Latest news with #878
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
07-08-2025
- Business
- First Post
Irony just died, many times, in Trump's 25% tariff penalty on India
Trump slaps India with tariffs over Russian oil ties, even as the US and China trade freely with Moscow read more The announcement of a 25 per cent on Indian exports by US President Donald Trump, aimed at penalising India for purchasing oil from Russia, has drawn global attention—not merely for its economic implications, but for its profound inconsistency. The irony is multilayered: while India is being singled out for maintaining an energy relationship with Russia, the United States itself remains a significant importer of Russian goods. According to US government data, in 2024, American trade with Russia amounted to $5.2 billion. This included critical imports such as $1.3 billion worth of fertilisers, $878 million of precious metals (notably palladium), and $624 million of uranium (USITC, 2025). STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Even as Washington accuses New Delhi of indirectly funding 'Putin's war machine,' it quietly maintains its own economic ties to Moscow—ostensibly under the radar of public and political scrutiny. America buys Russian uranium, then scolds India India's Ministry of External Affairs was quick to flag what it called a 'revealing' double standard. The ministry pointed out that US imports of Russian palladium and uranium have not ceased, and that fertiliser imports are, in fact, rising. Between January and May 2025, US imports of Russian uranium were up 28 per cent year-on-year, and fertiliser imports surged 21 per cent in the same period, The Indian Express reported. India's criticism carries a sharp edge: unlike the US, it argues, India turned to Russian oil only after traditional Western suppliers diverted their supplies to Europe, at Washington's own urging. India, the MEA noted, did not indulge in Russian trade as an indulgence but out of 'vital national compulsion.' In contrast, America's imports from Russia serve specific industry needs but continue without the same punitive scrutiny. China buys more oil — and buys time If India is being penalised for its energy trade with Russia, China's treatment is even more telling. Despite importing nearly half (47 per cent) of all Russian oil exports—compared to India's 38 per cent—China received a 90-day pause in US tariffs. The reason appears less about diplomacy and more about leverage. China, with its dominance over the global supply of rare earth elements and essential electronics components, holds sway over American industry. This leverage was evident during US-China trade talks in Stockholm, where Beijing framed its energy strategy as an expression of sovereignty. In response, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent conceded that while the US didn't want to 'impede on [China's] sovereignty,' Beijing might still 'like to pay a 100% tariff', Reuters reported. The Chinese strategy of strategic ambiguity and long-term positioning is hard to ignore. As Scott Kennedy of the Center for Strategic and International Studies observed, Beijing is simply waiting out the storm while doubling down on energy security and its relationship with Moscow. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD From China first to India first… in penalties The irony deepens when considering that Trump's trade war initially focussed on China. The US ran its largest goods trade deficit—$295 billion in 2024—with Beijing. That imbalance made China the presumed primary target of the tariff campaign. Now, while Chinese goods are being slapped with a 30 per cent tariff, India, a country with whom the US runs a much smaller deficit, is facing a punitive 25 per cent penalty simply for energy purchases. Trump's rationale—that India is profitting from reselling Russian oil—was stated with characteristic bluntness: 'They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine,' he said. However, such rhetoric appears at odds with on-the-ground realities. India uses the bulk of imported Russian oil for domestic consumption. The 'reselling for big profits' argument, while provocative, lacks substantiation. Tariff logic: Russia threatens US, so India must pay? The official justification for the new sanctions is rooted in national security. Trump's executive order states that 'the actions and policies of Russia continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the US.' By extension, India, through its oil purchases, is allegedly sustaining that threat. But the logic seems flawed. If the real aim is to end the war in Ukraine by drying up Russian revenues, then China's much larger purchases of Russian oil—along with the EU's ongoing trade—would warrant stricter action. Instead, US has exempted its own uranium buyers and offered China a delay. Trump had once boasted he could end the war in 24 hours if elected; yet six months into his third campaign cycle, Vladimir Putin remains unmoved, and Ukraine still bleeds. Defiance from the Global South Both India and China have responded not with capitulation, but resistance. Prime Minister Narendra Modi's public framing of the issue ties directly into his government's Atmanirbhar Bharat (Self-Reliant India) narrative. Officials in the Ministry of External Affairs have likewise drawn a sharp line, stating that India's bilateral ties 'should not be seen from the prism of a third country.' In other words, Washington's sanctions won't dictate New Delhi's strategic calculations. