‘Unable to accept erosion of its dominance': Russia slams Trump's tariffs; hails Brics-Global South unity
"Sanctions and restrictions have unfortunately become a defining feature of the current historical period," Zakharova said in response to a media query on the US decision to tighten tariffs against countries in the Global South.
"Unable to accept the erosion of its dominance in an emerging multipolar international order, Washington continues to pursue a neocolonial agenda, employing politically motivated economic pressure against those who choose an independent course on the international stage."
Zakharova asserted that no sanctions or tariff wars would stop the evolution of the international system. "Nonetheless, we firmly believe that no tariff wars or sanctions can halt the natural course of history. We are supported by a vast number of partners, like-minded states, and allies, particularly among the countries of the Global South and, above all, within Brics, who share this perspective," she said.
Zakharova accused the United States of violating the very principles of free trade it once championed, pointing to what she called "politically driven protectionism and the arbitrary imposition of tariff barriers."
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
30 Remarkable Women from 80–100 Years in the Past
chillinghistory.com
Undo
She named Brazil—Russia's strategic partner in Latin America—as one of the main victims of such policies, and said these actions amount to interference in other countries' internal affairs and pose a broader threat to global economic stability.
"We stand ready to deepen cooperation with them to resist unlawful unilateral sanctions and to help shape a genuinely multipolar, just, and equitable international order,' Zakharova said.
Her remarks came in response to Trump's statement on Truth Social, where he accused India of profiting from reselling Russian oil and declared that the US would 'substantially raise the tariff paid by India.'
India has pushed back strongly, calling the criticism "unjustified and unreasonable." The Ministry of External Affairs in New Delhi said that India's imports are driven by national interest and energy security, and pointed to ongoing US and EU trade with Russia in energy and other sectors.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
12 minutes ago
- India.com
RICH Alliance: Trump's Tariff War Backfires? Russia Backs India And Hints At Emerging Ties With China
While U.S. President Donald Trump has reportedly stated that he will "substantially" increase tariffs on India, New Delhi has made it clear that it will not yield to pressure. Meanwhile, Russia has also pushed back against Washington's move. Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger once famously said, 'Being America's enemy may be dangerous, but being its friend is fatal.' That sentiment seems to be playing out in real time as the relationship between India and the US may be emerging into a diplomatic turning point. In today's DNA episode, Managing Editor of Zee News, Rahul Sinha, analysed a possible alliance between India, Russia, and China: Watch Full DNA Episode Here: #DNAWithRahulSinha | वर्ल्ड ऑर्डर बदला.. यूएस का 'दबदबा' गया! 'मिशन RICH'..ट्रंप के लिए कितना घातक?#DNA #India #USA #DonaldTrump #TarrifWar@RahulSinhaTV — Zee News (@ZeeNews) August 5, 2025 In a strong statement, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova accused the U.S. of using tariffs as a tool to dominate other nations. She said countries that chose a different path from Washington were being economically pressured and that Russia supports a multipolar and equitable world order. This, she added, is why Russia stands with India—and even with China—against America's hegemonic approach. Zakharova further claimed the U.S. is reacting out of frustration as it struggles to accept its diminishing influence in the new world order. According to her, tariffs and sanctions will not stop the shift toward a new global structure. Zakharova also suggested, a new alliance could be on the brink after the US' tariffs announcement. This emerging alignment between Russia, India, and China could reshape the global balance of power. The question now being asked: Has Donald Trump's aggressive trade policy inadvertently triggered the rise of a powerful R-I-C-H bloc? What Is 'RICH'? A new alliance named 'RICH'—short for Russia, India, and China—could pose an even greater challenge to the United States than the BRICS. The acronym itself, symbolizing 'wealth and prosperity,' hints at a formidable coalition. While Russia has previously called for stronger India-Russia-China cooperation, current global tensions and Trump's policies may make this partnership more realistic than ever before. 'RICH' vs America GDP Power: America has a GDP of US Donald 28 trillion (Rs. 23 lakh crore), but the combined GDP of Russia, India, and China is close behind at Rs. 21 lakh crore. Population Power: Together, India, China, and Russia are home to nearly 3 billion people—about 37 percent of the world's population—far surpassing the U.S., which has just 330 million people or 4 percent of the global total. Military Strength: The combined military strength of the three nations is 4.8 million troops, compared to America's 1.3 million. Even when factoring in NATO allies, the numbers still tilt heavily toward the RICH bloc. Nuclear Arsenal: RICH nations possess approximately 6,300 nuclear weapons, compared to America's 5,200. Defense Capabilities, Self-Sufficiency While the U.S. remains the world's largest arms producer, Russia and China also rank among the top global arms manufacturers. India, too, is rapidly advancing toward self-reliance in defense production. Together, the three countries could pose a significant challenge to NATO on land, at sea, and in the air. However, experts caution that military confrontation between global powers could have catastrophic consequences, making economic and diplomatic battles more likely. Notably, these countries are also resource-rich and largely self-sufficient: Energy: Russia holds vast reserves of oil, gas, and coal and is a major exporter of fossil fuels. India is advancing in nuclear and solar energy, while China leads globally in the manufacture of solar panels and wind turbines. Natural Resources: Russia has significant reserves of titanium, nickel, cobalt, and uranium. China accounts for over 60 percent of global rare earth metal production. India, meanwhile, is rich in bauxite, iron ore, graphite, and manganese. Agriculture: India is the world's largest producer of milk and pulses. Russia leads in wheat exports, while China excels in agricultural machinery and food production. In short, if united, these three nations would have little need for external support in energy, food, or defense. Strategic Shifts and Diplomatic Openings While deep mistrust exists between India and China, recent developments suggest that the gap may be narrowing. India's National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajit Doval is set to visit China this month, followed by a trip by External Affairs Minister (EAM) S. Jaishankar. These diplomatic engagements, possibly accelerated by Trump's confrontational tactics, may help bridge long-standing divides.
