logo
Trump's economic nationalism and its ripple effects on India and BRICS

Trump's economic nationalism and its ripple effects on India and BRICS

The Hindua day ago
U.S. President Donald Trump's latest announcement to impose a 10% tariff on BRICS nations, alongside a potential 200% levy on pharmaceutical imports, signals a dramatic shift in how the world's largest economy seeks to wield its influence. For India, which recently submitted a comprehensive trade offer covering goods worth $150-200 billion to the U.S., this rhetoric threatens not only the flow of exports but also the trust underpinning one of its most important economic partnerships. As global trade teeters on the edge of uncertainty, Mr. Trump's strategy to 'weaponise' tariffs is poised to reshape not only bilateral deals but also the foundational dynamics of multilateral blocs, such as BRICS.
BRICS blowback
President Trump's decision to target the BRICS bloc with a blanket 10% tariff is more than a fiscal policy — it is a symbolic strike against a coalition perceived to be challenging U.S. hegemony. BRICS, comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, and newer entrants such as Iran, Egypt, and the UAE, has gained traction as a geopolitical alternative to Western-dominated platforms. The bloc's collective economic weight, accounting for nearly 32% of the global GDP and over 40% of the global population, has given it newfound assertiveness, including moves to settle trade in local currencies and reduce dependence on the U.S. dollar.
The U.S. administration, viewing this as a threat, opted for aggressive tariff-based retaliation. According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), total U.S. imports from the BRICS nations amounted to $886 billion in 2024, with China and India being the largest contributors. A 10% tariff on this volume would potentially generate over $88 billion in additional duties, effectively acting as a deterrent to BRICS expansion and dollar decoupling. India, as both a BRICS member and a strategic U.S. partner, finds itself in a delicate position — caught between bloc solidarity and bilateral dependence.
Targeting India's export backbone
Mr. Trump's rhetoric around a 'very, very high rate' of 200% tariff on pharmaceuticals directly strikes at the heart of India's export economy. India is the largest provider of generic drugs globally, with the U.S. being its most significant customer of these drugs. In the financial year 2024-25, India exported pharmaceuticals worth $9.8 billion to the U.S., a 21% increase from the previous year's, accounting for more than 30% of all Indian drug exports. The Indian pharmaceutical sector is not just a business; it is a lifeline for the American healthcare system, supplying affordable generics, vaccines, and essential medicines.
A 200% tariff, if implemented, would drastically raise the price of Indian drugs in the U.S. market, disrupting supply chains and possibly triggering domestic drug shortages. Moreover, the impact would not be restricted to Indian exporters. American consumers, especially Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, may bear the brunt of price hikes. In States such as Texas, California, and Florida, which are major recipients of Indian pharma shipments, this move could have a ripple effect on the political landscape as healthcare costs soar. Whether this is a negotiating tactic or a serious policy shift is unclear, but the implications are severe.
On the industrial front, India's $2 billion copper export sector, with the U.S. accounting for $360 million or 17%, is another casualty of this tariff-driven agenda. Copper, a critical component in technology and infrastructure, saw India regain export momentum after the reopening of capacities shut during the pandemic. A 50% tariff on copper will erode the competitiveness of Indian producers, particularly those in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, and shift demand to alternative sources, such as Chile or Peru.
Between alignment and autonomy
Trump's tariff threats, cloaked in the language of 'economic nationalism', mark a decisive shift from collaborative trade engagement to unilateral economic coercion by the U.S. For India, which has been walking a tightrope between its strategic autonomy within BRICS and its growing partnership with Washington, this development presents a critical diplomatic inflection point. New Delhi's recently tabled trade proposal, valued at $150-200 billion, now teeters in uncertainty as the White House weighs domestic populism against long-term global cooperation.
India has made it clear that no further concessions are on the table, signalling a firm stance amid rising pressure. However, this stand-off reveals a deeper global reality: in today's geopolitical climate, trade is no longer merely transactional — it is a contest of power, alignment, and sovereignty. Should the U.S. proceed with its punitive tariff agenda, it may secure momentary tactical gains but at the cost of alienating key partners such as India, which is increasingly exploring alternative multipolar alliances.
For BRICS, this aggressive turn by Washington could serve as a unifying catalyst, accelerating internal cohesion and driving a shift away from U.S.-centric trade frameworks. Ironically, by attempting to fracture the bloc's influence through tariffs, Trump may have strengthened its resolve and relevance. In weaponising trade, the U.S. risks not only isolating itself but also fuelling the very multipolar world order it seeks to resist.
Vipin Benny is Assistant Professor and Research Supervisor, St. Thomas College (Autonomous), Thrissur, Kerala, and the author of 'Elevating Excellence: The Relevance of Internal Marketing in Higher Education Institutions in India' (2023) and 'Decoded Decisions: Behavioural Finance Meets Artificial Intelligence' (2025). Views are personal
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump Administration Pulls Back Deployment of National Guard in LA
Trump Administration Pulls Back Deployment of National Guard in LA

