logo
Trump's economic war on India is a gift to China

Trump's economic war on India is a gift to China

The Hill19 hours ago
President Trump's decision to slap secondary sanctions on India over its imports of Russian oil, while also unleashing a tariff barrage on Indian exports, is more than a trade dispute. It is a self-inflicted wound to America's most vital strategic partnership in Asia, and it comes at a time when China is flexing its military muscle throughout the region.
Washington has long courted India as a bulwark against an expansionist China and as a critical pillar of its ' free and open Indo-Pacific ' strategy. Yet Trump's punitive steps against India are eroding the very trust on which strategic alignment rests — to Beijing's delight.
The mutual trust painstakingly built over years underpins bilateral cooperation. Once lost, it will be hard to rebuild. Even if the administration eventually reaches a trade deal with India, it may not be able to repair the damage.
Targeting India over Russian oil purchases smacks of selective enforcement. The European Union's large imports of Russian energy products, especially liquefied natural gas, have been left untouched. Such European imports not only contribute more to Russia's coffers than India's purchases, but Europe spends more on Russian energy than on assisting Ukraine.
Trump has also spared the world's largest buyer of Russian oil and gas: China. But India, the very country Washington has spent years courting as an Asian counterweight, has become the first victim of his secondary sanctions. This suggests Trump's tactics are less about punishing Moscow than about pressuring New Delhi.
Russian oil is a pretext to strong-arm India into accepting a Trump-dictated trade agreement, much as he foisted a largely one-sided deal on the European Union. That his tariffs on India have little to do with Russian oil is evident from one telling fact: Indian exports to the U.S. of refined fuels such as gasoline, diesel and jet fuel — increasingly made from Russian crude — remain exempt from his tariffs.
Such is the Trumpian logic. He has hit Indian non-energy exports with steep tariffs, but spared booming exports of refined fuels made largely from Russian crude. Trump seems to have no problem with Russian oil — as long as it is refined in India and then pumped into American planes, trucks and cars.
Furthermore, given continued U.S. imports of Russian enriched uranium, fertilizers and chemicals, Trump does not seem troubled that his own administration is helping fund Russia's war in Ukraine while still locked in a proxy war with Moscow.
In truth, Trump is using New Delhi's Russian oil purchases as a crude bargaining tactic to secure a bilateral trade deal on his terms. India illustrates how the Trump administration has weaponized tariffs not merely to extract trade concessions but also to bind other countries more closely to American strategic and security interests. In seeking to bend India to its will, it has targeted that country's traditionally independent approach to global affairs, including neutrality on conflicts.
Indian exports to the U.S. now face a steep 50 percent tariff, signaling the end of Trump's bromance with Prime Minister Narendra Modi. His moves against strategic-partner India are harsher than against China. This marks a dramatic U-turn from his first term, when bilateral relations thrived to the extent that Trump declared at a huge February 2020 rally in Modi's home state of Gujarat, 'America loves India, America respects India, and America will always be faithful and loyal friends to the Indian people.'
In Trump's second term, Modi was among the first world leaders to visit the White House, agreeing to fast-track trade negotiations. In July, the Indians believed they had reached an interim deal, awaiting only Trump's approval. But in characteristic fashion, Trump abruptly rejected the accord and embarked on punishing India.
New Delhi has publicly criticized the Trump administration's double standards. But it is more concerned about a deeper question: If Washington can so easily turn its coercive tools on a supposed ally, what is to stop it from doing so again?
U.S.-India relations have probably plunged to their lowest point in the 21st century, thanks to Trump's economic war and his singling out of India for secondary sanctions.
The fallout will extend beyond lost trade. India could respond by doubling down on strategic autonomy — hedging between the U.S., Russia and others — and diversifying its economic and security partnerships. Trump's gamble may wring out trade concessions in the short term, but it risks undermining the security architecture in the Indo-Pacific, where unity among key democracies is the only real check on China's expansionism. America is effectively handing China an opening to court a disillusioned India.
New Delhi is already signaling that it has other geopolitical options. Russian President Vladimir Putin is expected to visit India in the coming weeks. In less than three weeks, Modi is scheduled to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit, which Putin will also attend. Moscow is pushing for a revived Russia-India-China grouping.
A stable Indo-Pacific order demands more than joint military exercises and communiqués; it requires political will to accommodate each other's core interests. Punishing India in ways that ignore its legitimate security and energy needs sends the opposite message.
Ironically, Trump's sanctions-and-tariffs blitz may have done India a favor by exposing the strategic reality of America's unreliability. By presenting the U.S. as a transactional power, Trump has signaled that Washington cannot be counted on to separate short-term commercial considerations from long-term strategic imperatives.
Trump's economic coercion risks alienating a vast, still-growing market that U.S. firms see as central to their future growth. India remains the world's fastest-growing major economy, and as many other economies stagnate and populations shrink, it stands out as a rising giant.
Sacrificing a linchpin of Indo-Pacific stability for a fleeting win in a tariff war is not tough bargaining. It is strategic recklessness — and a gift to China.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Birkenstock profit beats estimates as shoemaker outlines plan to cope with tariffs
Birkenstock profit beats estimates as shoemaker outlines plan to cope with tariffs

