Adapted by:
Miguel Jorge
WriterJournalist. I've spent more than half of my life writing about technology, science, and culture. Before landing here, I worked at Telefónica, Prisa, Globus Comunicación, Hipertextual, and Gizmodo. I'm part of Webedia's cross-section team.
Karen Alfaro
WriterCommunications professional with a decade of experience as a copywriter, proofreader, and editor. As a travel and science journalist, I've collaborated with several print and digital outlets around the world. I'm passionate about culture, music, food, history, and innovative technologies.
A few days ago, U.S. President Donald Trump appeared to be furious. He displayed anger over Russian President Vladimir Putin’s refusal to cooperate in ceasefire negotiations in Ukraine. What initially seemed like a close agreement with the Russian leader, where Trump even avoided directly blaming him for the war, shifted into a threat: the imposition of secondary tariffs of up to 50% on Russian oil. Today, after Washington announced an almost universal list of tariffs, two countries are missing: Russia and North Korea.
Leniency toward adversaries. In a new and unprecedented phase of his trade war, Trump imposed high tariffs on some of America’s closest allies and partners, including Japan (24%), South Korea (25%), India (26%), and Taiwan (32%). These tariffs also extend to small and remote territories such as Tokelau (New Zealand) and Svalbard (Norway).
However, he’s exempted hostile countries such as Russia, North Korea, Belarus, and even Iran, which received only a 10% tariff—lower than the 17% imposed on Israel, a longtime ally. This approach aligns with Trump’s second-term strategy, characterized by punishing allied countries, even threatening them with military action, while showing leniency, albeit with caveats, toward Washington's traditional adversaries.
The official position. The White House has offered a justification. The absence of tariffs on Russia, along with Cuba, Belarus, and North Korea, is attributed to the assertion that “they are already facing extremely high tariffs and our previously imposed sanctions preclude any meaningful trade with these countries.” However, data indicate that Russia maintains significant trade exchanges despite existing sanctions.
Privileged relationship. According to FirstPost, Trump has formalized his affinity with the Russian president by attempting to shift Russia from an adversary to a partner. Moscow has neither relented in its aggression against Ukraine nor softened its stance toward the West. Despite the White House’s explanation that Russia, North Korea, and others are already under strict sanctions, trade with these countries continues.
In 2024, the U.S. conducted $3.5 billion worth of trade with Russia—down from $35 billion in 2021—but still significant, including U.S. exports of essential medical and pharmaceutical supplies. Even North Korea and Iran, both under sanctions, maintain limited trade in sectors such as pharmaceuticals and chemicals (Iran also engages in trade related to works of art). Meanwhile, allies such as Ukraine, despite being in the midst of war, were subjected to the 10% tariffs, contradicting the notion that the policy is designed to protect strategic partners.
The validity of Russia. Moreover, according to Axios, the U.S. trades more with Russia than with several countries affected by the new tariffs, highlighting a contradiction in the official justification. White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt reiterated that Russia could face “strong new sanctions” in the future, especially after Trump expressed public frustration with Putin over his statements on Ukraine and threatened secondary tariffs on Russian oil.
Stalled negotiations. Russia, on the other hand, has requested that the Trump administration partially lift sanctions as a condition for negotiating a ceasefire in Ukraine, a process that remains at an impasse. Meanwhile, Trump has chosen to target traditional partners and smaller economies rather than Russia, maintaining the pattern that defines his foreign policy: toughness with allies and flexibility, or at least restraint, with strategic adversaries.
The Israel-Iran case. Notably, Israel recently lifted tariffs on U.S. products as a goodwill gesture, hoping for reciprocal leniency. However, this wasn’t the case. Trump not only imposed a 17% tariff on Israel but also a lower one of just 10% on Iran, a county considered a direct adversary of both the U.S. and Israel and labeled a “sponsor” of hostile groups. The decision has sparked outrage in Tel Aviv, where it is viewed as a signal that Trump’s second-term trade policy does not distinguish between strategic allies and adversaries.
Controversial shift. It’s evident that the selection of some countries for tariffs while excluding others is deliberate (as opposed to smaller territories and uninhabited areas). As a result, the strategy has alarmed experts and Washington’s allies, as the U.S. escalates pressure on traditional partners while easing measures against geopolitical rivals.
Far from being just an economic move, this pattern reaffirms Trump’s approach of destabilizing long-standing alliances in favor of direct, albeit contradictory, relations with adversaries, even when they’ve offered no diplomatic or trade concessions in return.
Image | Office of the President of the Russian Federation
Related | There’s One Clear Winner From Trump’s New Tariffs on Imported Cars: Tesla, of Course
Log in to leave a comment