India-U.S. Ties Face Fresh Strain as Washington Advances 100% Tariff Power Over Russian Oil Purchases
New Delhi has cautioned Washington that the latest U.S. legislation targeting countries that continue to purchase Russian oil could have consequences for India-U.S. bilateral relations, while reiterating that protecting the country’s energy security and economic interests remains a priority. The warning came after the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026 by 262-159, sending the legislation to President Donald Trump for his signature.
The legislation gives the U.S. president authority to impose tariffs of up to 100% on countries that remain major purchasers of Russian oil and gas. India and China are among the principal countries exposed to the measure because of their continuing imports of Russian crude. The tariff authority is not automatic; it would depend on how the administration chooses to implement the new powers after the bill becomes law.
India’s Ministry of External Affairs said New Delhi had already raised the issue with U.S. interlocutors at various levels during recent months. According to the ministry, India had “very clearly articulated” the potential implications not only for bilateral relations but also for international energy markets. New Delhi also said it would take all necessary measures to protect its trade and economic interests.
The Indian government has simultaneously stressed that energy security remains central to its policy. The MEA said India remains committed to securing energy for its roughly 1.4 billion people through diversified sources and according to changing market conditions. That position reflects New Delhi’s longstanding argument that crude purchases must be assessed against domestic energy requirements, prices and supply availability.
The potential economic impact is significant because India is one of the world’s largest crude-oil importers and has become a major buyer of Russian petroleum since Western sanctions were imposed on Moscow following the invasion of Ukraine. Reuters reported that Indian refiners had already arranged Russian-oil supplies for September and October, while industry sources warned that sharply reducing Russian purchases could increase costs at a time when global supplies are already under pressure.
The dispute also comes at a sensitive point in India-U.S. trade negotiations. Washington remains one of India’s most important export markets, while the two countries have been attempting to advance a broader trade agreement after months of negotiations. The possibility of additional U.S. tariffs therefore introduces another economic issue into already complicated discussions over market access and trade concessions.
India’s position also reflects the changing global oil environment. The country has sought to diversify its crude supplies, but disruptions affecting Middle Eastern energy routes have increased the importance of reliable alternative suppliers. Analysts cited by Al Jazeera have warned that forcing major Asian buyers away from Russian crude could increase competition for supplies from other producers and potentially add pressure to international oil prices.
The U.S. legislation is broader than tariffs alone. It also targets Russian energy and defence interests, sanctions networks associated with Russia’s so-called shadow fleet, and strengthens Washington’s ability to pressure countries maintaining significant energy ties with Moscow. The measure is therefore part of a wider U.S. strategy aimed at reducing Russia’s revenue from energy exports.
India’s opposition Congress has meanwhile intensified its criticism of the government’s handling of the dispute. Congress general secretary Randeep Singh Surjewala described the U.S. move as an “affront to Indian sovereignty” and questioned whether New Delhi would assert its right to independently decide its sources of crude oil. K.C. Venugopal also questioned whether India’s foreign policy and energy security could effectively be influenced from Washington. These are opposition-party characterisations, rather than the government’s description of the situation.
Congress’s criticism comes as the government seeks to balance its strategic partnership with the United States against longstanding defence, energy and economic relations with Russia. The issue consequently extends beyond the immediate question of oil purchases, touching on India’s broader policy of maintaining relationships with multiple major powers while seeking room for independent economic and foreign-policy decisions.
For Washington, the legislation represents a mechanism to increase pressure on Russia by targeting major purchasers of its energy. For New Delhi, however, any implementation of a 100% tariff against Indian exports could create consequences for trade, energy costs and the wider bilateral relationship. The immediate question is therefore how the Trump administration will exercise the authority granted by Congress and whether exemptions, waivers or other arrangements emerge during negotiations with affected countries.
The next phase is likely to centre on diplomacy as much as legislation. India has indicated that it will work with its trade and industry bodies to address the consequences of the U.S. measure, while Indian Trade Minister Piyush Goyal is expected to engage with U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer during the upcoming G20 trade ministers’ meeting. The outcome of those discussions could have implications for both the India-U.S. trade negotiations and the future pattern of India’s Russian-oil purchases.
