特朗普下达最后通牒，莫迪不能再买俄石油，印度或要承担500%关税

Group 1 - Trump has issued a warning to India, demanding that the Modi government cease oil imports from Russia, threatening a potential 500% tariff on Indian goods if they do not comply [1][5][9] - The U.S. has imposed multiple sanctions on Russia since the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, particularly targeting energy exports, and seeks cooperation from allies like India to reduce Russian oil purchases [3][5] - India, as the world's third-largest oil consumer, relies heavily on oil imports, with over 80% of its oil needs met through imports, and has been purchasing Russian oil due to its lower prices and convenient transportation [3][11] Group 2 - The imposition of a 500% tariff is not solely about oil; it is also a strategic move to pressure India into making concessions in ongoing trade negotiations, particularly regarding agricultural market access for U.S. products [7][9] - Republican Senator Lindsey Graham is advocating for legislation that would formalize the 500% tariff on countries continuing to buy Russian oil, which could lead to long-term policy implications for India regardless of future U.S. administrations [9][11] - Indian officials have indicated that they will not abandon existing long-term contracts with Russia for oil, citing economic interests, and have emphasized that their energy policy is determined by market conditions rather than external pressures [11][12] Group 3 - Following Trump's ultimatum, the Indian stock market reacted negatively, with the NIFTY IT index dropping 2.5%, reflecting concerns over potential impacts on India's export sectors if tariffs are imposed [11][12] - The Modi government is attempting to balance relations with both the U.S. and Russia, requiring oil refineries to report their oil procurement from both countries to demonstrate compliance with U.S. expectations while maintaining Russian oil imports [12][14] - The situation highlights the complexities of U.S.-India relations, where India must navigate the challenge of not offending the U.S. while also protecting its national interests in energy procurement [16][17]