Mint

time28 minutes ago

  • Mint

Trump Administration Pulls Back Deployment of National Guard in LA

The Trump administration has recalled about half of the California National Guard troops that were deployed to Los Angeles under federal orders last month after a series of high-profile immigration raids and anti-deportation protests. About 2,000 National Guard troops will be released from duty because 'the lawlessness in Los Angeles is subsiding,' Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement Tuesday. Roughly 700 Marines remain deployed in the city. Trump ordered the federal deployment in early June, the first time in decades that a president used the National Guard in a US city without a request from the state government or local authorities. At the time, he said the troops — which numbered roughly 4,000 — were needed to quell what he described as rioting that would have otherwise destroyed the city. The move drew condemnation from Governor Gavin Newsom and LA Mayor Karen Bass, who accused the president of making the tensions even worse. Days of protests were mostly confined to several city blocks around downtown LA, largely focused on a federal detention center and another government building that houses an immigration court office. Federal immigration agents and troops have continued to confront protesters at the sites of arrest operations, but large-scale protests have generally subsided. Bass lifted a curfew in the downtown area on June 17. Newsom, who is suing the administration to end the deployment, said the remaining troops 'continue without a mission, without direction and without any hopes of returning to help their communities.' 'We call on Trump and the Department of Defense to end this theater and send everyone home now,' the governor said in a statement Tuesday. The National Guard troops were initially tasked with protecting federal property, along with hundreds of active-duty US Marines deployed to the city. Some of those troops later escorted immigration agents during raids at Home Depot parking lots, car washes and agriculture fields in nearby Ventura County. Thousands of immigrants across the LA region have been arrested since early June. Dozens of troops were deployed to a city park earlier this month as heavily armed federal agents marched across the area in an operation that didn't yield any arrests, according to city officials who decried the effort as an unnecessary display of force. The recent focus on LA is part of a broader Trump administration effort to carry out the largest mass deportation effort in US history. Federal immigration authorities have been ordered to make at least 3,000 arrests a day and have increasingly swept up farm workers and day laborers along with foreigners accused of committing crimes in the US. Bass, a Democrat, said Tuesday's recall of 2,000 troops was a 'retreat.' 'This happened because the people of Los Angeles stood united and stood strong,' Bass said in a statement. 'We will not stop making our voices heard until this ends, not just here in LA, but throughout our country.' With assistance from Catherine Lucey. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.

"She's Done A Good Job" Trump Defends Pam Bondi, Claims Epstein Files "Made Up" By Obama, Biden
"She's Done A Good Job" Trump Defends Pam Bondi, Claims Epstein Files "Made Up" By Obama, Biden

News18

time33 minutes ago

  • News18

"She's Done A Good Job" Trump Defends Pam Bondi, Claims Epstein Files "Made Up" By Obama, Biden

