By Masala Mirror Staff
Published: August 18, 2025

Washington, DC – In a move that has sparked widespread debate, the United States has decided not to impose sanctions or tariffs on China and European countries for their continued purchase of Russian oil, while simultaneously levying a 25% tariff on India for similar imports. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended the decision, stating that sanctioning China would “push global oil prices higher,” a rationale that has left many questioning why the same logic does not apply to India.

Background: The Russian Oil Trade

Since the onset of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the US has sought to curb Russia’s energy revenues, a key funding source for its military operations. To achieve this, the US and its allies, including the G7, implemented a price cap on Russian oil to limit Moscow’s profits while maintaining global oil supply stability. However, countries like China, India, and Turkey have continued to purchase Russian crude, often at discounted rates, to meet their energy needs.

China remains the largest buyer of Russian oil, importing approximately 2 million barrels per day, followed by India and Turkey. India, in particular, has significantly increased its imports of Russian crude since 2022, citing affordability and energy security as primary drivers. These purchases are conducted legally under the G7 price cap, with India buying through global traders and ensuring proper insurance.

The US Decision: Tariffs on India, Exemptions for China and Europe

On August 1, 2025, President Donald Trump announced a 25% tariff on Indian goods, coupled with an additional “penalty” import tax, targeting India’s continued purchase of Russian oil. The move was described by Rubio as addressing a “point of irritation” in US-India relations, despite acknowledging India as a “strategic partner” and ally. Rubio emphasized that India’s oil trade with Russia indirectly supports Moscow’s war efforts in Ukraine, a concern echoed by White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, who noted that India is “basically tied with China” in purchasing Russian oil.

However, no such tariffs or sanctions have been imposed on China or European countries, despite their significant imports of Russian oil and gas. When questioned about this discrepancy during a press briefing, Rubio argued that sanctioning China would have severe consequences for global energy markets. “Sanctioning China would push global oil prices higher, and that’s something we’re trying to avoid,” Rubio stated. He further noted that China’s role as the world’s largest importer of oil makes it a critical player in maintaining global supply stability.

Why the Different Treatment?

The selective application of tariffs has raised questions about fairness and consistency in US foreign policy. Several factors appear to contribute to the differing treatment of India, China, and Europe:

1. Global Oil Market Dynamics: China’s massive oil consumption and its position as a top importer give it significant leverage in global energy markets. Analysts suggest that sanctions on China could disrupt oil supplies, leading to a spike in prices that would affect not only the US but also its allies. India, while a significant buyer, does not wield the same market influence, making it a less risky target for tariffs.
2. Geopolitical Considerations: The US has been engaged in delicate trade negotiations with China, with both sides recently extending a tariff truce for another 90 days. Imposing sanctions or tariffs on China could derail these talks, which are critical for maintaining stable commercial ties between the world’s two largest economies. In contrast, India’s strategic partnership with the US, while strong, may be seen as less sensitive to trade disruptions.
3. European Energy Dependence: European countries, particularly those reliant on Russian gas, have faced less scrutiny due to their gradual efforts to diversify energy sources. The US has prioritized maintaining unity with its European allies, who are also key partners in supporting Ukraine against Russia. Tariffs on Europe could strain these alliances, a risk Washington appears unwilling to take.
4. India’s Growing Role in Russian Oil Trade: India’s rapid increase in Russian oil imports has drawn attention, with some US officials arguing that it undermines efforts to isolate Moscow economically. Posts on X have highlighted the frustration, with one user noting that the US is “weaponizing market access” to pressure India, while others defend India’s purchases as legal and necessary for its energy needs.

India’s Response

India’s Foreign Ministry has reiterated that its relationship with Russia is “steady and time-tested,” emphasizing that its oil purchases are driven by economic necessity and conducted within the framework of the G7 price cap. Indian officials have argued that the country is not secretly funding Russia’s war efforts, as claimed by some US figures, and that its imports help stabilize global oil prices by preventing supply shortages.

The 25% tariff, however, has sparked concerns in New Delhi about its impact on Indian exports, particularly in sectors like textiles, pharmaceuticals, and technology. Indian analysts have called the tariffs “discriminatory,” pointing out that the US itself imports refined Russian oil processed by Indian refineries without facing similar penalties.

Criticism and Congressional Push

The US decision has drawn criticism for its apparent double standards. Critics argue that targeting India while sparing China and Europe undermines the credibility of US sanctions policy. Senator Lindsey Graham has been a vocal advocate for broader sanctions, introducing a bill that would authorize tariffs as high as 500% on any country purchasing Russian oil, gas, or uranium. The bill, which has bipartisan support, aims to “break the cycle” of countries like China and India buying Russian oil at discounted rates, which Graham claims fuels Moscow’s war machine. However, the legislation remains on hold, pending President Trump’s approval.

Global Implications

The selective imposition of tariffs could strain US-India relations, particularly as India continues to assert its energy sovereignty. Meanwhile, China’s firm stance against US pressure, as articulated by its Foreign Ministry, underscores its confidence in resisting external demands. Beijing has stated that it will “firmly defend its sovereignty, security, and development interests,” signaling that it will not alter its energy policies.

As the US navigates its complex relationships with China, India, and Europe, the debate over Russian oil purchases highlights the challenges of balancing geopolitical objectives with economic realities. For India, the tariffs represent a hurdle in its otherwise robust partnership with the US, while China’s exemption underscores its unique position in global trade dynamics.

Conclusion

The US decision to impose tariffs on India while sparing China and Europe reflects a pragmatic approach to global energy markets and trade negotiations. However, it has sparked a broader conversation about fairness, sovereignty, and the effectiveness of sanctions in achieving foreign policy goals. As the situation evolves, all eyes will be on how India responds to the tariffs and whether the US can maintain a consistent approach to curbing Russia’s energy revenues without destabilizing global markets.

Sources: Times Now (Web ID: 0), CBS News (Web ID: 1), ABC News (Web ID: 2), The Indian Express (Web ID: 7), Reuters via NDTV (Web ID: 8), Associated Press (Post ID: 0, 2, 5).