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD China's stance mirrors India's, albeit with different rhetoric. It portrays energy decisions as sovereign choices, and positions itself as a leader of the Global South. Beijing's message isn't just directed at the White House—it's aimed at a world increasingly frustrated with US-centric norms. Brics: A quiet realignment India and China's parallel resistance fits into a broader shift. Brics, which now includes Egypt, Iran, Ethiopia and the UAE, is increasingly presenting itself as an alternative to the Western-led global order. At the July 2025 Brics summit in Rio de Janeiro, members called out unilateral trade measures and emphasised sovereign financial cooperation. Trump's recent comment that Brics is 'basically a group of countries that are anti-US' shows how far this sentiment has travelled into American politics. Washington's fear that Brics will undermine the dollar's dominance and bypass Swift reflects the economic realignment underway. Parallel but uncoordinated pushback Despite the complex and often tense relations between India and China, the Trump administration's aggressive tactics are inadvertently aligning their responses. Both countries are rejecting US pressure not in coordination, but in parallel. For India, it's about economic autonomy and for China, it's about geopolitical calculus. Yet both share a common interest in resisting what they view as economic coercion masked as moral high ground. Whether through 25 per cent tariffs or Senate bills proposing 500 per cent duties on countries buying Russian oil, the US risks isolating itself from two of the world's largest economies. Oil: The last lever? Ultimately, Washington's hope that tariffs will force India to abandon Russian oil may be misplaced. India now sources 35 per cent of its crude from Russia, and much of it cannot be easily replaced. Many fear that any hasty pullback could disrupt refining and supply chains. At the same time, the global oil market remains delicately balanced. Russia could still retaliate by cutting CPC pipeline flows, which would hit Western oil giants and potentially spike global prices beyond $80 per barrel. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Given this backdrop, punishing India—while ignoring similar or larger trade by others—risks weakening Washington's credibility and alienating a vital partner in the Indo-Pacific. Final Irony: Targeting allies while fuelling the fire In the end, Trump's 25 per cent tariff on India seems less like strategic statecraft and more like symbolic punishment. It offers an illusion of action while failing to curb Russian oil revenues, ignoring American-Russian trade, and driving India and China further toward economic alignment. In trying to isolate Russia, Washington may be isolating itself. And in a world of sharp geopolitical edges, irony is the first casualty.
Barnama
30-05-2025
- Business
- Barnama
CPO FUTURES SLIP ON WEAK SOYBEAN OIL, SNAPPING 5-DAY RALLY
WORLD By Siti Noor Afera Abu KUALA LUMPUR, May 30 (Bernama) -- The crude palm oil (CPO) futures contract on Bursa Malaysia Derivatives snapped its five-day rally to close lower on Friday, dragged down by weakness in the soybean oil market, said palm oil trader David Ng. He noted that key support and resistance levels are seen at RM3,800 and RM4,000 per tonne respectively. Meanwhile, Fastmarkets Palm Oil Analytics senior analyst Dr Sathia Varqa said CPO futures close lower as traders booked their profits ahead of the long weekend. At the close, the spot month June 2025 contract lost RM41 to RM3,888 per tonne, July 2025 decreased by RM51 to RM3,491 per tonne, and August 2025 went down RM54 to RM3,878 per tonne. September 2025 was RM51 lower at RM3,870 per tonne, October 2025 slid by RM49 to RM3,870 per tonne, and November 2025 eased RM46 to RM3,874 per tonne. Trading volume fell to 59,698 lots from 69,553 lots yesterday, while open interest narrowed to 241,994 contracts from 244,448 contracts previously. The physical CPO price for June South fell by RM30 to RM3,930 per tonne. Bursa Malaysia Bhd and its subsidiaries will be closed on June 2 in conjunction with the official birthday of His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, King of Malaysia and would resume operations on June 3 (Tuesday).
