Latest news with #nationalinterests
Arab News
07-08-2025
- Business
- Arab News
India vows to protect national interests after Trump threatens Delhi with 50 percent tariff
NEW DELHI: India has vowed to take 'all actions necessary' to protect its national interests after President Donald Trump doubled US tariffs on India to 50 percent over Delhi's purchase of Russian oil. Trump signed an executive order on Wednesday to place an additional 25 percent tariff on India on top of a 25 percent tariff that is set to go into effect on Thursday, making the South Asian country one of the most heavily taxed US trading partners in Asia. The order finds India is 'currently directly or indirectly importing Russian Federation oil,' and says it is 'necessary and appropriate' to apply the new 25 percent tariff on Indian goods. The US is India's top export market, making up around 18 percent of exports and 2.2 percent of its GDP. Foreign Ministry spokesman Randhir Jaiswal said the US decision to impose additional tariffs were 'extremely unfortunate,' as Delhi's imports from Russia 'are based on market factors' and done to ensure energy security for the 1.4 billion Indian population. 'We reiterate that these actions are unfair, unjustified and unreasonable. India will take all actions necessary to protect its national interests,' he said in a statement. The 50 percent tariff could cut Indian GDP by 0.6 to 0.8 percent, according to Arupam Manur, an economist at the Takshashila Institution in Bangalore. The cut would risk India's economic growth slipping below 6 percent this year. As the combined tariffs will go into effect 21 days after the signing of the order, India still has time to negotiate with the Trump administration. 'There is speculation that the 25 percent additional tariffs might be a negotiating tactic by the Trump administration, which can be used as a leverage point against India in the upcoming round of trade talks,' Manur said. 'So, India will continue negotiating with the US, but the room for making concessions to the US is getting smaller due to the bad-faith nature of dealings.' India will likely look at diversifying trade partners, as Washington becomes increasingly 'unreliable trading partner with multiple ad-hoc tariff impositions.' 'The recently concluded FTAs (free trade agreements) with Australia and the UK have come at a good time. India will hope to sign a trading arrangement with Europe as well. India will also look to strengthen its trading relationship with the Middle East,' Manur said, highlighting how UAE and Saudi Arabia are India's third and fifth largest trading partners, respectively. As India exports around $81 billion goods annually to the US, the impact would be felt in India domestically in labor-intensive industries, such as gems and jewelry, apparel, textiles, auto parts, sea food and chemicals. Lalit Thukral, president of the Noida Apparel Export Cluster, which employs about one million people, said the 50 percent tariff rate is 'too much' for his industry. 'The 50 percent is out of reach now. We cannot do that. It means you have to close your factories, close your business … Buyers who are in the US are running away … They are placing orders to China, Vietnam or a third country. They will not come to India now,' he told Arab News. 'I have been in this field for the last 45 years and for the first time we have seen this kind of situation. This is a very horrible situation. Had we known that this trouble was coming we could have planned it, but we were not ready for this kind of thing to come.'
