Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov has strongly criticised Washington’s trade and tariff threats, arguing that major powers such as India and China cannot be coerced into changing their policies through ultimatums. Speaking on a television programme in Moscow, Lavrov said that the repeated warnings from the United States to cut energy ties with Russia were not only failing but also backfiring, as they were pushing countries to diversify markets, look for alternative energy resources, and adapt to new global trade realities.
Lavrov highlighted the resilience of Asian powers in particular, pointing to India and China as examples of nations that would not be swayed by aggressive rhetoric. “Both China and India are ancient civilisations, and to use this language with them, ‘either stop doing what I don’t like, or I will impose tariffs on you’, well, that won’t work,” Lavrov said. He stressed that beyond the economic dimension, there is a strong moral and political resistance to Washington’s approach. According to him, pressure and threats undermine the spirit of diplomacy and instead create conditions for new alliances that bypass US influence.
The dispute comes against the backdrop of rising friction between Washington and New Delhi over India’s continued purchase of Russian crude oil. During the Ukraine war, India emerged as one of the key buyers of discounted Russian oil, a move that angered US policymakers. In retaliation, Washington imposed a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods in July and followed it up with another 25 per cent levy in August, taking the total tariff level to 50 per cent. Officials in the Trump administration accused India of profiting at America’s expense while ignoring repeated calls to reduce its engagement with Russia.
White House trade adviser Peter Navarro went so far as to accuse Indian refiners of being complicit in what he called “profiteering” from Russian partnerships. He claimed that the system worked against American workers and labelled the deals as unfair trade practices. Navarro used particularly harsh language, saying that India was financially benefitting from Russian refiners immediately after the invasion of Ukraine, while ordinary people suffered.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick also expressed dissatisfaction with New Delhi’s tariff structure. In a recent interview, Lutnick criticised India for restricting imports of US agricultural products and pointedly remarked that India, despite its population of over a billion, would not even purchase small volumes of American corn. He warned that without changes to its tariff regime, India could face significant difficulties in its trade relations with Washington.
Meanwhile, Lavrov dismissed the impact of US sanctions and restrictions targeting Russia. He argued that Russia had long grown accustomed to Western measures, recalling that an unprecedented number of sanctions had been imposed during Donald Trump’s first term as president. According to him, sanctions have now replaced traditional diplomacy under Joe Biden, with Western governments avoiding compromise in favour of punitive measures.
The comments underscore the widening rift in global trade and diplomacy. While Washington insists that tighter restrictions are necessary to isolate Russia over the Ukraine conflict, Moscow is doubling down on cultivating ties with nations like India and China. For New Delhi and Beijing, both countries see energy security and strategic autonomy as vital, making them reluctant to align with US expectations.
India, in particular, has maintained that its purchase of Russian oil is guided by national interest and energy security. Officials in New Delhi have repeatedly argued that the discounted oil helps keep domestic inflation under control and supports economic stability. China, on the other hand, has expanded its imports of Russian energy, further solidifying its role as a counterweight to US influence in Asia.
As the tariff battle intensifies, it remains unclear how relations between Washington and New Delhi will evolve. The growing rhetoric from US officials suggests further tensions, while Russia continues to portray itself as a reliable partner offering energy supplies without political conditions. For India and China, their status as ancient civilisations, as Lavrov described, reflects both pride and an unwillingness to bow to what they see as external pressure.
The episode also highlights broader questions about the future of global trade. With sanctions becoming a primary tool of foreign policy, the effectiveness of such measures is increasingly debated. For Russia, India, and China, the pushback signals a shift towards multipolar economic partnerships. For the United States, the challenge lies in balancing domestic political pressures with the realities of an interconnected global economy.
