US President Donald Trump has initiated significant shifts in his administration's foreign and economic policies, announcing new military aid for Ukraine and threatening severe economic sanctions against buyers of Russian exports, while simultaneously pressing forward with a broad scheme of tariffs impacting various global economies, from South Korea's booming beauty industry to India's manufacturing sector and the local economy of Washington state.

In a major policy change reflecting his disappointment with Russian President Vladimir Putin, President Trump announced that billions of dollars in top-of-the-line weapons would be distributed to Ukraine, with NATO allies expected to cover the costs. These weapons are set to include Patriot air defense missiles, urgently sought by Ukraine to defend against Russian air strikes, with some units arriving within days through swaps from other countries. Trump also issued an ultimatum, stating that if a peace deal is not reached within 50 days, the U.S. would impose 100% tariffs on Russian exports and implement secondary sanctions targeting third countries purchasing Russia's goods. Such secondary sanctions are anticipated to have a far more severe impact on Russia's economy than previous measures, which had allowed sales to major buyers like China and India.

Concurrently, President Trump's tariff war has created global economic uncertainty, with several countries facing new duties on their exports to the United States. South Korea, a nation with a free trade agreement since 2012 that allowed many goods to enter tax-free, is now contending with the possibility of a 25% duty on its exports, effective August 1st. This has prompted reactions from consumers and businesses alike.

The burgeoning Asian skin care market, particularly Korean cosmetics (K-beauty), has become a focal point of these trade tensions. Consumers like Amrita Bhasin have resorted to stockpiling popular items such as sheet masks, fearing price hikes. The U.S. imported $1.7 billion worth of South Korean cosmetics in 2024, a 54% increase from the previous year, with K-beauty significantly boosting South Korea's global profile. However, retailers like Senti Senti and Ohlolly, who depend heavily on South Korean products, face a substantial increase in costs if the 25% import tax is imposed, potentially leading to higher prices for consumers or product discontinuations. While Japan, the Philippines, and Indonesia managed to secure agreements that lowered their tariff rates, South Korea has yet to reach such a deal, complicating the future of accessible K-beauty pricing in the U.S. market.

Domestically, the impact of these tariffs is acutely felt in trade-dependent regions like Washington state. Governor Bob Ferguson, joined by business owners and officials, held a news conference to highlight projections from an Office of Financial Management (OFM) report, which indicated that Washington could lose as many as 25,000 jobs. The tariffs, described as regressive taxes, are expected to significantly increase grocery costs for average families and escalate demand on already strained food banks. Washington's effective tariff rate, cumulatively around 18.6% as of August 7th, is the highest since the Great Depression in 1933, threatening the state's general fund with a projected $2.2 billion loss over four years, potentially impacting essential services like healthcare and education, including Medicaid coverage for hundreds of thousands of residents.

Washington state, a major global exporter generating nearly $58 billion from exports in 2024 and supporting 160,000 jobs, relies heavily on trade partners such as China, Japan, Vietnam, and Thailand, all of whom have faced steep U.S. tariffs. China, its largest trading partner, faces the harshest U.S. tariffs at 57.6%, reciprocated by China with 32.6% duties on U.S. goods. Furthermore, the state's agricultural industry, primarily in Central and Eastern Washington, depends on Canada for approximately 90% of its fertilizer, and more expensive fertilizer could lead to reduced produce and agricultural job losses for low-income immigrant workers.

India has also grappled with President Trump's tariff scheme, leading to divided opinions on its economic repercussions. While some initially dismissed the tariffs due to the perceived small scale of U.S.-India trade, others warned of serious economic damage. The implementation of the new duties in late August directly affected Indian industries, such as apparel manufacturing, which saw factory closures due to their dependence on the U.S. market for "large and loud" clothing styles and sizes that are cheap by American standards.

A more unconventional analysis emerged from discussions among Indian citizens, suggesting that President Trump's actions might stem from a "teenager-like" reaction to perceived rejection. This theory linked his behavior to instances where the Indian Prime Minister reportedly declined invitations to the White House. Drawing parallels to Custer's Last Stand in the 19th century, where underestimation of an opponent led to significant defeat, some posited that if Trump continues with his tariffs, given that "Today's Indians outnumber the Americans," it could ultimately become "Trump’s last stand," implying that the collective weight of India could compel a reduction in tariffs.