Times of Oman
06-08-2025
- Business
- Times of Oman
US slaps additional tariffs, India says 'unfair, unjustified and unreasonable'
New Delhi : Terming the United States' move to impose additional tariffs on India over its oil imports from Russia as "unfair, unjustified and unreasonable," the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) on Wednesday declared that New Delhi will take "all actions necessary to protect its national interests." In an official statement, the MEA said, "The United States has in recent days targeted India's oil imports from Russia. We have already made clear our position on these issues, including the fact that our imports are based on market factors and done with the overall objective of ensuring the energy security of 1.4 billion people of India." "It is therefore extremely unfortunate that the US should choose to impose additional tariffs on India for actions that several other countries are also taking in their own national interest," the statement added. "We reiterate that these actions are unfair, unjustified and unreasonable. India will take all actions necessary to protect its national interests," the MEA stressed. This came after US President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed an Executive Order imposing an additional 25 per cent tariff on imports from India. According to the order issued by the White House, Trump cited matters of national security and foreign policy concerns, as well as other relevant trade laws, for the increase, claiming that India's imports of Russian oil, directly or indirectly, pose an "unusual and extraordinary threat" to the United States. After the order, the total tariff on Indian goods will be 50 per cent. While the initial duty becomes effective on August 7, the additional levy will come into effect after 21 days and will be imposed on all Indian goods imported into the US, except for goods already in transit or those meeting specific exemptions. The Executive Order also allows for modifications based on changing circumstances, including potential retaliation by other countries or steps taken by Russia or India to address the national emergency. "Accordingly, and as consistent with applicable law, articles of India imported into the customs territory of the United States shall be subject to an additional ad valorem rate of duty of 25 per cent," the order stated. "This rate of duty shall be effective with respect to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time 21 days after the date of this order, except for goods that (1) were loaded onto a vessel at the port of loading and in transit on the final mode of transit prior to entry into the United States before 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time 21 days after the date of this order," the order added.
ABC News
13-07-2025
- Business
- ABC News
China was the big disruptor in our region. Now the US is determined to take that title
Australia and China, the prime minister told the secretary of the CCP's Shanghai Municipal Committee on Sunday, "deal with each other in a calm and consistent manner". "And we want to continue to pursue our national interests, and it is in our interest to have good relations with China". It's the sort of polite diplomatic language that can often sound eye glazing at bilateral meetings on official trips. But it had a particularly pointed resonance this time, given there is little that feels 'calm and consistent' emanating from our other major international partner: the United States of America. There is the ongoing and escalating trade war that President Trump has unleashed upon the globe, and notably on countries that have close economic relationships with China. And there has also been his continuing pressure on allies to increase their defence spending, facing the prospect of a US withdrawal of its forces — and military spending — around the world. Over the weekend, the US president has made more declarations about tariffs he plans to impose on the European Union and Mexico. To date, Australia hasn't been subjected to talk of any further punitive tariffs. But on the strategic front, an intervention by his Under Secretary of Defence for Strategy, Elbridge Colby, signalled that pressure that has, to date, been most notably seen on NATO countries in Europe to increase their defence spending, is now turning to the Asia Pacific. The Financial Times reported that the Pentagon is pressing Japan and Australia to make clear what role they would play if the US and China went to war over Taiwan. Apart from being the latest attempt by the US administration to pressure all its allies on spending, the issue raises a whole set of separate issues for Australia, because of the AUKUS agreement. The AUKUS agreement — which includes, in the shorter term, the purchases by Australia of US nuclear-powered submarines — is built on a so-called 'forward defence' strategy — one that envisages a conflict fought out in the South China Sea, rather than in the maritime approaches to Australia closer to home. AUKUS sceptics have long argued that the increasing intermeshing of Australia's defence capability with that of the US (even before AUKUS), tied us intrinsically into whatever military operations the United States might undertake in the future. The AUKUS deal escalated that possibility, raising the question of whether the submarine deal would link us into a conflict between our biggest trading partner and our biggest ally over Taiwan. The leaking of news about Secretary Colby's pressure on Australia and Japan makes that question over our position on a war over Taiwan — which has tended to be fobbed off as hypothetical until now — a much sharper one. The irony of course is that the United States has always maintained a position