China pushes back at US demands to stop buying Russian and Iranian oil

An oil tanker is moored at the Sheskharis complex, part of Chernomortransneft JSC, a subsidiary of Transneft PJSC, in Novorossiysk, Russia, on Oct. 11, 2022, one of the largest facilities for oil and petroleum products in southern Russia. (AP Photo, File)
Short Url
Updated 04 August 2025
Follow

China pushes back at US demands to stop buying Russian and Iranian oil

  • “China will always ensure its energy supply in ways that serve our national interests,” China’s Foreign Ministry posted on X
  • China is an important customer for Russia, but is second to India in buying Russian seaborne crude oil exports

WASHINGTON: US and Chinese officials may be able to settle many of their differences to reach a trade deal and avert punishing tariffs, but they remain far apart on one issue: the US demand that China stop purchasing oil from Iran and Russia.
“China will always ensure its energy supply in ways that serve our national interests,” China’s Foreign Ministry posted on X on Wednesday following two days of trade negotiations in Stockholm, responding to the US threat of a 100 percent tariff.
“Coercion and pressuring will not achieve anything. China will firmly defend its sovereignty, security and development interests,” the ministry said.
The response is notable at a time when both Beijing and Washington are signaling optimism and goodwill about reaching a deal to keep commercial ties between the world’s two largest economies stable — after climbing down from sky-high tariffs and harsh trade restrictions. It underscores China’s confidence in playing hardball when dealing with the Trump administration, especially when trade is linked to its energy and foreign policies.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, emerging from the talks, told reporters that when it comes to Russian oil purchases, the “Chinese take their sovereignty very seriously.”
“We don’t want to impede on their sovereignty, so they would like to pay a 100 percent tariff,” Bessent said.
On Thursday, he called the Chinese “tough” negotiators, but said China’s pushback hasn’t stalled the negotiations. “I believe that we have the makings of a deal,” Bessent told CNBC.
Gabriel Wildau, managing director of the consultancy Teneo, said he doubts President Donald Trump would actually deploy the 100 percent tariff. “Realizing those threats would derail all the recent progress and probably kill any chance” for Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping to announce a trade deal if they should meet this fall, Wildau said.
In seeking to restrict oil sales by Russia and Iran, a major source of revenue for both countries, the US wants to reduce the funding available for their militaries, as Moscow pursues its war against Ukraine and Tehran funds militant groups across the Middle East.
China plays hardball
When Trump unveiled a sweeping plan for tariffs on dozens of countries in April, China was the only country that retaliated. It refused to give in to US pressure.
“If the US is bent on imposing tariffs, China will fight to the end, and this is China’s consistent official stance,” said Tu Xinquan, director of the China Institute for WTO Studies at the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing. WTO is the acronym for the World Trade Organization.
Negotiating tactics aside, China may also suspect that the US won’t follow through on its threat, questioning the importance Trump places on countering Russia, Tu said.
Scott Kennedy, senior adviser and trustee chair in Chinese Business and Economics at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said Beijing is unlikely to change its posture when it sees inconsistencies in US foreign policy goals toward Russia and Iran, whereas Beijing’s policy support for Moscow is consistent and clear. It’s also possible that Beijing may want to use it as another negotiating tool to extract more concessions from Trump, Kennedy said.
Danny Russel, a distinguished fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said Beijing now sees itself as “the one holding the cards in its struggle with Washington.” He said Trump has made it clear he wants a “headline-grabbing deal” with Xi, “so rejecting a US demand to stop buying oil from Iran or Russia is probably not seen as a deal‑breaker, even if it generates friction and a delay.”
Continuing to buy oil from Russia preserves Xi’s “strategic solidarity” with Russian President Vladimir Putin and significantly reduces the economic costs for China, Russel said.
“Beijing simply can’t afford to walk away from the oil from Russia and Iran,” he said. “It’s too important a strategic energy supply, and Beijing is buying it at fire‑sale prices.”
China depends on oil from Russia and Iran
A 2024 report by the US Energy Information Administration estimates that roughly 80 percent to 90 percent of the oil exported by Iran went to China. The Chinese economy benefits from the more than 1 million barrels of Iranian oil it imports per day.
After the Iranian parliament floated a plan to shut down the Strait of Hormuz in June following US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, China spoke out against closing the critical oil transit route.
China also is an important customer for Russia, but is second to India in buying Russian seaborne crude oil exports. In April, Chinese imports of Russian oil rose 20 percent over the previous month to more than 1.3 million barrels per day, according to the KSE Institute, an analytical center at the Kyiv School of Economics.
This past week, Trump said the US will impose a 25 percent tariff on goods from India, plus an additional import tax because of India’s purchasing of Russian oil. India’s Foreign Ministry said Friday its relationship with Russia was “steady and time-tested.”
Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff and a top policy adviser, said Trump has been clear that it is “not acceptable” for India to continue financing the Ukraine war by purchasing oil from Russia.
“People will be shocked to learn that India is basically tied with China in purchasing Russian oil,” Miller said on Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures.” He said the US needs “to get real about dealing with the financing of this war.”
US Congress demands action

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, is pushing for sanctions and tariffs on Russia and its financial backers. In April, he introduced a bill that would authorize the president to impose tariffs as high as 500 percent not only on Russia but on any country that “knowingly” buys oil, uranium, natural gas, petroleum products or petrochemical products from Russia.
“The purpose of this legislation is to break the cycle of China — a communist dictatorship — buying oil below market price from Putin’s Russia, which empowers his war machine to kill innocent Ukrainian civilians,” Graham said in a June statement.
The bill has 84 co-sponsors in the 100-seat Senate. A corresponding House version has been introduced, also with bipartisan support.
Republicans say they stand ready to move on the sanctions legislation if Trump asks them to do so, but the bill is on hold for now.
 


