Is Russia fearing loss of energy markets, bowing to Trump’s pressure?

Nikola Mikovic, Journalist-writer

The Kremlin seems to have taken U.S. President Donald Trump’s threat to impose “secondary tariffs” on Russia’s trade partners, like China and India, seriously. Unlike Beijing and New Delhi, which have indirectly stated they plan to continue doing business with Moscow despite Trump’s ultimatum for Russia to make progress toward ending the war in Ukraine, Moscow appears to fear the potential consequences of U.S. tariffs on countries still purchasing Russian oil.

In July, Trump initially announced a 50-day deadline for Russia and Ukraine to end the war. In early August, however, he shortened it to “10 or 12” days, later clarifying August 8 as the deadline. 

“If Russia does not come to the table, we will move forward with penalties against its top energy buyers,” the U.S. leader said in an interview with Bloomberg, directly naming China, India, and Brazil. 

Although Trump has a history of issuing empty threats – something he has in common with Russian President Vladimir Putin – this time he showed he is not joking. While his Steve Witkoff was on the way to Moscow to meet with Putin, Trump imposed 50% tariffs on India – a move that seems to have worried the Kremlin more than the Indian leadership.  

India’s Ministry of External Affairs accused the United States and the European Union of applying double standards, pointing out that while Washington and Brussels criticize New Delhi for importing Russian oil, they themselves continue trading with Russia.

Following Trump’s decision to target India’s oil imports from Russia, New Delhi has once again described his moves as “unjustified and unreasonable,” emphasizing that it will “take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security.” Indeed, on the same day – August 6 – India and Russia reaffirmed their strategic partnership and signed a key protocol to boost cooperation in sectors including aluminium, fertilizers, railways, and mining technology.

Previously, India had reportedly informed Washington it was not interested in purchasing American-made F-35s, while Prime Minister Narendra Modi signaled plans to travel to China to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Summit on August 31. Beijing, on the other hand, has indirectly rejected Trump’s threats, claiming that it will “always ensure its energy supply in ways that serve its national interests.”

Trump’s policy of “secondary tariffs” could, therefore, lead to political rapprochement between India and China, two geopolitical rivals. Nevertheless, the Kremlin does not seem willing to take the risk of relying on their continued support, especially given that neither Beijing nor New Delhi has explicitly stated that they will continue purchasing Russian oil despite Trump’s tariffs.

Since energy has traditionally been the main driver of Russia’s foreign policy, the country’s leadership is likely well aware of the long-term economic consequences if it becomes unable to sell its oil to India and China. The very fact that Witkoff and Putin, according to the Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, discussed “the state of the global economy and energy markets,” clearly suggests that the Russian leadership is on alert over Trump’s threats. It is, therefore, no surprise that, even before Witkoff came to Moscow, the Kremlin reportedly signaled that the Russian military might suspend its long-range strike campaign in Ukraine as a potential concession to the United States. 

Such a move would undoubtedly allow the Ukrainian military to consolidate, freely receive American and other Western shipments of weapons, and prepare for another round of fighting. In other words, if Putin makes such concessions to Trump, Russia will effectively give up on its significant trump card – drone and missile strikes – and help its opponent secure its rear positions and logistics. 

Moreover, if Putin agrees to a full ceasefire in exchange for Kyiv’s de facto recognition of the Russian occupation of southeastern Ukraine and Trump’s “approval” for Moscow to continue supplying oil to India and China, the Eastern European country would gain an opportunity to slowly and quietly prepare for another inevitable war in the not-so-distant future.

But such an outcome can only freeze the conflict in Ukraine – not end it. It takes two leaders – Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky – to sign a peace agreement. Putin has, however, repeatedly refused to meet with Zelensky, questioning his legitimacy. But even if he goes back on his word and accepts Trump’s proposal to hold a tripartite summit with Ukrainian leader and the U.S. President, Russia and Ukraine are very unlikely to sign a peace deal anytime soon.

From Kyiv’s perspective, under the current conditions, any agreement that does not include Russian withdrawal from Ukraine’s internationally recognized territories would be considered a defeat. Although the Kremlin has more room for political maneuvering and can portray almost any concession to Kyiv and the West as a “great victory” to the Russian public, it is unlikely to afford ending the war without achieving any of its strategic goals in Ukraine. 

That is why the upcoming meeting between Putin and Trump – whether in the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, or elsewhere – is unlikely to lead to lasting peace in Ukraine. It could, however, help the American leader improve his approval ratings at home by portraying himself as a “peacemaker” – especially if he also manages to push the Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders to reach a peace deal – and temporarily set aside the Epstein files scandal.