of 'strategic ambiguity' about what it would do in the case of China invading Taiwan. Yet now it is pressuring Australia and Japan to say what they would do. What's more the story appeared just as the Australian prime minister touched down in Shanghai: timing that few believe was coincidental and possibly designed to disrupt any improvement in relations between the two countries, and to dominate the coverage of the visit. Prime Minister Albanese and his foreign minister Penny Wong have been significantly changing their language about Australia's strategic approach to both the US and China in the past couple of weeks, and China hawks in Australia have been warning that the change in tone in the way the PM has reflected on, and defined the ANZUS alliance, would not be welcomed in Washington. In a major speech, Mr Albanese spoke of the decision of his predecessor John Curtin to turn the United States during World War II involved "an Australian foreign policy anchored in strategic reality, not bound by tradition". It was "dealing with the world as it is, not as we would like it to be", he said, a statement with clear resonances in the present. While Australia's position between the two superpowers is often seen as a binary choice of one or the other, the times compel a different, more nuanced and independent approach. After a decade of discussion in Australia about China seen largely through a national security lens, understandably provoked by China's increasing defence position, the PM's message ahead of this trip to China has been a nod to our huge trade relationship and to people-to-people contacts. Chinese tourism to Australia, for one thing, was worth $9 billion alone last year. But Mr Albanese's foreign minister, Penny Wong, has been taking the role of 'bad cop', putting on record with her counterpart on the sidelines of an ASEAN meeting in Kuala Lumpur that Australia was not happy about China's live fire exercises off our coast, or a range of other issues. For the always carefully spoken, the language was stronger than it has been in the past, and came on the back of a speech in which she expressed Australia's concern about China's military build up, including nuclear weaponry. It seemed to signal a balanced approach to the good and bad of the Australia-China relationship, just as the government was also sending a clear signal that it would take a more independent approach, less frightened of offending the Americans, than has been the case in recent years. But just as Australia is asserting that its national interests are different from those of both China and the US, it seems the United States may force us into a choice we don't want to make. Mr Albanese was careful in his response to the Elbridge story, agreeing that there was some irony in the US expecting Australia to outline its position on an issue which the Americans have not done. And also insisting that Australia's preference is for the status quo over Taiwan to continue. Five years ago it seemed China was the big disruptor in our region. Now the United States appears determined to take that title for itself. Laura Tingle is the ABC's Global Affairs Editor.
South China Morning Post
11-07-2025
- Business
- South China Morning Post
Japan refuses to yield on Trump's tariff threat: ‘We will not be taken advantage of'
Tokyo says it is standing firm on trade after US President Donald Trump announced a 25 per cent tariff on all Japanese imports, with Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba vowing to do what was best for his country rather than yield to pressure from Washington. In a speech on Wednesday in Chiba prefecture, Ishiba declared: 'This is a battle for our national interests. We will not be taken advantage of. Even if it is an ally, we must speak honestly. We will protect what needs to be protected.' The comments come amid rising tensions over Trump's decision to begin imposing the blanket levy – a move analysts say could cripple bilateral trade and strain a security alliance that has underpinned the postwar regional order in East Asia. In his comments, Ishiba stressed Japan 's long-standing contributions to the US economy and strategic interests, pointing out that the country has been Washington's largest investor and a major job creator for nearly 80 years. The tariffs are part of Trump's broader 'Liberation Day' trade agenda, unveiled in April, which seeks to slash trade deficits by imposing sweeping levies on countries he accuses of exploiting the US. After a 90-day window for negotiations yielded limited results – with only the UK and Vietnam securing exemptions – the White House confirmed on Monday that a 25 per cent tariff on all Japanese and South Korean imports would take effect from August 1. Since the announcement, Ishiba's administration has repeatedly said that Trade Minister Ryosei Akazawa is ready to return to the US for further talks and that Tokyo remains committed to reaching a breakthrough – though the chances of that now appear slim.
Wall Street Journal
23-06-2025
- Politics
- Wall Street Journal
Trump's Iran Attack Revives Questions About War Powers
Operation Midnight Hammer, Saturday's U.S. attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, rekindled a long-running legal debate about when presidents can unilaterally deploy the military against a foreign power. In one sense, President Trump's decision to strike Iran follows perhaps the most central theme of his second term in office: He is taking aggressive, boundary-pushing actions while the legislative branch is relegated to the sidelines. But in this instance, Trump's move bears similarities to decisions made by past presidents—of both parties—who moved quickly to use military force to vindicate what they saw as urgent national interests.