Economic Times
12 minutes ago
- Economic Times
India's antitrust play needs a rewrite
India's economy is undergoing a dramatic transformation. But its competition policy feels like a relic. While the world redesigns antitrust frameworks for the digital age, India continues to address 21st-c. monopolies with tools that belong to the typewriter risk is not simply about policy lag. It's about allowing the marketplace to evolve into something it was never meant to be - a moat for incumbents, rather than a playground for new ideas. There is something oddly theatrical about India's markets. A few giants now play every role - producer, distributor, seller and reviewer. If capitalism were a Bollywood film, we would be somewhere deep into the second act. The camera never pans away from the stars. The script is over-designed, the plot barely believable, and the supporting cast is left applauding from the wings. What this production lacks is direction. A strong antitrust regime should function as the off-stage hand that can stop the show when the ensemble is replaced by a with the illusion of choice. Consumers seem to have endless options. Multiple apps, brands and platforms. In reality, their decisions are quietly managed by default settings, recommendation engines and closed ecosystems. You think you are shopping around. You are actually walking a hallway with two doors, both leading to the same room. This isn't a marketplace of ideas. It's an orchestra conducted by a duopoly that writes both the score and the Competition Act of 2002 was well-intended. But it was born in a simpler time. It functions well in hindsight. It spots the corpse, but doesn't see the murder coming. In a world where algorithmic decisions are made in milliseconds, retrospective enforcement is like sending a telegram after a don't need more post-mortems. We need a pre-emptive immune system. One that stops dominance before it trouble is not confined to digital platforms. The same centralisation is quietly embedding itself into India's physical infrastructure. Ports, airports, fibre networks, toll roads, data centres - arteries of the economy are increasingly controlled by a select few. When a single group manages warehouse, gateway, fibre pipe and checkout, what you have is not a supply chain but a bottleneck with a business are left with the 'invisible tax of absence'. No second airport terminal, no rival broadband, no alternative toll road. Choice, in infrastructure, is not a feature. It is the foundation. And that foundation is steadily being the world, competition authorities have shifted focus. The EU's Digital Markets Act targets gatekeepers who control access to platforms and users. It forbids self-preferencing, demands data separation and insists on real interoperability. Britain followed with its 2024 legislation that empowers regulators to intervene before harm becomes US, traditionally more lenient, is catching up. Federal Trade Commission, under Lina Khan, has taken on Big Tech with a zeal not seen in decades. Lawsuits have replaced policy briefs, and default settings are now considered battlegrounds for competition. Even Japan and South Korea have started examining algorithmic bias and platform approach is more opaque, but no less firm. When its regulators bring down a tech giant, it's often swift and politically aligned. The message is simple: no company grows beyond the state's comfort is inching towards the future with its proposed Digital Competition Bill. The Bill seeks to impose obligations on 'systemically significant digital intermediaries', asking them to behave more like neutral infrastructure and less like landlords with a favourite tenant. No bundling. No unfair ranking. No quiet preference for in-house brands. It borrows from Brussels, adapts for Delhi, and if enforced well, it could make up for decades of policy without it, the market won't crash but congeal. Space for startups will shrink, funding will chase favour rather than innovation. The price of admission will no longer be a good idea but a good relationship with the policy is not a punishment for success. It's a safety net for fairness. It ensures that achievement does not calcify into entitlement. It reminds us that markets are not meant to be gated estates where old money and new data sit comfortably, sipping stands at a crucial fork. One road leads to genuine plurality - more products, platforms, participants. The other leads to a curated monopoly garden where every flower is owned, every bench reserved, and the public is welcome only on guided market is not your mother. It does not love you unconditionally. It will not hold your hand through failure, or clap for your potential. It'll reward dominance if no one stops it. And punish aspiration if no one protects it. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. Can Coforge's ambition to lead the IT Industry become a reality? BlackRock returns, this time with Ambani. Will it be lucky second time? Amazon is making stealthy moves in healthcare, here's why! The trader who blew the whistle on Jane Street Stock Radar: Globus Spirits breaks out from 9-month consolidation; check target & stop loss for long positions Weekly Top Picks: These stocks scored 10 on 10 on Stock Reports Plus These large-caps have 'strong buy' & 'buy' recos and an upside potential of more than 25% Stock picks of the week: 5 stocks with consistent score improvement and upside potential of up to 36% in 1 year
