India faces tough choices under U.S. tariff pressure
India faces an ultimatum from the United States with major political and economic ramifications both at home and abroad: end purchases of Russian oil or face painful tariffs.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, leader of the world's most populous nation and its fifth-biggest economy, must make some difficult decisions.
U.S. President Donald Trump has given longstanding ally India, one of the world's largest crude oil importers, three weeks to find alternative suppliers.
Levies of 25 per cent already in place will double to 50 per cent if India doesn't strike a deal.
For Trump, the August 27 deadline is a bid to strip Moscow of a key source of revenue for its military offensive in Ukraine.
'It is a geopolitical ambush with a 21-day fuse,' said Syed Akbaruddin, a former Indian diplomat to the United Nations, writing in the Times of India newspaper.
How has India responded?
New Delhi called Washington's move 'unfair, unjustified and unreasonable'.
Modi has appeared defiant.
He has not spoken directly about Trump but said on Thursday 'India will never compromise' on the interests of its farmers.
Agriculture employs vast numbers of people in India and has been a key sticking point in trade negotiations.
It all seems a far cry from India's early hopes for special tariff treatment after Trump said in February he had found a 'special bond' with Modi.
'The resilience of U.S.-India relations... is now being tested more than at any other time over the last 20 years,' said Michael Kugelman, from the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada.
What is the impact on India?
Russia accounted for nearly 36 per cent of India's total crude oil imports in 2024, snapping up approximately 1.8 million barrels of cut-price Russian crude per day.
Buying Russian oil saved India billions of dollars on import costs, keeping domestic fuel prices relatively stable.
Switching suppliers will likely threaten price rises, but not doing so will hit India's exports.
The Federation of Indian Export Organisations warned that the cost of additional U.S. tariffs risked making many businesses 'not viable'.
Urjit Patel, a former central bank governor, said Trump's threats were India's 'worst fears'.
Without a deal, 'a needless trade war' would likely ensue and 'welfare loss is certain', he said in a post on social media.
What has Modi done?
Modi has sought to bolster ties with other allies.
That includes calling Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva on Thursday, who said they had agreed on the need 'to defend multilateralism'.
Ashok Malik, of business consultancy The Asia Group, told AFP: 'There is a signal there, no question.'
India's national security adviser Ajit Doval met with Vladimir Putin in Moscow, saying the dates of a visit to India by the Russian president were 'almost finalized'.
Modi, according to Indian media, might also visit China in late August. It would be Modi's first visit since 2018, although it has not been confirmed officially.
Beijing's foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said in response to an AFP question on Friday that 'China welcomes Prime Minister Modi' for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit.
India and neighbouring China have long competed for strategic influence across South Asia.
Successive U.S. administrations have seen India as a key partner with like-minded interests when it comes to China.
'All those investments, all that painstaking work done by many U.S. presidents and Indian prime ministers, is being put at risk,' Malik said.
'I have not seen the relationship so troubled since the early 1990s, to be honest. I'm not saying it's all over, not in the least, but it is at risk.'
Can Modi change policy?
Modi faces a potential domestic backlash if he is seen to bow to Washington.
'India must stand firm, put its national interest first,' the Indian Express newspaper wrote in an editorial.
Opposition politicians are watching keenly.
Mallikarjun Kharge, president of the key opposition Congress party, warned the government was 'disastrously dithering'.
He also pointed to India's longstanding policy of 'non-alignment'.
'Any nation that arbitrarily penalizes India for our time-tested policy of strategic autonomy... doesn't understand the steel frame India is made of,' Kharge said in a statement.
However, retired diplomat Akbaruddin said there is still hope.
New Delhi can be 'smartly flexible', Akbaruddin said, suggesting that could mean 'buying more U.S. oil if it's priced competitively, or engaging Russia on the ceasefire issue.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Global News
33 minutes ago
- Global News
Prime Minister Carney maintains positive approval rating despite summer cooldown: poll
See more sharing options Send this page to someone via email Share this item on Twitter Share this item via WhatsApp Share this item on Facebook A new poll suggests Prime Minister Mark Carney's popularity is cooling off in the summer, but still remains broadly positive. Abacus Data says the Carney-led Liberal government's approval dipped to 50 per cent in its latest polling, down two percentage points compared to mid-July and the lowest level since March. Canadians were surveyed in the week after U.S. President Donald Trump levied new 35 per cent tariffs on Canada — seemingly a consequence of failing to secure a new trade deal by the Aug. 1 deadline. 9:47 Canada-US trade war: Why can't Mark Carney get a deal done with Trump? Carney himself maintains a positive net approval rating despite a couple percentage points of mild cooling. Story continues below advertisement Abacus CEO David Coletto says the drop in popularity could be tied to a lack of perceived progress on key domestic files and ongoing high-profile international negotiations. Despite a modest cooldown for the Liberals, the polling firm says political preference has been largely unchanged through the summer.
CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
Russia and Ukraine hold fast to their demands ahead of a planned Putin-Trump summit
This combination of photos shows Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, in Moscow on May 9, 2025, and President Donald Trump in Washington on Aug. 1. (AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko, Pool, Mark Schiefelbein, File) The threats, pressure and ultimatums have come and gone, but Russian President Vladimir Putin has maintained Moscow's uncompromising demands in the war in Ukraine, raising fears he could use a planned summit with U.S. President Donald Trump in Alaska to coerce Kyiv into accepting an unfavorable deal. The maximalist demands reflect Putin's determination to reach the goals he set when he launched the full-scale invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022. Putin sees a possible meeting with Trump as a chance to negotiate a broad deal that would not only cement Russia's territorial gains but also keep Ukraine from joining NATO and hosting any Western troops, allowing Moscow to gradually pull the country back into its orbit. The Kremlin leader believes time is on his side as the exhausted and outgunned Ukrainian forces are struggling to stem Russian advances in many sectors of the over 1,000-kilometer (over 600-mile) front line while swarms of Russian missiles and drones batter Ukrainian cities. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy also has stood firm in his positions, agreeing to a ceasefire proposed by Trump while reaffirming the country's refusal to abandon seeking NATO membership and rejecting acknowledgment of Russia's annexation of any of its regions. A look at Russian and Ukrainian visions of a peace deal and how a Putin-Trump summit could evolve: Russia's position In a memorandum presented at talks in Istanbul in June, Russia offered Ukraine two options for establishing a 30-day ceasefire. One demanded Ukraine withdraw its forces from Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson — the four regions Moscow illegally annexed in September 2022 but never fully captured. As an alternate condition for a ceasefire, Russia made a 'package proposal' for Ukraine to halt mobilization efforts, freeze Western arms deliveries and ban any third-country forces on its soil. Moscow also suggested Ukraine end martial law and hold elections, after which the countries could sign a comprehensive peace treaty. Once there's a truce, Moscow wants a deal to include the 'international legal recognition' of its annexations of Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula in 2014 and the four regions in 2022. Russia says a peace treaty should have Ukraine declare its neutral status between Russia and the West, abandon its bid to join NATO, limit the size of its armed forces and recognize Russian as an official language on par with Ukrainian -– conditions reflecting Putin's earliest goals. It also demands Ukraine ban the 'glorification and propaganda of Nazism and neo-Nazism' and dissolve nationalist groups. Since the war began, Putin has falsely alleged that neo-Nazi groups were shaping Ukrainian politics under Zelenskyy, who is Jewish. They were fiercely dismissed by Kyiv and its Western allies. In Russia's view, a comprehensive peace treaty should see both countries lift all sanctions and restrictions, abandon any claims to compensation for wartime damage, resume trade and communications, and reestablish diplomatic ties. Asked Thursday whether Moscow has signaled any willingness to compromise to make a meeting with Trump possible, Putin's foreign affairs adviser Yuri Ushakov responded that there haven't been any shifts in the Russian position. Ukraine's position The memorandum that Ukraine presented to Moscow in Istanbul emphasized the need for a full and unconditional 30-day ceasefire to set stage for peace negotiations. It reaffirmed Ukraine's consistent rejection of Russian demands for neutral status as an attack on its sovereignty, declaring it is free to choose its alliances and adding that its NATO membership will depend on consensus with the alliance. It emphasized Kyiv's rejection of any restrictions on the size and other parameters of its armed forces, as well as curbs on the presence of foreign troops on its soil. Ukraine's memorandum also opposed recognizing any Russian territorial gains, while describing the current line of contact as a starting point in negotiations. The document noted the need for international security guarantees to ensure the implementation of peace agreements and prevent further aggression. Kyiv's peace proposal also demanded the return of all deported and illegally displaced children and a total prisoner exchange. It held the door open to gradual lifting of some of the sanctions against Russia if it abides by the agreement. Trump's positions Trump has often spoken admiringly of Putin and even echoed his talking points on the war. He had a harsh confrontation with Zelenskyy in the Oval Office on Feb. 28, but later warmed his tone. As Putin resisted a ceasefire and continued his aerial bombardments, Trump showed exasperation with the Kremlin leader, threatening Moscow with new sanctions. Although Trump expressed disappointment with Putin, his agreement to meet him without Zelenskyy at the table raised worries in Ukraine and its European allies, who fear it could allow the Russian to get Trump on his side and strong-arm Ukraine into concessions. Trump said without giving details that 'there'll be some swapping of territories, to the betterment of both' Russia and Ukraine as part of any peace deal that he will discuss with Putin when they meet Friday. Putin repeatedly warned Ukraine will face tougher conditions for peace if it doesn't accept Moscow's demands as Russian troops forge into other regions to build what he described as a 'buffer zone.' Some observers suggested Russia could trade those recent gains for the territories of the four annexed by Moscow still under Ukrainian control. 'That is potentially a situation that gives Putin a tremendous amount of leeway as long as he can use that leverage to force the Ukrainians into a deal that they may not like and to sideline the Europeans effectively,' Sam Greene of King's College London said. 'The question is, will Trump sign up to that and will he actually have the leverage to force the Ukrainians and the Europeans to accept it?' Putin could accept a temporary truce to win Trump's sympathy as he seeks to achieve broader goals, Greene said. 