Trump's Ukraine U-turn puts Russia's trade partners at risk. India caught in the middle

The Print

18-07-2025

Under the new Trump policy, Europe will foot the bill—around $10 billion—for largely defensive US weapons package to Ukraine. While some European leaders see this as a necessary compromise, others view it with unease.
Since returning to the White House, his Oval Office meetings have taken on an almost mythical quality, with global consequences often hinging on his remarks. In a recent episode, NATO chief Mark Rutte was seen placating Trump with 'Daddy diplomacy', who publicly aired his frustration over being 'played' by Putin. This was followed by Trump announcing what many are calling a U-turn in policy on Ukraine, NATO, and Europe.
Donald Trump has once again reversed his position—this time on Ukraine—and once again with global repercussions, including for New Delhi.
The decision has only deepened the sense that the world remains trapped in the aftermath of a Pax Americana gone lax—not strong enough to shape global affairs decisively, yet not weak enough to allow others real autonomy.
However, it's another one of Trump's stances that has had the Indian strategic circles speculating—the likely passing of the Graham-Blumenthal Bill, which would sanction Russian energy buyers.
Build up to the sanctions
Just days before his major policy reversal on Ukraine, Donald Trump had exercised his presidential drawdown authority for the first time since returning to office and authorised approximately $300 million in aid to Ukraine. This move came on the heels of former Fox News host and now Secretary of Defence, Pete Hegseth, halting aid to Ukraine, which led to immediate and visible devastation in the country.
Following the aid announcement, Trump has set another 50-day deadline for Russia to decide on a ceasefire. However, as with many Trump proclamations, there's no certainty he will stick to this plan. He has also threatened to impose a sweeping 100 per cent tariff on Russia and its trade partners, notably China and India, if no ceasefire is reached by the deadline.
NATO chief Mark Rutte has not minced words, issuing a sharp warning to 'leaders in Delhi, Beijing, and Brazil' to brace up for punitive measures. This rhetoric aligns with the Graham-Blumenthal sanctions bill, currently backed by over 80 US Senators. The legislation, if adopted, would allow Trump to impose a staggering 500 per cent tariff on imports from any country continuing to buy Russian uranium, gas, or oil.
This has direct implications for India, now one of Russia's largest crude oil buyers. Indian refineries have processed Russian oil and sent it—refined—into Europe.
In parallel, with only a 10 per cent tariff baseline remaining in India-US trade talks, India could soon face a difficult choice: Risk harsh US sanctions or pivot fully toward strengthening its trade relationship with Washington. The cautious statements by Minister of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Hardeep Singh Puri, allude to India preferring a resilient approach with the US and Europe instead of a confrontational one, implying the availability of more import sources and a falling crude price. Contrary to public rhetoric, this measured approach reflects a deeper awareness of the numerous geopolitical complexities, where national interest alone should pave the way forward.
Also read: India's 'triple anxiety'—What Chinese media sees in Jaishankar's Beijing visit
Trump's zig-zag
Donald Trump's latest pivot on Ukraine seems to have a surprising domestic influence—his wife, Melania Trump. An ethnic Slovene, Melania's European roots have reportedly played a role in softening Trump's stance on the region, suddenly making her something of a darling across European capitals.
Another factor that likely influenced Trump's shift was his growing sense of being repeatedly manipulated by Putin. After boasting of a recent peace talk call, Trump claimed progress—only for Putin to launch a brutal civilian airstrike the same night, casting doubt on Moscow's intentions and embarrassing Trump's narcissistic diplomatic narrative.
Throughout his political career, Trump has generally maintained a favourable posture toward Putin. Russia, in turn, has welcomed this position. Yet, lately, Putin seemed to be playing Trump a tad too much.
Russian confidence likely stems from a perception of Trump's inconsistency and American distractions. The US is bogged down by Middle East entanglements, political infighting, and a string of domestic controversies ranging from the Musk fallout to the latest storm over the Epstein files.
On its part, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has condemned the possibility of Trump sending long-range weapons to Ukraine. Lavrov issued sharp warnings, making it clear that Moscow is prepared to endure new sanctions and steeper tariffs if necessary, as it will continue pursuing its 'maximalist goals' in Ukraine.
From Putin's perspective, consolidating battlefield gains is crucial. In September 2022, just months into the full-scale invasion, Russia constitutionally annexed four Ukrainian regions—Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson—the first two having been under Russia's de facto control since 2014. However, until recently, none of these were fully under Russian control. Currently, Russia is engaged in intense but attritional battles in Ukraine's northeast, particularly in Sumy, and in the south around the key town of Pokrovsk. The fighting in Pokrovsk has dragged on for over a year, with little progress.
The most significant military gain from Russia's sluggish summer offensive has been Luhansk, now almost entirely under its control. The other three regions remain partially occupied at best, and at the current pace of territorial gains, a complete military takeover could take years, if not decades. This lack of decisive victory is likely pushing Putin to search for an inflexion point.
In Putin's strategic calculus, such a breakthrough may lie in breaking Ukraine's civil resilience and dismantling its critical infrastructure, while hoping to wear down Europe's resolve. His bet seems to be that if the US wavers, European support for Ukraine will eventually falter. However, this has not materialised. Despite Trump's unpredictable stance, European nations have held firm. Even amid fractures in EU solidarity—especially in Hungary and Slovakia—Europe has shown a resolve few could have predicted.
Germany, in particular, has undergone a 'military awakening.' Its increased defence spending and strategic clarity have significantly shifted Europe's posture on long-term security. These developments present a major challenge for Moscow, which counts on European indecision, fragile social welfare politics and public fatigue with the war to eventually turn the tide.
Putin's bet on a favourable Trump administration may not yet yield the dividends he anticipated. Instead, with winter approaching and momentum stalling, the Kremlin faces pressure to translate limited battlefield progress into some form of political or strategic advantage.
If Ukraine is having it tough fighting an invasion from a mighty neighbour without enough weapons and men, Russia, too, is entangled in a miscalculated and poorly executed war draining its resources and global standing.
Also read: Paradox of India's S-400 deal—key asset delayed when country needs it most
Attritional warfare continues
Trump has announced the provision of up to 17 Patriot missile systems, along with interceptors and other defence equipment worth billions of dollars to Ukraine. However, in contrast to European expectations, he has refrained from approving long-range weapons, keeping the door open for potential peace negotiations. Rumours about the US possibly supplying JASSM and PrSM missiles had circulated, but Trump denied those claims recently.
The key takeaway is that these new supplies, while significant, are unlikely to alter the course of the war. Ukraine is expected to deploy these systems not at the front, where Russian advances remain slow, but around vital civilian and critical infrastructure, which has been repeatedly targeted by Russian airstrikes and missiles. That said, Patriot systems will have a limited impact against Russia's continued drone attacks.
The current U-turn on Ukraine is still on shaky ground. Trump must show enough consistency to provide a discernible enough pattern in his strategy.
New Delhi has a vested interest not only in securing a favourable trade deal with the US, but also in Europe's evolving military landscape. Across strategic and political circles, there is a broad consensus that India should prioritise its national interest by integrating into global defence production and supply chains. Europe's growing security demands offer a significant opportunity—one that the continent cannot meet through domestic capabilities alone or by relying solely on the United States.
Swasti Rao is a Consulting Editor (International and Strategic Affairs) at ThePrint. She tweets @swasrao. Views are personal.
(Edited by Theres Sudeep)