Why Has Trump Excluded Russia from His Tariff Blitz? A Strategic Silence Explained

As Donald Trump lays out his 2025 economic agenda, his sweeping proposal to impose a universal 10% tariff on all imports—and higher tariffs on countries with trade deficits with the U.S.—has shaken international markets and provoked backlash from American allies. But one glaring omission has caught the attention of policymakers and analysts: Russia is not mentioned among the nations facing targeted trade penalties.

In a climate of continued U.S. sanctions against Russia for its 2022 invasion of Ukraine and deepening geopolitical divides, the absence of new tariffs targeting Russian imports has raised eyebrows. Why would Trump, a candidate positioning himself as a hard-nosed nationalist, choose not to confront a known adversary economically?

This article explores possible explanations—ranging from trade data to political calculation—and examines what this silence could mean for U.S. foreign policy and transatlantic alliances.

📉 The Data: Russia’s Trade Footprint in the U.S.

To begin with, Russia’s trade volume with the United States is relatively small. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Russian imports totaled just $14.5 billion in 2024, down from $29 billion in 2021 before expanded sanctions took effect.

Top Russian exports to the U.S. include:

• Fertilizers
• Aluminum
• Energy-related products (though many are restricted under existing sanctions)

In contrast, U.S. imports from China exceed $500 billion annually. Economically speaking, Russia is a marginal player in U.S. trade policy, and a broad-based tariff would have little practical impact.

“It’s easier for Trump to target China or Germany because the numbers are bigger—and so are the headlines,” said trade economist Monica de Graaf. “Russia simply doesn’t move the needle in economic terms.”

🪖 Geopolitics: Sanctions, Not Tariffs

Since 2014 and especially after 2022, the U.S. has imposed heavy sanctions on Russian financial institutions, oligarchs, defense firms, and energy exports. These tools—not tariffs—have been the primary mechanism for U.S. economic pressure.

“Tariffs are about trade. Sanctions are about coercion,” notes former Treasury official Daniel Glaser. “The U.S. has already hit Russia where it hurts—with financial and energy restrictions.”

Adding tariffs might be seen as redundant or even contradictory, given that sanctioned goods already face steep regulatory barriers.

Source: U.S. Treasury Sanctions Tracker, 2025

🗳️ Political Calculus: A MAGA Strategy?

Another possible explanation lies in Trump’s political base. Many MAGA voters see Russia less as a threat and more as a potential ally—a country that shares socially conservative, nationalist, and anti-globalist values.

During his presidency, Trump resisted stronger measures against Putin, even as bipartisan consensus in Congress sought tougher responses.

“Russia simply isn’t a priority for Trump’s worldview,” said foreign policy scholar Heather Hurlburt. “His enemies list includes globalists, China, Iran, and liberal Europe—not Moscow.”

This omission may also be strategic:

• Avoiding alienation of pro-Russia elements in right-wing media
• Keeping diplomatic doors open for future U.S.-Russia cooperation
• Framing Europe as the real economic competitor, not Moscow

Source: Foreign Affairs, March 2025

🇪🇺 Transatlantic Frictions: A Gift to Putin?

By excluding Russia from his tariff crackdown—and targeting the EU instead—Trump risks reinforcing the perception that he is more hostile to allies than to adversaries.

“Trump is undermining the Western economic front against Russia,” warned EU trade commissioner Margrethe Vestager. “This emboldens autocratic regimes.”

The absence of tariffs on Russia while attacking European exports sends a mixed signal:

• To NATO, it weakens perceived unity
• To Russia, it may signal opportunity
• To China, it reinforces Trump’s selective tough talk

Some analysts believe the silence may be designed to destabilize EU consensus, particularly as European capitals diverge on how aggressively to enforce sanctions.

🧠 Strategic Ambiguity or Deliberate Omission?

It’s unclear whether the omission of Russia was an intentional signal or a byproduct of Trump’s America-centric focus.

Former National Security Advisor John Bolton suggested the move might be part of a broader strategy:

“Trump sees the world in transactional terms. If Russia isn’t hurting him economically, he sees no reason to escalate. It’s not about values—it’s about leverage.”

Alternatively, the omission could be a deliberate ambiguity that allows Trump to retain flexibility if he needs a bargaining chip later.

💬 Domestic Reception: Silence Speaks Volumes

Trump’s omission has already sparked criticism from both sides:

• Democrats accuse him of appeasement and playing into Russian geopolitical goals.
• Traditional Republicans worry about the message it sends to allies and adversaries alike.

“You can’t claim to be tough on foreign threats and then give Putin a pass,” said Senator Mitt Romney. “This is inconsistent and dangerous.”

Despite this, Trump’s core supporters have remained largely silent—perhaps unwilling to criticize an economic plan that targets more visible rivals like China and Mexico.

📌 Conclusion: A Strategic Silence with Consequences

While Trump’s 2025 tariff plan is bold, disruptive, and headline-grabbing, its selective implementation tells its own story. Russia’s exclusion may be pragmatic—but it is also political.

Whether it reflects geopolitical alignment, limited trade exposure, or a simple desire to focus elsewhere, the result is the same: a major global adversary has been left out of the most aggressive U.S. trade proposal in a generation.

In doing so, Trump may have opened a new flank in the battle over American foreign policy values—one where economic nationalism and strategic ambiguity collide.

Stay with Modern Politics Unpacked as we continue to follow the ripple effects across trade, diplomacy, and the 2026 campaign.