"She's Done A Good Job" Trump Defends Pam Bondi, Claims Epstein Files "Made Up" By Obama, Biden | 4K President Donald Trump defended Attorney General Pam Bondi from mounting criticism over her handling of the federal government's files related to Jeffrey Epstein, attempting to quell Republican infighting over the investigation. 'The attorney general has handled that very well. She's really done a very good job, and I think that when you look at that, you'll understand it,' Trump said. Trump claimed the files were 'made up' by Democrats — including former Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden and former FBI Director James Comey. n18oc_world n18oc_crux

The Milk India Refuses To Drink: Why ‘Non-Veg Dairy' Is A Red Line In Trade Deal With US
The Milk India Refuses To Drink: Why ‘Non-Veg Dairy' Is A Red Line In Trade Deal With US

India.com

time34 minutes ago

  • India.com

The Milk India Refuses To Drink: Why ‘Non-Veg Dairy' Is A Red Line In Trade Deal With US

New Delhi/Washington: In the backrooms of New Delhi's diplomatic zone, trade officials kept circling one issue that simply would not move. It was not fighter jets, data servers or farm subsidies. It was milk. Yes, milk. One of the biggest stumbling blocks in the India-U.S. trade pact is white, creamy and sacred to millions. And the problem lies not in how it is consumed, but how it is produced. Washington wants access to India's $16.8 billion dairy market, the largest in the world. It wants to sell its butter, cheese and milk powder to a country that churns out over 239 million metric tonnes of milk a year. But New Delhi is not opening that door. At the centre of India's resistance lies one demand – an assurance that the milk entering Indian homes comes from cows that were never fed meat, blood or animal remains. No exceptions. No compromises. Indian officials are calling it a red line. The idea of 'non-veg milk' does not sit well with millions of Indian households, especially vegetarians who see dairy as nutrition as well as ritual. Ghee is poured into sacred flames during prayer. Milk is bathed over deities. The concept of cows being fed pig fat or chicken remains crosses dietary boundaries and lines of faith. Trade experts struggled to explain this to Washington. 'Imagine eating butter made from the milk of a cow that was fed meat and blood from another cow. India may never allow that,' said Ajay Srivastava from the Global Trade Research Initiative in New Delhi. Despite U.S. claims that the concern is exaggerated, several American reports confirm the reality. A Seattle Times investigation documented how American cattle feed can legally include ground-up remains of pigs, horses and poultry. Even chicken droppings, known as poultry litter, sometimes make their way into the mix. The logic is economic – feed animals cheap and grow them fast. For Indian regulators, it is simply unacceptable. India's Department of Animal Husbandry mandates certification on all imported food items, including milk, to ensure no animal-derived feed is involved. This has long been criticised by the United States at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) as a 'non-scientific barrier'. But for India, it is not about science but belief. In 2006, the Indian government formalised this belief in trade rules. It resulted into high tariffs – 30% on cheese, 40% on butter and a whopping 60% on milk powder. For countries like New Zealand or Australia, breaking into India's dairy space is nearly impossible. For the United States, it is a billion-dollar hurdle. India's dairy sector feeds over 1.4 billion people. It employs more than 80 million, many of them smallholder farmers. Cheap American imports, experts say, could collapse local markets. A report from the State Bank of India estimates an annual loss of Rs 1.03 lakh crore if U.S. dairy is allowed to flood in. That is nearly 2.5-3% of the country's entire Gross Value Added. And the risk is not theoretical. 'If American butter comes in cheap, our milk prices drop. What happens to the village woman who sells five litres of milk a day?' asks Mahesh Sakunde, a dairy farmer from Maharashtra. Meanwhile, Washington sees India's refusal to open up as 'protectionist'. But India's negotiators stood firm. 'There is no question of conceding on dairy. That is a red line,' said a senior Indian official. The United States exported over $8.2 billion worth of dairy last year. Gaining access to India's vast market could supercharge those numbers. But Indian officials are unwilling to allow milk from cows that ate meat to be offered at temple altars or poured into toddler cups. And so, while the two countries hammer out trade terms with hopes of reaching $500 billion in bilateral commerce by 2030, the dairy debate remains unresolved. It may seem like a small detail in a massive negotiation, but in India, this is sacred, culture and a line that will not be crossed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store