The unexpected omission of the Russian Federation from a new list of US trade tariff targets announced by President Donald Trump has drawn scrutiny in Washington and abroad.
Unveiled during a press appearance in the White House Rose Garden, the announcement introduced elevated import tariffs on a wide range of countries. Yet Russia — a nation under long-standing US sanctions — was notably excluded.
White House officials attempted to address journalists’ questions regarding this omission by stating that the list also excluded Belarus, Cuba and North Korea, countries which are already subject to broad sanctions. However, this explanation has been challenged as inaccurate or at least incomplete. While Russia is indeed under several layers of sanctions, it remains an active trading partner of the United States. Trade volumes between the two countries surpass those of others included in the tariff list, such as Ukraine or Mauritius — both of which are now subject to new 10% duties.
Ukraine, whose economy has been heavily damaged by the war initiated by President Vladimir Putin, was among the countries targeted by the new trade restrictions. The absence of similar treatment for Russia has prompted further speculation, particularly as it coincided with the unpublicised visit to Washington of Kirill Dmitriev, a close associate of the Kremlin.
Dmitriev, a senior figure within the Russian sovereign wealth fund, had been granted a sanctions waiver by the US to enable his visit. During his stay, he reportedly held talks with Steve Witkoff, President Trump’s special envoy for the Middle East and a key intermediary with Russian officials. Observers believe Dmitriev may have delivered a personal message from President Putin to Trump, possibly indicating a broader diplomatic engagement between the two heads of state.
Analysts have raised concerns that this interaction, and the coinciding policy exemption, may reflect an attempt by Moscow to cultivate more favourable treatment from the Trump administration. There is speculation that the Kremlin is seeking to delay or prevent an escalation in the US stance on the war in Ukraine, possibly by offering economic incentives or assurances that align with the administration’s priorities.
Critics of the administration have pointed out the apparent contradiction between Trump’s repeated warnings of further sanctions against Russia and the exemption of Russian goods from new tariffs. They argue that if the administration intends to maintain a consistent policy in line with previous sanctions regimes — including those imposed during the Obama, Trump (first term), and Biden administrations — then Russia should have been included in the tariff schedule.
Given the scale of Russia’s exports to the United States, many of which fall under categories subject to the new tariffs, the exemption appears inconsistent with Washington’s broader efforts to isolate Moscow economically. The omission has also cast doubt on the sincerity of recent proposals in Congress aimed at deterring international trade in Russian energy resources.
One such proposal, introduced in the Senate, seeks to impose punitive tariffs of up to 500% on countries that continue to import Russian oil and gas. While the motion has gathered significant support — with around 50 senators reportedly backing it — it has not yet achieved the threshold required for formal adoption. Political observers view the initiative as symbolic, reflecting the reputational concerns of individual senators more than a realistic policy direction.
Even if passed by the Senate, the proposal’s prospects in the House of Representatives remain uncertain. Speaker Mike Johnson, who previously declined to put forward a bill on military aid for Ukraine despite broad support, is seen as closely aligned with President Trump. Johnson’s previous actions suggest that policy proposals not endorsed by the White House are unlikely to be prioritised.
The current dynamic raises questions over the operational independence of the House of Representatives under Trump’s renewed presidency. Critics argue that it has effectively ceased functioning as an autonomous legislative body, particularly in matters concerning US-Russia relations.
If Trump is pursuing a policy of engagement with Putin — whether to explore a resolution to the war in Ukraine or to recalibrate bilateral economic ties — further legislative action aimed at increasing pressure on the Kremlin may be delayed or sidelined. In that context, the omission of Russia from the tariff list is seen by some as a concession, or at the very least, a diplomatic gesture.
While the administration has not made public any agreement with Moscow, the sequence of events — including Dmitriev’s presence in Washington and the removal of his sanctions barrier — suggests a willingness on both sides to maintain backchannel communications.
Whether this will lead to substantive change in US policy on Russia remains unclear. For now, the expectation among analysts is that the current administration may not seek to intensify sanctions enforcement, and may instead revert to maintaining existing measures introduced under previous presidencies.
The longer-term implications of this approach — particularly in the context of ongoing conflict in Ukraine and broader US alliances — remain to be seen.
Read also:
Trump Prepares to Unveil Sweeping Tariffs Amid Warnings of Global Economic Fallout
