ramps up punitive measures.
