Howard lutnick US Commerce Secretary ON TARIFFS: Oil is from Russia,Interview,what happening now

Howard Lutnick, confirmed in early 2025 as the United States Secretary of Commerce under President Donald Trump, has quickly become one of the central figures in the administration’s aggressive trade agenda. Lutnick, a financier and former CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald, runs a department that oversees everything from trade policy to economic statistics, and now occupies a key role in pushing economic pressure via tariffs. This article examines Lutnick’s stance on tariffs, especially with regard to Russian oil and India’s response, the evolving U.S.-India trade relations, the legal and geopolitical implications, and what the future may hold.

Background: Lutnick’s Confirmation & Philosophical Approach to Trade

When the Senate confirmed Lutnick, it marked a decisive shift in U.S. trade policy. Lutnick has been a vocal proponent of using tariffs and reciprocal trade pressures as tools to force changes in trade practices and open foreign markets to American goods. He emphasizes fairness in trade — especially opposing what the U.S. sees as unfair trade barriers, subsidies, non‑tariff barriers, and regulatory hurdles that favor foreign producers over American ones. Howard Lutnick, confirmed in early 2025 as the United States Secretary of Commerce under President Donald Trump, has quickly become one of the central figures in the administration’s aggressive trade agenda. Lutnick, a financier and former CEO of Cantor Fitzgerald, runs a department that oversees everything from trade policy to economic statistics, and now occupies a key role in pushing economic pressure via tariffs. This article examines Lutnick’s stance on tariffs, especially with regard to Russian oil and India’s response, the evolving U.S.-India trade relations, the legal and geopolitical implications, and what the future may hold.

Background: Lutnick’s Confirmation & Philosophical Approach to Trade

When the Senate confirmed Lutnick, it marked a decisive shift in U.S. trade policy. Lutnick has been a vocal proponent of using tariffs and reciprocal trade pressures as tools to force changes in trade practices and open foreign markets to American goods. He emphasizes fairness in trade — especially opposing what the U.S. sees as unfair trade barriers, subsidies, non‑tariff barriers, and regulatory hurdles that favor foreign producers over American ones. 

One of his recurring points: many countries have benefited disproportionately from past U.S. policies that prioritized cheap imports and outsourcing; Lutnick and the administration want to reshape that order. 

Russia, Oil, Sanctions, and India’s Role

A major flashpoint has been India’s oil imports from Russia since the Ukraine war. Before Russia invaded Ukraine (February 2022), India reportedly bought under 2% of its oil from Russia. Now that number is around 40%. The sharp rise is largely because Russian oil is being sold at discounts, as many other buyers have shunned it due to sanctions. 

Lutnick has called India’s increased purchases of Russian crude “ridiculous,” “just plain wrong,” and has pressured India to choose between aligning more closely with the U.S. and supporting its interests (and the dollar‑based trading order), or continuing deeper ties with Russia (and indirectly China). 

The rationale from the U.S. perspective is both economic and geopolitical:

Economic: U.S. wants to decrease the revenue flows to Russia (a target of broad sanctions), reduce support for Russian war‑effort, and discourage markets that exacerbate supply distortions.

Geopolitical: India’s role in groups like BRICS and its balancing act between great powers is under scrutiny. By buying discounted Russian oil, India is seen as undermining U.S. pressure on Russia, weakening the coherence of Western sanctions. 

Tariffs as Leverage: What Lutnick is Saying

Lutnick has made clear that India’s position on Russian oil is a factor in the U.S. moving toward trade agreements or lowering trade barriers. A few key points:

Tariffs on India unless it stops buying Russian oil

Lutnick has said that India would face steep tariffs — up to 50% — if it continues its high level of Russian oil imports. 

“Come back to the table” policy

Lutnick has expressed optimism that India will eventually return to negotiate, “say sorry,” and strike a trade deal with the U.S. once the oil issue is addressed. He forecasts this might happen in a “month or two.” 

Fair trade, reciprocity, reordering global trade

More broadly, Lutnick argues that not only India but many trade partners have been profiting from what the U.S. considers an unfair playing field — one with high non‑tariff barriers, subsidies, complicated regulations, and low transparency that disadvantage American industries. He says the U.S. will insist on reciprocity and adjustments. 

