The global energy landscape experienced significant turbulence after former U.S. President Donald Trump made startling claims regarding India’s commitment to halt purchases of India Russian oil. Speaking from the Oval Office, Trump asserted that Prime Minister Narendra Modi personally assured him during their recent conversation that New Delhi would cease importing crude from Moscow. This announcement immediately impacted international petroleum markets, with oil prices climbing approximately 1% as traders assessed the potential ramifications of removing one of Russia’s largest customers from the market.
Also Read: India-Russia oil
Other: Deadly clashes trigger Kabul airstrikes
Trump characterised the purported commitment as “a big step” in his administration’s efforts to economically isolate Russia and pressure Moscow to conclude its military operations in Ukraine. The President emphasised his dissatisfaction with India’s continued procurement of discounted India Russian oil, stating that such purchases enabled Russia to sustain what he termed “this ridiculous war where they’ve lost a million and a half people.” According to Trump, Modi assured him the transition would occur “within a short period of time,” though he acknowledged the process could not be implemented immediately.
The market response was swift and measurable. Brent crude futures increased by 0.82% to reach $62.43 per barrel, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures climbed 0.89% to $58.79. These price movements reflected trader expectations that India’s potential withdrawal from the India-Russia oil market could tighten global supply dynamics and force crude buyers to seek alternative sources at potentially higher costs.
India’s Measured Response Creates Diplomatic Ambiguity
Despite Trump’s confident assertions, India’s official response has been notably circumspect, creating considerable uncertainty about whether any such commitment was actually made. India’s Ministry of External Affairs issued a carefully worded statement that did not refer to Modi’s alleged promise or any plans to discontinue India’s Russian oil imports. Instead, spokesperson Shri Randhir Jaiswal emphasised India’s longstanding energy policy priorities: “Ensuring stable energy prices and secured supplies have been the twin goals of our energy policy. This includes broad-basing our energy sourcing and diversifying as appropriate to meet market conditions.”
The statement notably mentioned that India has “for many years sought to expand our energy procurement” from the United States, suggesting openness to diversification rather than confirming any concrete commitment to abandon India’s Russian oil entirely. This diplomatic language leaves substantial room for interpretation and has fueled speculation about whether Trump may have overstated or mischaracterised the nature of his discussions with Modi.
Adding to the confusion, some international observers raised questions about whether Trump and Modi had even spoken on the date in question. The lack of official confirmation from New Delhi regarding the conversation’s details has led analysts to question whether Trump’s announcement represents actual policy coordination or political positioning. This ambiguity underscores the complex diplomatic dance between Washington and New Delhi on the sensitive issue of India’s Russian oil trade.
The Strategic Importance of Russian Crude to India’s Economy
India’s relationship with Russian oil has evolved dramatically since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine fundamentally altered global energy markets. Before the conflict, Russia accounted for a relatively modest portion of India’s crude imports. However, as Western sanctions pushed Russian oil prices to significant discounts compared to other benchmark crudes, India emerged as one of Moscow’s most important customers, with imports surging to unprecedented levels.
Currently, Russia serves as India’s top oil supplier, with Moscow exporting approximately 1.62 million barrels per day to India in September 2025—representing roughly one-third of India’s total oil imports. Data from research firm Kpler indicates that India now takes about 1.7 million barrels per day of Russia’s 3.35 million barrels per day of crude exports, making New Delhi second only to China (1.1 million barrels per day) among Russian oil customers.
The economic rationale for India’s continued purchase of Russian oil is compelling. India, with a population exceeding 1.4 billion people and a rapidly growing economy, has massive energy requirements that must be met cost-effectively to maintain economic growth and prevent inflation. The discounted pricing of Russian crude—often $10-15 per barrel below comparable grades—has delivered billions of dollars in savings to India’s economy, helping to moderate fuel costs for consumers and supporting the profitability of India’s substantial refining sector.
India’s petroleum minister has defended the purchase of India Russian oil by noting that during the initial supply disruptions following Russia’s invasion, Western nations actually encouraged India to continue buying Russian crude within the G7-imposed price cap to prevent global oil prices from spiking to $130 per barrel or higher. This history complicates current U.S. pressure on India to abandon Russian supplies entirely.
Trump’s Trade War Tactics and the Tariff Leverage Strategy
Trump’s claims regarding India’s Russian oil cannot be separated from his broader trade confrontation with New Delhi. The President has explicitly weaponised tariffs as a tool to pressure India over its Russian energy purchases, implementing punitive measures designed to make continued procurement economically painful for Indian companies and policymakers.
In August 2025, Trump announced an additional 25% tariff on Indian exports to the United States, specifically citing India’s ongoing imports of India Russian oil as justification for the punitive measure. This brought total tariffs on Indian goods to 50%, creating substantial friction in the bilateral economic relationship between the world’s largest and most populous democracies. The tariff strategy represents a calculated effort to leverage America’s role as a major export market for Indian goods to influence New Delhi’s energy procurement decisions.
Trump’s approach contrasts notably with his treatment of China, which remains the largest single importer of Russian oil. Despite China’s even larger purchases of Indian Russian oil—importing a record 109 million tonnes of Russian crude in 2024, representing nearly 20% of its total energy imports—Trump has not imposed similar punitive tariffs on Chinese goods based on their Russian energy purchases. This selective enforcement has raised questions about the consistency of U.S. policy and whether India is being singled out for pressure.