'He could accept a ceasefire so long as it's one that leaves him in control, in which there's no real deterrence against renewed aggression somewhere down the line,' he said. 'He understands that his only route to getting there runs via Trump.' In a possible indication he thinks a ceasefire or peace deal could be close, Putin called the leaders of China, India, South Africa and several ex-Soviet nations in an apparent effort to inform these allies about prospective agreements. Tatiana Stanovaya of the Carnegie Russia and Eurasia Center argued Putin wouldn't budge on his goals. 'However these conditions are worded, they amount to the same demand: Ukraine stops resisting, the West halts arms supplies, and Kyiv accepts Russia's terms, which effectively amount to a de facto capitulation,' she posted on X. 'The Russian side can frame this in a dozen different ways, creating the impression that Moscow is open to concessions and serious negotiation. It has been doing so for some time, but the core position remains unchanged: Russia wants Kyiv to surrender.' She predicted Putin might agree to meet Zelenskyy but noted the Kremlin leader would only accept such a meeting 'if there is a prearranged agenda and predetermined outcomes, which remains difficult to imagine.' 'The likely scenario is that this peace effort will fail once again,' she said. 'This would be a negative outcome for Ukraine, but it would not deliver Ukraine to Putin on a plate either, at least not in the way he wants it. The conflict, alternating between open warfare and periods of simmering tension, appears likely to persist for the foreseeable future.' The Associated Press
Global News
an hour ago
- Global News
How Trump's judicial picks could reshape abortion rights for decades
A review by The Associated Press shows that several of President Donald Trump's nominees to the federal courts have revealed anti-abortion views, been associated with anti-abortion groups or defended abortion restrictions. Several have helped defend their state's abortion restrictions in court and some have been involved in cases with national impact, including on access to medication abortion. While Trump has said issues related to abortion should be left to the states, the nominees, with lifetime appointments, would be in position to roll back abortion rights long after Trump leaves the White House. Trump has been inconsistent on abortion Trump has repeatedly shifted his messaging on abortion, often giving contradictory or vague answers. In the years before his most recent presidential campaign, Trump had voiced support for a federal ban on abortion on or after 20 weeks in pregnancy and said he might support a national ban around 15 weeks. Story continues below advertisement He later settled on messaging that decisions about abortion access should be left to the states. View image in full screen FILE – President Donald Trump holds up a signed executive order relating to clemency for anti-abortion protesters as he signs executive orders in the Oval Office of the White House, Jan. 23, 2025, in Washington. Ben Curtis/ The Associated Press Throughout his campaign, Trump has alternated between taking credit for appointing the Supreme Court justices who helped overturn Roe v. Wade and striking a more neutral tone. Get weekly health news Receive the latest medical news and health information delivered to you every Sunday. Sign up for weekly health newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy That's been an effort to navigate the political divide between his base of anti-abortion supporters and the broader public, which largely supports access to abortion. Many nominees have anti-abortion backgrounds One Trump nominee called abortion a 'barbaric practice' while another referred to himself as a 'zealot' for the anti-abortion movement. A nominee from Tennessee said abortion deserves special scrutiny because 'this is the only medical procedure that terminates a life.' Story continues below advertisement One from Missouri spread misinformation about medication abortion, including that it 'starves the baby to death in the womb' in a lawsuit aiming to challenge the Food and Drug Administration's approval of the abortion pill mifepristone. 5:19 U.S. Supreme Court rules abortion drug Mifepristone will remain widely accessible Legal experts and abortion rights advocates warn of a methodical remaking of the federal courts in a way that could pose enduring threats to abortion access nationwide. Bernadette Meyler, a professor of constitutional law at Stanford University, said judicial appointments 'are a way of federally shaping the abortion question without going through Congress or making a big, explicit statement.' 'It's a way to cover up a little bit what is happening in the abortion sphere compared to legislation or executive orders that may be more visible, dramatic and spark more backlash,' she said. The nominees represent Trump's 'promises' to Americans: White House Harrison Fields, a White House spokesperson, said 'every nominee of the President represents his promises to the American people and aligns with the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark ruling.' Story continues below advertisement 'The Democrats' extreme position on abortion was rejected in November in favor of President Trump's commonsense approach, which allows states to decide, supports the sanctity of human life, and prevents taxpayer funding of abortion,' Fields said in a statement to the AP. Trump focused primarily on the economy and immigration during his 2024 campaign, the issues that surveys showed were the most important topics for voters. Anti-abortion groups, abortion rights advocates respond Anti-abortion advocates say it's premature to determine whether the nominees will support their objectives but that they're hopeful based on the names put forth so far. 'We look forward to four more years of nominees cut from that mold,' said Katie Glenn Daniel, director of legal affairs for the national anti-abortion organization SBA Pro-Life America. Abortion rights advocates said Trump is embedding abortion opponents into the judiciary one judge at a time. 'This just feeds into this larger strategy where Trump has gotten away with distancing himself from abortion, saying he's going to leave it to the states, while simultaneously appointing anti-abortion extremists at all levels of government,' said Mini Timmaraju, president of the national abortion rights organization Reproductive Freedom for All.
