Energy politics rarely stay confined to spreadsheets and shipping routes. They spill into press briefings, tariffs, and carefully worded diplomatic statements. That was on full display this week as Washington and New Delhi exchanged signals over one of the most sensitive commodities in the world.
India Defends Its Energy Choices
After China, India has become the largest buyer of Russian crude oil, a position that would have seemed unlikely just a few years ago. In 2024, Russian oil accounted for roughly 36 percent of India’s crude imports, compared with barely 2 percent before the war in Ukraine began in 2022. That sharp shift reflects a simple calculation. Russian barrels have been cheaper, and India’s energy demand continues to grow at speed.
Following comments by Donald Trump, Indian officials moved quickly to restate their position. The Ministry of External Affairs said New Delhi’s energy policy is guided by one principle above all else: protecting Indian consumers in a volatile global market. In other words, affordability comes first.
Anyone who has watched fuel prices creep up knows how politically sensitive this issue can be. In India, where millions rely on stable energy costs for transport and cooking, the stakes are even higher. Officials stressed that procurement decisions are not ideological but pragmatic, shaped by supply, price, and reliability.
This response carefully avoided confirming or denying Trump’s claim that Narendra Modi had personally promised to halt purchases of Russian oil. The silence itself was telling. Diplomacy, after all, often relies as much on what is left unsaid as on what is declared at a podium.
A Growing Focus On U.S. Energy Imports
The tension sharpened after Washington imposed a 50 percent surcharge on Indian exports in late August, a move framed as retaliation for India’s continued energy ties with Moscow. Trump has repeatedly argued that revenue from Russian oil sales helps finance the war in Ukraine, a view echoed by several Western governments and institutions such as the International Energy Agency.
At the same time, New Delhi has pointed out that it has been actively seeking to diversify its energy sources. Indian officials noted that the country has spent years increasing imports from the United States, particularly liquefied natural gas and crude oil. Talks on deeper energy cooperation with Washington are ongoing, and the current US administration has shown interest in expanding that partnership.
A senior Indian diplomat once compared energy sourcing to grocery shopping during a shortage. You buy what is available, affordable, and good enough for the family. That analogy may sound simplistic, but it captures the real world pressures facing governments responsible for vast populations.
From Washington’s perspective, the issue is as much geopolitical as economic. Reducing global dependence on Russian energy has been a core objective since 2022. Yet analysts at organisations like the Brookings Institution have long noted that expecting emerging economies to absorb higher costs overnight is a hard sell.
Between Diplomacy And Domestic Reality
What emerges from this exchange is a familiar balancing act. India is navigating geopolitical pressure, domestic economic needs, and long term strategic relationships all at once. Publicly, it is holding the line on consumer interests. Privately, it continues discussions with the United States about expanding alternative supplies.
For travellers or business owners watching petrol prices, this debate is not abstract. It shapes daily costs and long term growth. The emphasis on energy security, consumer protection, and strategic autonomy is likely to remain central to India’s messaging.
As for Trump’s comments, they underline how energy has become a diplomatic lever as powerful as tariffs or treaties. Whether India ultimately reduces its reliance on Russian oil will depend less on sound bites and more on market conditions, supply chains, and the pace of global realignment.
In the meantime, New Delhi’s answer has been measured and consistent. It will keep buying what best serves its people, while keeping the conversation open with Washington. In today’s fractured energy landscape, that may be the most realistic position of all.
