India Warns US Tariff Law Could Strain Bilateral Ties as Congress Calls Russian-Oil Measure an ‘Affront’ to Sovereignty
India has cautioned that the latest US legislation targeting countries that continue to purchase Russian oil could have consequences for the India-US relationship as well as international energy markets. The warning came after the US House of Representatives passed the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, giving President Donald Trump authority to impose tariffs of up to 100% on major buyers of Russian oil and gas. The legislation now awaits Trump’s signature.
The House approved the measure by 262 votes to 159. The legislation is designed primarily to intensify economic pressure on Moscow over the war in Ukraine, with provisions targeting Russia’s energy and defence sectors and its so-called shadow fleet of vessels used to transport oil. Its most consequential provision for India is the authority to impose tariffs of as much as 100% on countries identified as major purchasers of Russian energy.
New Delhi responded cautiously but firmly. The Ministry of External Affairs said India remains committed to ensuring energy security for its 1.4 billion people and would continue to source energy through diversification and according to changing market conditions. The ministry said the possible implications of the US measure for the bilateral relationship and the international energy market had already been “very clearly articulated” to American interlocutors in discussions over recent months.
The Indian government also said it would take all necessary measures to protect the country’s trade and economic interests. It indicated that the government would work with Indian trade and industry bodies to address the consequences of the legislation while continuing to monitor developments in Washington.
The potential economic impact is significant because Russian crude has become a major component of India’s oil-import basket. According to data cited by Indian media, Russia accounted for more than half of India’s crude imports in July, making any sudden disruption or major increase in the cost of Russian supplies potentially relevant to refiners, fuel markets and the wider economy.
For Indian refiners, the issue is not simply the availability of crude but the cost and flexibility of replacing Russian supplies. India has been diversifying its energy purchases, including from the United States, Venezuela and other suppliers, but a rapid shift in sourcing could expose refiners to different prices, freight costs and market conditions. Reuters reported that Indian refiners have been seeking negotiations over possible exemptions or quotas amid concerns about the effect of the US measure on costs and margins.
The legislation also arrives at a sensitive moment for India-US economic relations. The United States is India’s largest export destination, with Indian goods exports to the US rising to $42.79 billion during April-August from $40.39 billion in the corresponding period a year earlier, according to figures cited by Reuters. The tariff threat therefore extends beyond the oil sector because the proposed measures could affect Indian goods entering the American market.
India’s response has also acquired a domestic political dimension. The opposition Congress party has sharply criticised the US legislation and questioned whether India’s energy choices could effectively be determined in Washington. Congress general secretary Randeep Surjewala described the US move as an “affront to Indian sovereignty”, while KC Venugopal asked whether India’s foreign policy and energy sovereignty would be controlled from Washington. These are political statements by opposition leaders, rather than findings of the Indian government.
Congress has argued that India should retain the sovereign right to determine from which countries it purchases crude oil. Surjewala said India’s foreign policy and sovereignty should not be traded in the context of relations with the United States, while Venugopal demanded clarity from the government on its position following the US congressional action.
The dispute highlights a broader tension between Washington’s strategy of increasing economic pressure on Russia and New Delhi’s emphasis on energy security and diversified sourcing. The United States is seeking to reduce revenues available to Moscow, while India has repeatedly framed its Russian oil purchases around market conditions, energy security and the needs of Indian consumers. The competing priorities are now directly intersecting through US trade policy.
The immediate legal position is also important. The 100% tariff is an authority granted to the US president, not an automatic 100% tariff that has already been imposed on India. The House has passed the legislation after its earlier Senate approval, and the next major step is presidential action. The final economic consequences will therefore depend on how the authority is implemented, which countries are designated and whether exemptions or other provisions are used.
For New Delhi, the coming phase is likely to involve a combination of diplomatic engagement, trade negotiations and continued diversification of crude supplies. India has already told Washington that it understands the potential implications for bilateral ties and global energy markets, while making clear that protecting its economic interests and energy security remains a central priority.
The latest confrontation therefore goes beyond the immediate question of Russian oil. It places India-US trade, energy security and strategic autonomy into a single negotiating framework, while leaving the practical impact dependent on the final implementation of the US law and the subsequent diplomatic and commercial response from New Delhi and Washington.
