U.S. Profits from Russia While Penalizing India: 2025 Trade Contradiction

In 2025, the United States walks a fine line between economic pragmatism and moral posturing—lecturing India on strategic alignment while quietly importing billions in strategic commodities from Russia. The numbers reveal a stark contradiction, one that undermines Washington’s credibility, exposes U.S. supply chain vulnerabilities, and strains its relationship with New Delhi.

The timing is notable: India’s trade negotiating team has just returned from the U.S. without any breakthrough, highlighting the growing tension between Indian economic priorities and the policy stance of the White House under President Donald Trump.

Quietly Funding Russia: U.S.–Russia Trade

Between January and June 2025, U.S. imports from Russia totaled $2.5 billion, while exports were just $284.3 million, producing a trade deficit of $2.21 billion.

Key imports:

• Radioactive chemicals: $162M (June alone)
• Nitrogenous fertilizers: $93.4M ($806M in first five months, up 21% YoY)
• Platinum: $92.4M
• Uranium: $596M in first five months, up 28% YoY

These commodities fuel American energy, agriculture, and manufacturing and sustain Russia’s extractive industries—one of the few sectors still generating hard currency despite sanctions and formal bans, often through waivers granted by the U.S. Department of Energy. By relying on Russian materials for critical sectors, the U.S. Administration exposes its supply chains to risk, even as it pressures India over similar imports.

Penalizing a Partner: India–U.S. Trade

In 2025, total bilateral trade reached $131.84 billion. India exported $86.51 billion in goods to the U.S., while American exports to India totaled $87.08 billion, including $41.75 billion in services.

India enjoys a goods trade surplus of $44.76 billion, driven by high-value, innovation-led exports like IT services, pharmaceuticals, and electronics. Meanwhile, the U.S. benefits from robust services exports and access to Indian talent, making the overall trade relationship mutually advantageous.

Yet India faces steep penalties:

• Tariffs of up to 50% on smartphones, seafood, and pharmaceuticals
• H-1B visa fee hikes to $100,000, threatening a $190B services export industry

Despite months of negotiations, India’s trade team returned from Washington without any progress, highlighting the White House’s unwillingness under President Donald Trump to ease trade pressures. While the trade relationship benefits both sides, the U.S. uses tariffs and visa policies to extract concessions, skewing the partnership in its favor.

India–Russia Trade Context

India’s trade with Russia in FY25 underscores its economic rationale:

• Imports from Russia: $63.84B, mostly crude oil
• Exports to Russia: $4.88B, including engineering goods, pharmaceuticals, and chemicals
• Oil pricing: Russian crude ~$68.90/barrel vs. $77.50 (Saudi) and $74.20 (U.S.)

India’s sourcing is economically rational, ensuring energy security while maintaining diversified exports to Russia. Yet the U.S. criticizes India for buying Russian oil—even though India depends on imports for 90% of its crude needs—while itself importing billions in Russian commodities.

The Contradiction Is Unmistakable

The situation exposes a fundamental contradiction in the Trump Administration’s trade policy:

• Washington admonishes India for purchasing Russian oil.
• The U.S. imports $2.5B in Russian goods in six months, including fertilizers, uranium, and platinum.
• India’s trade surplus comes from productive, high-value exports.
• Russia’s surplus with the U.S. comes from strategic materials underpinning energy, agriculture, and manufacturing.

America profits from Russia while penalizing India for making economically rational, diversified trade decisions. This contradiction undermines the credibility of the White House and the U.S. Administration, and highlights the transactional nature of its diplomacy.

Strategic Imports vs. Strategic Pressure

Washington’s public stance: “Avoid Russian oil, no exceptions.”
Private practice: “We’ll buy what we need, sanctions notwithstanding.”

This is not mere hypocrisy—it is economic coercion. Tariffs and visa restrictions are used to pressure a strategic partner while critical Russian supply chains continue uninterrupted.

Rethinking Dependencies: India’s Way Forward

India must read the signals clearly. Friendship with the U.S. comes with conditions—and those conditions often serve American interests more than Indian ones. To mitigate this, India should:

• Diversify trade and strategic partnerships with EU, ASEAN, BRICS
• Build resilience against arbitrary economic shocks

As global alliances shift and economic fault lines deepen, India must assert strategic autonomy—not just defensively, but as a proactive vision for a multipolar world. Until the White House aligns trade actions with rhetoric, its moral authority will remain compromised, and global leadership questioned.

India’s strategic autonomy isn’t just a policy choice—it’s a necessity in a world where alliances shift and economic coercion masquerades as diplomacy.