President Donald Trump proclaimed the return of a “Great America.” However, this idea faces opposition from most countries around the world, as the United States ignores the interests of others and imposes its own hegemony.
Political populism transformed into “trade wars”
It cannot be said that the 47th U.S. president, upon returning to the White House, forgot his promises. Over the past six months, largely thanks to Trump’s initiatives, the United States has revised its position toward Russia, without whose participation it is impossible to reach a political settlement in Ukraine. The pace of various negotiations (phone calls between the U.S. and Russian leaders, meetings between the U.S. president’s special envoy and the Russian president, the resumption of Russian-Ukrainian talks in Istanbul) was quite high, taking time constraints into account.
Nevertheless, a real breakthrough toward peace has not yet been achieved due to Kyiv’s position, which ignores the interests of the Russian side and the objective realities of the balance of power on the ground. Unfortunately, European leaders (in particular those of France, the United Kingdom, and Germany), apparently because of disagreements with the United States, have taken a destructive stance in favor of President Zelensky’s regime and have begun fueling a new escalation of the conflict.
NATO member states’ bet on continued arms deliveries to Ukraine and strikes deep into Russian territory cannot lead to the cessation of hostilities. The United States, while on the one hand declaring the need to respect Russia’s interests, on the other proved unable to persuade its European allies to end the conflict by lifting sanctions on Russia.
Given Moscow’s consistent policy of upholding the concept of a multipolar world order, expanding multifaceted ties with key Asian countries (especially China and India), and continuing successful foreign economic activity with the Global South despite harsh Western sanctions, the United States has chosen to intensify sanctions against Russia. The main focus is on minimizing Russian oil and gas exports, the country’s main source of foreign currency revenue, in order to pressure Moscow into accepting American peace terms on the “Ukrainian track.”
As a result, the failure of Trump’s populist pledge to secure a rapid peace has been offset by the U.S. decision to raise tariffs on countries importing Russian oil and gas. In this context, Washington pays special attention to major buyers of Russian energy resources, especially India and China.
The United States and China continue to have deep geopolitical and geo-economic contradictions. Washington sees China’s economy as a direct threat to its hegemony. This is why Trump raised tariffs on Chinese goods entering the U.S. market to 145%, forgetting that many American companies’ products are actually manufactured in China. This U.S. trade policy puts at risk nearly $700 billion annually flowing into China’s budget from exports to the American market.
Consequently, Beijing is forced to seek new channels to the European market, which has also been affected by Trump’s tariff increases. This explains China’s push to develop new international transit routes for its goods to the EU within the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative, through Pakistan, the post-Soviet republics of Central Asia, the South Caucasus, and Turkey.
The United States, in turn, seeks to create a mechanism for controlling key transit points on the China–Europe route (for example, plans for a 100-year outsourcing arrangement over the “Zangezur Corridor” in Armenia — the so-called Trump Route to Peace — which would allow monitoring of the Middle Corridor in the South Caucasus). Added to these economic issues are geopolitical tensions over Taiwan and Washington’s determination to prevent China from becoming a global leader.
India expresses discontent over the U.S. “trade war”
The United States has reduced (if not halted) its investment and technological assistance to China’s economy, shifting its focus to China’s geopolitical rival, India. India’s technological progress has, to a large extent, been the result of U.S. and EU interest. However, Washington is attempting to undermine New Delhi’s long-standing, balanced diplomacy, which also aims to strengthen its strategic partnership with Russia. To sustain its economic development and support its population of over 1.4 billion, India is objectively interested in securing large volumes of energy resources from Russia.
Unlike European countries that abandoned Russian gas in favor of Kyiv’s regime and to the detriment of their own citizens, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government tries to remain more pro-Indian than pro-Ukrainian. Moreover, there is not enough oil and gas on the global market to justify refusing Russian supplies. Nevertheless, Trump imposed a 25% tariff on India over its imports of Russian oil.
Will the “Indian example” become a template for U.S. trade pressure on other countries over energy cooperation with Russia?
India’s Ministry of External Affairs expressed dissatisfaction with the new U.S. tariffs, calling them “unfair, unjustified, and unreasonable.” It noted in particular that it was regrettable for the United States to impose additional tariffs on India for actions that many other countries take in their own interests.
India’s imports are driven by its national interest in ensuring the country’s energy security and are based on market factors. Despite U.S. measures, India is not giving up Russian oil imports. As one representative of a private Indian oil refinery told Reuters: “The government hasn’t told us anything yet, so we will not stop importing Russian oil.”
Meanwhile, the United States threatens to raise tariffs on countries buying Russian oil and gas to as much as 100%. However, import-dependent countries still have no clear idea of how to replace Russian gas or oil in their trade balance.
For example, NATO member Turkey, a U.S. ally, in 2024 purchased more than 40% of its gas from Russia (specifically, 21.75 billion cubic meters out of a total of 52 billion). Of this, 16 billion cubic meters came through the Blue Stream pipeline and 5.75 billion cubic meters through the TurkStream pipeline. State company Botaş’s contracts for annual deliveries expire in 2025. Russian gas is attractive to Turkey because of its competitive price, and Moscow has repeatedly accommodated its Turkish partners by agreeing to defer payments (especially in light of Turkey’s financial crisis, the aftermath of a devastating earthquake, and strategic partnership considerations).
If the United States raises tariffs on countries for importing Russian gas and oil, how could friendly Turkey quickly compensate for its losses by buying from Azerbaijan, Iran, Algeria, or Qatar? Likely, the U.S. will try to push its own high-priced LNG onto the Turkish market. But what would Turkish consumers gain from this? Europeans are already feeling the severe consequences of breaking off energy cooperation with Russia.
The United States has previously accommodated Turkey’s requests for an exemption from the list of Russian gas importers, given its severe economic crisis and favorable geographic location. Washington will likely make concessions to Ankara again. Trump will repeat Biden’s approach, as Turkey holds strategic value in the Balkans, Syria, the South Caucasus, Central Asia, and Pakistan.
The speculative U.S. approach — aimed at pressuring the Kremlin into being more flexible in reaching a truce in Ukraine — will once again fail. Such a policy by Trump will only strengthen the global alliance of Russia with China and India.
Alexander Svarants – Doctor of Political Science, Professor, Turkologist, expert on the Middle East
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