The tariff strategy reflects Trump’s preference for bilateral leverage over multilateral sanctions regimes. Rather than working through international organisations or coordinating with allies to establish universal restrictions on India’s Russian oil purchases, Trump has opted to use America’s economic relationship with India as direct pressure. This approach has yielded mixed results, with Indian officials consistently defending their purchases as vital to national energy security despite the economic costs of higher U.S. tariffs.
Market Implications and Supply Chain Disruption Risks
If India were to actually follow through on the commitment Trump claims Modi made regarding India’s Russian oil, the implications for global energy markets would be profound and far-reaching. The immediate removal of 1.7 million barrels per day of demand for Russian crude would force a fundamental restructuring of both Russian export patterns and Indian supply chains.
For Russia, losing its second-largest customer would create immediate pressure to find alternative buyers for substantial volumes of crude. While China could potentially absorb some additional Russian barrels, Beijing’s refining capacity and demand growth have limits. Russia might be forced to further discount its crude to attract new customers or to convince existing buyers to take larger volumes, potentially reducing the revenue Moscow derives from energy exports—precisely Trump’s stated objective in pressuring countries to reduce their Indian Russian oil purchases.
For India, the transition would present formidable challenges. Indian refiners have developed specific supply chains, logistics arrangements, and processing configurations optimised for Russian crude grades. Replacing India’s Russian oil with alternatives from the Middle East, Africa, or the Americas would require renegotiating long-term contracts, potentially accepting higher prices, and possibly modifying refinery equipment to process different crude qualities. The adjustment period could create supply disruptions and upward pressure on fuel prices within India.
The broader market response has already begun. The 1% price increase in crude futures following Trump’s announcement reflects trader expectations that reduced India-Russian oil flows could tighten available supply and force buyers into competition for alternative barrels. If the policy shift materialises, analysts anticipate potential volatility as markets adjust to new supply-demand dynamics, with particular pressure on benchmark prices in the near term.
India’s Energy Security Dilemma and Geopolitical Balancing Act
India’s approach to the India-Russia oil question reflects broader strategic challenges facing New Delhi as it navigates competing pressures from Washington, its own economic imperatives, and its traditionally independent foreign policy stance. For months, Indian officials have framed continued purchases of discounted Russian crude as essential to national energy security and economic development, resisting external pressure to sacrifice India’s interests for others’ geopolitical objectives.
The concept of strategic autonomy has long been central to Indian foreign policy. New Delhi has historically resisted alignment with any single power bloc, preferring to maintain relationships across the international spectrum to maximise its diplomatic flexibility and serve its own interests. This tradition makes India reluctant to accept what officials view as unilateral dictation from Washington regarding India’s Russian oil purchases, particularly when such directives carry significant economic costs for Indian consumers and businesses.
Indian policymakers face a genuine dilemma. On one hand, the U.S. market remains crucial for Indian exports, and antagonising Washington carries economic risks beyond just tariffs—including potential impacts on technology transfers, defence cooperation, and investment flows. The U.S. has become an increasingly important strategic partner for India, particularly regarding shared concerns about China’s growing influence in the Indo-Pacific region.
On the other hand, abruptly abandoning India’s Russian oil purchases would impose substantial costs on India’s economy. Energy security is a fundamental national interest, and India’s ability to access affordable, reliable crude supplies directly impacts economic growth, inflation rates, and political stability. The savings from discounted Russian crude have been measured in billions of dollars annually—resources that would be diverted to higher-cost alternatives if India complies with Trump’s pressure.
The statement from India’s Ministry of External Affairs suggesting openness to “broad-basing our energy sourcing and diversifying as appropriate” may represent a middle path—gradually reducing dependence on India’s Russian oil over time while avoiding the economic shock of an immediate, complete halt. This approach would allow India to demonstrate responsiveness to U.S. concerns while protecting its core economic interests and maintaining its tradition of strategic autonomy.
Conclusion: Uncertainty Prevails in Global Energy Diplomacy
Conclusion: Uncertainty Prevails in Global Energy DiplomacyThe controversy surrounding Trump’s claims about India’s commitment to cease India’s Russian oil imports exemplifies the complex intersection of energy economics, geopolitical rivalry, and diplomatic manoeuvring that characterises current international relations. As of now, the fundamental question remains unresolved: Did Modi actually make the commitment Trump claims, and if so, what precisely did it entail?
The approximately 1% increase in oil prices following Trump’s announcement demonstrates that energy markets take these developments seriously, even amid the uncertainty. Traders recognise that any significant shift in India’s Russian oil flows would materially impact global supply-demand balances and potentially reshape trade patterns throughout the petroleum sector.
For India, the path forward involves difficult tradeoffs between economic interests, diplomatic relationships, and energy security requirements. Whether New Delhi actually follows through on the alleged commitment—and on what timeline—will depend on multiple factors, including the specifics of any actual agreement with Trump, the economic costs of transition, and India’s assessment of the geopolitical landscape.
What remains clear is that India’s Russian oil has become a critical pressure point in great power competition, with the United States seeking to economically isolate Russia while India pursues affordable energy to fuel its development. The resolution of this tension will have significant implications not only for petroleum markets but for the broader architecture of international relations in a multipolar world where traditional alliances and enmities no longer neatly define national interests and policy choices.
