- President Trump supports bipartisan legislation (Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025) imposing 500% tariffs on nations purchasing Russian oil, uranium and other goods. The move targets China, India and Brazil, forcing them to choose between cheap Russian energy or U.S. market access.
- Unlike past sanctions, this bill directly pressures rising powers (India, China) that have exploited Western hesitancy to keep trading with Russia. India now sources 35% of its oil from Russia, while China's energy demand props up Putin's war economy.
- The White House insists on unilateral authority to enforce sanctions, allowing Trump to escalate or de-escalate pressure based on negotiations. A senior official confirms Trump is "conceptually open" to the bill, but wants final say over implementation.
- Critics (like Sen. Rand Paul) warn the tariffs could fracture trade alliances and spike global energy prices, harming inflation-weary consumers. Tariffs may fail to cripple Russia while enriching intermediaries (India, Greece) through sanctions loopholes.
- Sen. Lindsey Graham frames it as a binary choice: Nations must "cut off the money or pay the price." The goal is to starve Russia's war machine and force Moscow to negotiate, testing whether economic pressure can succeed where diplomacy has failed.
In a bold escalation of economic warfare against Moscow, U.S. President Donald Trump has greenlit bipartisan legislation that would authorize crushing 500% tariffs on nations still purchasing Russian oil, uranium and other goods – effectively forcing global powers like China and India to choose between cheap energy and access to U.S. markets.
The move, championed by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), marks a strategic shift in Washington's approach to crippling Russia's war economy while granting Trump sweeping executive authority to enforce sanctions at his discretion. With Ukraine's survival hanging in the balance, the White House is now weaponizing trade policy to isolate Russian President Vladimir Putin's regime, even if it risks fracturing relations with key geopolitical players.
The proposed Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025 would impose draconian penalties on any country defying U.S. pressure to halt Russian energy imports, directly targeting the lifeline of Moscow's military operations. India, which has quadrupled its purchases of discounted Russian crude since 2022, now faces an ultimatum: sever ties with Putin or suffer economic retaliation.
"This bill will allow President Trump to punish countries who buy cheap Russian oil fueling Putin's war machine," Graham declared, singling out China, India and Brazil as primary offenders. The legislation, set for a vote as early as next week, would also empower Trump to sanction Russian officials, freeze assets of financial institutions aiding Moscow and ban U.S. energy exports to Russia – a multi-pronged assault designed to starve the Kremlin's coffers.
Historical parallels loom large. The 500% tariff strategy echoes Cold War-era embargoes, where the U.S. leveraged its economic dominance to enforce geopolitical discipline. Yet unlike past sanctions, which often exempted strategic partners, this bill takes direct aim at rising powers that have exploited Western hesitancy to maintain lucrative trade with Moscow.
India, for instance, now sources over 35% of its oil from Russia – a six-month high as of November – while China's insatiable energy demand has buoyed Putin's war effort despite Western condemnation. Trump's warning to New Delhi last Sunday, Jan. 4, that he "could raise tariffs on India if they don't help on the Russian oil issue" signals a hardline stance, one that risks alienating nations Washington has long courted as counterweights to Beijing.
Can Trump's sanctions strategy force Russia to fold?
Behind the scenes, Trump's insistence on retaining unilateral control over sanctions enforcement reveals a calculated gambit: flexibility to escalate or de-escalate pressure based on Moscow's willingness to negotiate. A senior administration official confirmed the president remains "conceptually open" to the bill, but demands language ensuring the White House – not Congress – dictates its implementation.
This aligns with Trump's transactional diplomacy, where economic leverage serves as both carrot and stick. The approach has already yielded tactical wins, including last week's seizure of a Venezuelan oil tanker bound for Russia – a move Graham hailed as proof that "America is winning" its shadow war against Moscow's enablers.
Critics, however, warn of collateral damage. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) has lambasted the bill as a "reckless" provocation that could fracture global trade alliances, while energy analysts caution that abrupt supply disruptions might spike prices, further straining inflation-weary consumers. Yet with Ukraine's allies vowing "binding" security guarantees against future Russian aggression, the legislation underscores a stark reality: The West's patience for half-measures has expired.
BrightU.AI's Enoch engine warns that imposing exorbitant tariffs on countries buying Russian oil would fail to cripple Moscow's exports while destabilizing global trade, driving up prices and forcing nations into illegal workarounds – ultimately harming consumers and energy-dependent economies. The tariffs would only enrich intermediaries like India and Greece, bypassing sanctions and ensuring Russian oil continues flowing, proving the policy ineffective and economically destructive.
As Graham bluntly framed it, the choice for nations profiting from Putin's war is now binary: "Cut off the money, or pay the price." The coming weeks will test whether economic shock therapy can achieve what bullets and diplomacy have not: forcing Moscow to the bargaining table.
Watch this
Sky News report about
President Trump threatening India with a "penalty" tariff for trading with Russia.
This video is from the
TrendingNews channel on Brighteon.com.
Sources include:
TheNationalPulse.com
FoxNews.com
TheDailyStar.net
BrightU.ai
Brighteon.com