Trump takes unconventional approach to communicating to the public about war in Iran

Updated 03 March 2026
Follow

Trump takes unconventional approach to communicating to the public about war in Iran

  • The communications strategy opened Trump to criticism that he hadn’t done enough to explain the rationale and objectives of the war

Typical of an unconventional presidency, the Trump administration waited more than 48 hours to make any live, public communication to the American people about why it had decided to go to war with Iran.
President Donald Trump discussed why he launched the attack prior to a White House ceremony honoring military heroes on Monday but took no questions from reporters. Earlier in the day, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Dan Caine briefed journalists at the Pentagon.
The two days previous, Trump delivered two pretaped statements that were released on Truth Social, the social media site owned by the president’s media company, and granted telephone interviews to more than a dozen journalists — several of which produced fragmented responses that, to some, clouded as much as they cleared up.
The communications strategy opened Trump to criticism that he hadn’t done enough to explain the rationale and objectives of the war, even as the American military suffered its first casualties. By contrast, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has teamed with the US against Iran, delivered two statements the day the war began and addressed reporters Monday at the site of a missile attack that killed nine people. The Israeli military has held multiple press briefings each day.
“The American people need a commander in chief, and he has been absent in that role,” Rahm Emanuel, White House chief of staff under President Barack Obama, said on CNN Monday. Emanuel, a Democrat, is contemplating a run for the presidency in 2028.
An unconventional strategy leads to criticism
Peter Baker, chief White House correspondent for The New York Times, wrote on social media that “after Trump launched a new war on Iran, he did not rush back to the White House to make an Oval Office address to rally the nation as other presidents have done. He stayed at Mar-a-Lago to attend a glitzy political fundraiser.”
That post provoked a response from Steven Cheung, White House communications director. “Imagine being a reporter so consumed with Trump Derangement Syndrome that he wants President Trump to mimic the failed policies of the past. The truth is that President Trump spent the majority of his time monitoring the situation in a secure facility, in constant contact with world leaders, and made multiple addresses to the nation that garnered hundreds of millions of views. He also took dozens of calls with reporters.”
The calls included one with Baker’s colleague at The Times, Zolan Kanno-Youngs. Trump’s mobile phone number is known to many of the reporters who cover him, and the president often takes their calls for on-the-spot interviews. Besides The Times, he spoke in the aftermath of the attack to journalists for ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, CNBC, Fox News Channel, The Atlantic, The Washington Post, Axios, Politico and an Israeli television station.
Most of the calls were brief and marginally illuminating; Politico’s Dasha Burns said Trump answered but said he was too busy to talk. The public couldn’t hear what Trump said in the interviews and was dependent upon what the journalists chose to report on the conversations.
“I spoke to President Trump today and he told me that the operation in Iran is going to go very fast,” Libby Alon, a reporter for Channel 14 News in Israel, wrote about her interview on X. “It’s doing very well, and (will) make the people of Israel very happy, and the people of the world very happy.”
The Times reported that in its six-minute chat, Trump “offered several seemingly contradictory visions of how power might be transferred to a new government — or even whether the existing Iranian power structure would run that government or be overthrown.”
In one of his two conversations with Trump, ABC News’ Jonathan Karl said when he asked about the death of Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the president said: “I got him before he got me. They tried twice. Well I got him first.” CNN’s Jake Tapper went on the air minutes after his conversation Monday, saying Trump told him “the big one is coming soon,” an apparent reference to a future attack.
Asked for comment, White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said: “President Trump is the most transparent and accessible president in American history. The American people have never had a more direct and authentic relationship with a president of the United States than they have with President Trump.”
Hegseth briefing concentrates on friendly reporters
Pentagon reporters learned late Sunday about Hegseth’s briefing. Reporters from The Associated Press, Reuters, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox News Channel and Stars & Stripes were permitted into the briefing room, but Hegseth did not call on them. Instead, he took questions from NewsNation and Trump-friendly outlets like the Daily Caller, Daily Wire, One America News and the Christian Broadcasting Network. Most mainstream news outlets left their regular stations at the Pentagon last fall rather than agree to Hegseth’s rules restricting their work.
Hegseth denounced the “foolishness” of people wanting to know details of the operation in advance, such as whether Americans would commit to more than air power, and said the operation would continue as long as it took to achieve objections. He initially ignored NBC News’ Courtney Kube when she called out a question: “President Trump put a four-week time limit on it. Are you saying he’s wrong?”
Later, Hegseth denounced Kube for asking “the typical NBC sort of gotcha-type question. President Trump has all the latitude in the world to talk about how long it might take — four weeks, two weeks, six weeks, it could move up, it could move back. We’re going to execute at his command the objectives he set out to achieve.”
Unlike Pentagon briefings in past administrations, reporters were given assigned seats, with the Trump-friendly outlets seated in front. Jennifer Griffin, Hegseth’s former colleague at Fox News Channel who left the Pentagon with other reporters after not accepting his new rules, was seated in the last row.