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Birkenstock profit beats estimates as shoemaker outlines plan to cope with tariffs

- Birkenstock (NYSE:BIRK) has posted better-than-anticipated profit in its fiscal third quarter and backed its full-year outlook, as the legacy German shoemaker said it is in a good spot despite the impact of elevated U.S. tariffs on the European Union. Known for its sandals and clogs, the more than 250-year old Birkenstock said it is "well-positioned" to handle President Donald Trump's increased 15% levies on many EU products sent to the U.S. -- a rate agreed upon by Washington and Brussels in late July. In a statement, CEO Oliver Reichert said the company will look to mitigate the duties through "a combination of pricing adjustment, cost discipline and inventory management." The firm backed its prior guidance for annual adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization margin of 31.3% to 31.8%. Analysts had seen the figure at 31.5%. At constant currency, revenue growth is also tipped to be at the "high end" of its predicted range of 15% to 17%. Operating profit in the three months ended on June 30 rose by 27% versus a year ago to 198 million euros, exceeding Bloomberg consensus projections of 182.7 million euros, with Reichert noting that income was bolstered by mid-single-digit expansion in average selling prices. Meanwhile, quarterly revenue increased by 12% to 635 million euros, compared with estimates of 636.3 million, as an uptick in business-to-business sales was offset by weaker-than-expected demand in the Americas region and at its direct-to-consumer segment. Shares of Birkenstock climbed by more than 3% in premarket U.S. trading on Thursday. Related articles Birkenstock profit beats estimates as shoemaker outlines plan to cope with tariffs If Powell goes, does Fed trust go with him? 7 Undervalued Stocks on the Rise With 50%+ Upside Potential Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

How US Pilots Trained to Fight Russia Will Soon Help Protect Putin
How US Pilots Trained to Fight Russia Will Soon Help Protect Putin

