Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has sharply criticised Washington’s reliance on tariff threats as a means of pressuring other nations, arguing that such tactics are proving ineffective against countries like India and China. His remarks, delivered during an appearance on Russia’s main Channel 1 television programme The Great Game, came at a time when U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly voiced concern over India’s energy trade with Russia while simultaneously threatening punitive tariffs.
Lavrov emphasised that both New Delhi and Beijing have responded with resilience and composure to American warnings. According to him, the United States is beginning to recognise the futility of attempting to coerce two long-standing and deeply rooted civilisations through intimidation. He suggested that Washington has slowly realised that a strategy based on ultimatums and threats will not succeed in altering the independent policy paths of India and China.
“Both China and India are ancient civilisations,” Lavrov explained, “and talking to them like ‘either you stop doing what I don’t like or I’ll impose tariffs on you’ won’t work. The continuing dialogue between Beijing and Washington, and between New Delhi and Washington, demonstrates that the Americans themselves have begun to understand this reality.”
His observations coincided with a noticeable shift in the tone of U.S. diplomacy. While Trump has spent months criticising India’s oil trade with Russia, his approach has recently softened. Only days before Lavrov’s television appearance, Trump publicly praised his close ties with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Speaking at a joint press conference with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer in the United Kingdom, Trump highlighted his personal rapport with Modi, even mentioning that he had recently spoken with him to extend birthday wishes. He reaffirmed that the U.S.-India relationship remained strong and friendly despite the disagreements over tariffs and energy imports.
Lavrov further argued that India and China have demonstrated an ability to stand firm in the face of U.S. pressure, continuing to pursue strategies that align with their own national interests rather than bending to Washington’s demands. He pointed out that while American tariff threats have had certain economic effects—forcing countries to seek alternative markets, diversify energy sources, and sometimes pay higher prices—they have not produced the intended political outcome of compelling these nations to alter their core policies.
More significantly, Lavrov underlined that there exists a deeper moral and political resistance to Washington’s approach. According to him, the practice of using economic coercion as a substitute for genuine diplomacy not only creates economic challenges for targeted nations but also strengthens their determination to oppose such methods on principle.
Turning to the issue of sanctions, Lavrov maintained that Russia itself has learned to cope with the unprecedented punitive measures imposed by the U.S. and its allies. Reflecting on the experiences of the past decade, he said that Russia had drawn important lessons and adjusted its economy in ways that allowed it to withstand the external pressure. He recalled that a vast number of sanctions had already been applied during Trump’s first presidential term, and that Moscow had since adopted measures to adapt to such restrictions.
“Frankly speaking, I don’t see any problem with the new sanctions imposed on Russia,” Lavrov remarked. He explained that the Russian economy has reoriented itself to operate under sanctions, turning the West’s pressure campaign into an opportunity for restructuring. He also criticised the Biden administration’s approach, claiming that sanctions have now become a complete substitute for diplomacy, with little effort made to search for compromise or common ground.
In Lavrov’s view, Washington’s reliance on tariffs and sanctions as its primary instruments of foreign policy has undermined its credibility while failing to bend major powers like India, China, and Russia to its will. Instead, he suggested, these tactics have only deepened resistance and reinforced the determination of nations to follow independent paths.