India Today
12 minutes ago
- India Today
Modi misread Trump: Now India pays the price
A war of words has erupted between New Delhi and Washington, exposing the fragility of what was once hailed as a geopolitical success story. India has hit back hard at US President Donald Trump's threat to hike tariffs on Indian goods over continued imports of Russian oil, calling the targeting "unjustified and unreasonable" whilst slamming what it perceives as Washington's double The so-called Modi-Trump bromance, once paraded as diplomatic triumph, is now cracking under the weight of harsh reality. What began with mutual praise and public spectacle, from the "Howdy Modi" event in Houston to the grand "Namaste Trump" reception in Ahmedabad, has devolved into accusations, tariffs, and transactional Fatal MiscalculationOne of New Delhi's fundamental missteps was assuming that warm handshakes and mega-rallies could override hard economic interests. Modi's outreach to Trump was personal, public, and passionate, but Trump doesn't separate business from bromance. The "great friend" narrative gave India false confidence that proved Modi threw his weight behind Trump, literally sharing the stage with him in Houston and Ahmedabad, it was a bet on personal chemistry over policy complexity. India saw Trump not as a volatile businessman-president, but as a dealmaker who'd favour "friends." The reality? Trump doesn't do friendships, he does leverage. And India misread that playbook temples in Varanasi to villages in Gujarat, people performed pujas praying for Trump's victory. Modi had pulled off spectacular diplomatic theatre, and India felt it had America in its corner. Yet Trump's loyalty lies only with the US balance sheet, viewing India as a trade surplus machine rather than a strategic Russian Oil WedgeIndia's dependence on Russian oil has become the new wedge in this deteriorating relationship. With crude prices volatile and energy security paramount, India turned to Moscow for discounted supply, with Russia now accounting for up to 40% of India's oil imports. Trump, who views foreign policy through a profit-loss lens, sees this as lashed out, accusing India of undermining the West's Ukraine strategy and "helping Putin," with tariffs becoming punishment. Worse still, he's framed it as India profiting from global chaos. Modi's government finds itself caught in a trilemma: oil security, global optics, and Trump's offensive 4th August 2025, India's Ministry of External Affairs dropped a diplomatic bombshell in response. Calling Trump's tariff threats "unjustified and unreasonable," the MEA emphasised that India's oil purchases are driven by survival, not sympathy for Moscow. With Middle Eastern oil redirected to Europe after the Ukraine war, India had little choice but to buy discounted Russian crude to shield its economy. India's anger wasn't merely economic, it was moral. The statement highlighted US and EU hypocrisy, pointing out how the West continues trading heavily with Russia in everything from uranium to fertilisers, yet singles out India for 25% Tariff HammerTrump's imposition of a 25% tariff on all Indian goods wasn't just economic muscle-flexing, it was a warning shot. The US goods trade deficit with India stood at $45.7 billion in 2024, which Trump views as theft, plain and simple. His administration has revived old complaints about high tariffs, restricted market access, regulatory red tape, and "unfair" practices in pharmaceuticals, agriculture, and most jarring for India was Trump's renewed outreach to Pakistan, military meetings, energy cooperation discussions, and vague proposals of "regional balance." For a country that expected Trump to be firmly in its anti-Pakistan corner, this felt like betrayal, exposing another blind spot in India's strategic Path ForwardIndia must now abandon illusions of personal diplomacy. Trump is a negotiator, not a friend, he respects leverage, not loyalty. New Delhi must shift from sentimentality to strategy, from ceremonial displays to pragmatic biggest lesson? Don't tie national strategy to individual leaders. American policy is shifting toward hard realism, and India must do the same. This means engaging not as a junior partner seeking approval, but as a sovereign power navigating a multipolar obsession with optics, handshakes, stagecraft, mega-events, must give way to tough negotiations, quiet diplomacy, and pragmatic positioning. Because Trump isn't here to dance at "Namaste Trump" events, he's here to deal. And if Modi wants to succeed, it's time to stop praying and start playing hardball politics.- Ends