Newsweek

time17 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

How US Pilots Trained to Fight Russia Will Soon Help Protect Putin

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. As Russian President Vladimir Putin prepares to make his first visit to the United States in a decade, U.S. warplanes that have intercepted Russian aircraft as recently as two weeks ago will soon play a key role in escorting the Kremlin chief to U.S. soil. "It is an interesting irony that the fabric used to intercept and defend North America from military incursions like those that Russia has done three times so far this year, will be used to protect the Russian president for this upcoming summit," Scott Clancy, a retired Royal Canadian Air Force major general who served as deputy commander of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD)'s Alaska Region, told Newsweek. NORAD is a unique joint U.S.-Canadian military organization tasked with enforcing security throughout North American airspace. For the U.S., this includes not only the mainland but also Alaska, where NORAD fighters most recently intercepted Russian Tu-95 bombers and Su-35 fighters flying within the state's Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) on July 22. "NORAD conducts aerospace warning, aerospace control and maritime warning in defense of North America," NORAD spokesperson Captain Rebecca Garand told Newsweek. Yet "in addition to these critical mission sets," Garand pointed out another lesser known role for NORAD—and it's not just tracking Santa Claus. "NORAD is also responsible for working in coordination with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the U.S., and Transport Canada and NAV CANADA in Canada, to support and enforce Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) areas as well as airspace over National Security Special Events (NSSE), when required or requested," Garand said. In doing so, she said "NORAD employs a layered defense network of radars, satellites, and fighter aircraft to identify and respond to potential threats." "NORAD's response to air activity within a NORAD-enforced TFR that is not in compliance with authoritative law demonstrates the Command's execution of aerospace warning and control missions for the United States and Canada," Garand said. A NORAD F-35 intercepts a Russian Su-35 fighter and Tu-95 bomber over the Bering Sea, off of Alaska, on July 22, 2025. A NORAD F-35 intercepts a Russian Su-35 fighter and Tu-95 bomber over the Bering Sea, off of Alaska, on July 22, 2025. Alaskan NORAD Region/11th Air Force/U.S. Department of Defense Advanced Firepower Separated by just two miles at their closest point across the Bering Strait, Alaska effectively serves as the U.S. front line with Russia. As such, the state is also a hub for NORAD firepower stationed at two primary bases of Fairbanks and Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, where President Donald Trump is set to receive Putin on Friday. In fact, "Alaska is the largest concentration of operational Gen 5 aircraft in the world between these two bases with F-22 Raptors at JBER and F-35s at Fairbanks," Clancy, who is today a fellow at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, said. "These bases also are the location for the E-3 AWACS aircraft which does airborne surveillance and tactical battle management for the fighters, and the ever-crucial tanker aircraft without which, due to the extreme distances in the Arctic, nothing happens," he added. It's not just Russia that NORAD looks out for on this Arctic frontier. Last year, Chinese H-6 bombers joined Russian Tu-95 counterparts for the first time, prompting NORAD to scramble U.S. F-16s and F-35s, along with Canadian CF-18 fighters. Such encounters, which take place over international airspace designated as Alaska's ADIZ, have also inspired new exercises on the part of NORAD, including a March drill that saw an American B-1 bomber join F-16s and Canadian C-18s showcasing both nation's "readiness to defend North America and respond to global security challenges in partnership," according to a statement by NORAD's Alaska Command. The following month, in April, Alaska National Guard Major David Bedard reported on how the 176th Air Defense Squadron fielded a "state-of-the-art" third-generation battle command center known as the AN/FYQ-156 Tactical Command and Control System in order to ward off the combined patrol "careening toward the [ADIZ] and bringing the nuclear-capable long-range bombers closer to U.S. sovereign airspace." How It Works The precise details of the logistics surrounding the summit are not publicly disclosed for security reasons. But Clancy spoke of his previous experience during Trump's May 2019 visit to Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson. While then-NORAD Alaska Region commander U.S. General Boussiere greeted Trump on the tarmac, Clancy "was in the command center directing the intercept of potential threats." "NORAD's procedures and systems would work alongside the FAA to identify any deviation from the stringent protocols of the TFR, in order to delineate between normal air traffic and that which is suspicious," Clancy said. "NORAD would then use its fighter aircraft to further delineate between negligent contacts, and those which could be more nefarious." "They would do so by intercepting the aircraft," he added. "All of this is supported by a complex web of systems and conference calls set to provide decision makers the best chance of getting all the required information to make decisions pertaining to the aircraft and the safety of and security of the principles, especially POTUS." As for Putin, the protocol for his arrival was even more opaque, not least because his trip will mark the first time a Russian leader steps foot in Alaska since the territory was sold by Russia to the U.S. in 1867. Clancy suspected that Putin may opt to travel to Alaska without a Russian military escort in order to reduce the likelihood of any "antics" that may "take away from the newsworthiness of the summit" at a time when the Russian leader was "trying to own the narrative and portray himself as the driver of long-term peace in Ukraine." At the same time, he raised the possibility that the U.S. could also deploy aircraft to escort Putin's flight and potentially do so in coordination with Russian counterparts if necessary. "If Russian fighter aircraft were escorting President Putin's plane to the edge of or into the ADIZ," Clancy said, "this is where things get interesting." President Donald Trump speaks in front of an F-22 fighter jet during a visit to Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, on February 28, 2019. President Donald Trump speaks in front of an F-22 fighter jet during a visit to Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, on February 28, 2019. Staff Sergeant Westin Warburton/U.S. Air Force 'Our Highest Priority' In any case, the primary agency involved in orchestrating the security protocols surrounding the summit will be the U.S. Secret Service. The Secret Service, known primarily for protecting the president, also offers security to visiting heads of state. This practice was confirmed in relation to Putin's upcoming visit by former Secret Service agent Robert McDonald in comments shared Tuesday with the official TASS Russian News Agency. Putin is also expected to bring his own security detail from Russia's Presidential Security Service. In the U.S., the role of the Secret Service has been in the spotlight over the past year as Trump survived two assassination attempts, one in which he was injured by a sniper's bullet while on the 2024 campaign trail. Reached for comment, a Secret Service spokesperson told Newsweek that "the safety of the President is our highest priority." "In order to maintain operational security," the spokesperson said, "the Secret Service does not discuss the specific means and methods used to conduct our protective operations."

Hungary Offers Model for Conservative Higher Ed Reform
Hungary Offers Model for Conservative Higher Ed Reform

Newsweek

time18 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Hungary Offers Model for Conservative Higher Ed Reform