U.S.-India Trade Relations: The Current State

Given these tensions, where do U.S.-India trade relations stand?

Strained but not broken

Despite strong rhetoric, both sides are still negotiating. India has defended its purchase of Russian oil on grounds of energy security, market dynamics, and discounted prices. 

The U.S. has acknowledged that some Indian policies (defense purchases from Russia, joining BRICS, etc.) have “rubbed the U.S. the wrong way.” 

Business Standard

Trade deal contingent on policy change

The Trump administration — via Lutnick — is making clear that any trade agreement will be tied to India reducing or stopping its oil imports from Russia, opening Indian markets to U.S. goods, and aligning more with U.S. expectations of economic diplomacy. 

Severe tariffs threatened

If India does not comply, Lutnick has said exports from India could face a 50% tariff, which would severely impact many Indian industries reliant on the U.S. market. 

Legal, Economic, and Geopolitical Implications

Legal Perspective Tariffs are always subject to legal scrutiny, both domestically and via international trade law (WTO etc.). Key issues include:

Whether the U.S. has clear legal authority under U.S. statutes to impose such high tariffs.

Whether retaliated parties may challenge these tariffs under WTO rules, or via bilateral trade agreements.

Concerns about due process, transparency, stability for businesses. If businesses can’t predict trade policy, they may delay investment. Lutnick has acknowledged that uncertainty exists but suggests that change is coming and firms will adjust. 

Economic Impacts

On India: A 50% tariff on key Indian exports to the U.S. would be a major blow to industries depending on U.S. demand. It could reduce India’s export volumes, harm job‑creation in export sectors, increase costs for Indian importers of U.S. goods, and possibly raise inflation. It may also force India to diversify its energy supplies or renegotiate terms with Russia.

On U.S.: Tariffs often raise domestic costs for consumers and firms (who depend on imported inputs), potentially increasing inflation. But the administration argues that these costs are outweighed by gains in domestic production, job creation, and restoring what it views as fairness in trade.

Global trade ripple effects: Countries aligned or semi‑aligned with the U.S. might feel pressure to take similar positions. Others may see an opportunity to deepen ties with India or Russia. There is risk of trade fragmentation.

Geopolitical Stakes

The U.S. is using trade policy as a foreign policy tool: to isolate Russia, to influence India’s alignment, to push back against China’s influence, and to reinforce the U.S. dollar‑centric order.

India is caught in a balancing act: energy security, its purchasing relationships, its sovereign right to choose suppliers, vs. desire for trade cooperation with the U.S., investment, and goodwill in international relations.

BRICS and other multilateral or emerging alignments are viewed by the U.S. under this policy lens. India’s participation in or role inside such groups is part of the calculus.

What Has Lutnick Already Done / Key Moves

Imposed high tariffs or threatened them on Indian goods due to the oil issue. 

Publicly criticized India’s oil‑Russia trade, calling it misaligned with American strategic interest. 

Indicated that there are big trade deals in the pipeline (e.g. with Taiwan, Switzerland) and that deals with South Korea are close, pending paperwork. 

Reiterated that many of the sweeping tariff policies (including Section 232‑type tariffs) are durable and will remain, despite legal challenges. 

India’s Response & Domestic Pressures

India has publicly defended its decisions on importing oil from Russia, citing energy needs and cost. Some points in its defense:

Russian oil is discounted due to sanctions; buying discounted oil is seen as economically rational.

Energy security: Alternatives may be more expensive, or logistically harder to procure.

Sovereignty: India argues it has the right to choose energy partners, manage its external procurement according to its needs.

At the same time, there is domestic pressure: export industries will feel damage if tariffs from the U.S. hit, and public opinion may shift if trade relations are damaged. India also wants access to U.S. investment, technology, and trade. Thus some Indian actors may prefer a path toward negotiation to limit damage.

What’s Next: Scenarios & Predictions

Given all of the above, several scenarios emerge for what might happen over the next few months to a year.