Across the West, universities have ceased to be neutral institutions. Once dedicated to the pursuit of truth, they have become fortresses of ideological conformity. Anyone who diverges from progressive orthodoxy is excluded from faculty ranks, free inquiry is subordinated to activism, and taxpayer funds flow into administrative bureaucracies that enforce political correctness. What was once debate is now enforcement. What used to be education is now indoctrination. This is no longer a matter of liberal drift but an illiberal takeover—the Berkeley hippies who moved into faculty lounges decades ago would now be considered retrograde white supremacists—a structural crisis. As our colleague Christopher Rufo laid out last month in the Manhattan Statement on Higher Education, this moment calls for more than gentle nudges. Universities have violated their founding compact to seek truth and develop knowledge for the common good. They take billions from the federal government and repay it with contempt for most of the country. Reform will not come from within, so it must be cajoled from without. The West already has a model for what such reform can look like: Hungary. Hungary's approach to higher education has attracted scorn from international media and Western academics, who label it authoritarian. In truth, it has begun what American reformers have only recently proposed, and which the Trump administration is attempting to achieve as it moves to remedy our leading universities' massive civil rights violations: a serious realignment of higher education with the values of the nation that sustain it. Since 2021, the Hungarian government has restructured many of its public universities into foundation models, governed by boards of trustees. These boards, comprised of academics and civic leaders, are tasked with upholding academic integrity while ensuring institutional accountability. These structures resemble those in place in Germany and the Netherlands, so the opposition to them isn't technical, but political: Hungary's critics oppose this restructuring not because they fear dysfunction, but because they fear competition. ROME, ITALY - JUNE 24: Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orbán meets the press at Palazzo Chigi after a meeting with Giorgia Meloni on June 24, 2024 in Rome, Italy. ROME, ITALY - JUNE 24: Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orbán meets the press at Palazzo Chigi after a meeting with Giorgia Meloni on June 24, 2024 in Rome, Italy. Simona Granati - Corbis/Getty Images Some of these reforms are specific to the Hungarian context, but the reaction to them lays bare an underlying reality: "academic freedom" in the mouths of Western progressives no longer means the freedom to pursue open inquiry. Instead, the concept has been perverted to mean higher-ed grandees' exclusive right to determine who participates in scholarly life. In an Orwellian twist, it means suppressing dissenting views, excluding nonconformists, and protecting institutional monopolies under the pretense of intellectual neutrality. Nowhere has this dynamic become clearer than in the recent controversy surrounding Balázs Orbán, the political director to Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orbán (no relation). Last December, Balázs Orbán successfully defended his PhD dissertation at Eötvös Loránd University. His thesis, focused on constitutional issues attending national sovereignty, was approved by a faculty committee, earned the highest honors, and passed all academic and procedural reviews. But that didn't stop left-wing academics from launching a smear campaign. A German academic blog alleged that Orbán benefited from political favoritism. Critics also alleged plagiarism, then abandoned that charge when no evidence emerged. Dissenting members of the university's doctoral council admitted that the thesis was academically sound but still opposed it on vague ethical grounds, citing Orbán's position in government. One professor called on the university to deny the degree outright, not because of scholarly deficiencies, but because of Orbán's political affiliation. This was no isolated outburst, but part of a broader effort to delegitimize conservative participation in academic life. Even Anna Unger, a legal scholar critical of the government, described the backlash as a coordinated campaign of intimidation. The campaign failed and Orbán earned his degree. But the real lesson of the episode lies in what it revealed. The opposition was not to the content of his work, but to the idea that someone aligned with Hungary's government could be allowed to participate in academic life at all. The critics were not defending scholarly standards, but their exclusive claim to setting those standards. This pattern is not unique to Hungary. American universities famously screen out candidates based on "diversity statements," enforce other ideological litmus tests, and use public funds to support political activism. Institutions that were created to educate citizens have become tools for reshaping them. The Manhattan Statement calls for a new compact, as does model legislation that one of us (Shapiro) helped develop and that's been adopted in many states. Universities should be required to eliminate political loyalty tests, disband race-based bureaucracies, and restore merit as the primary basis for admission, hiring, and promotion. Free speech must be enforced in practice, not just in theory. Institutions that refuse to comply should lose taxpayer funding. These are not radical demands, but overdue correctives necessary for restoring public trust in higher education. Hungary's experience shows that such reforms are both possible and effective. The foundation model has stabilized university finances, increased transparency, and enabled new institutions, such as the Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC), to grow. MCC, whose board Orbán chairs—and where both of us have been involved in programming—sponsors research, runs seminars, hosts visiting speakers, and offers fellowships to students with a range of views. It represents a different vision of what academic life can be. That vision is one in which public institutions serve the public, not a self-replicating elite. It's one in which conservatives and classical liberals can participate in scholarly debate without being treated as intruders. It's one in which universities are once again judged by whether they produce knowledge and educate citizens, not whether they reinforce progressive narratives. The university is not above the political community that sustains it. When it ceases to reflect and serve that community and begins to function as an engine of ideological enforcement—not to mention identity-based discrimination—it forfeits its privileged status. In that case, as Hungary's example shows, the state has not only the right, but also the duty, to act. Ilya Shapiro is director of constitutional studies at the Manhattan Institute and author of Lawless: The Miseducation of America's Elites. Charles Yockey was formerly a legal policy analyst at the Manhattan Institute who spent the past year living in Budapest as a fellow of the Hungary Foundation. The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store