Thank you dear subscribers, we are overwhelmed with your response.
Your Turn is a unique section from ThePrint featuring points of view from its subscribers. If you are a subscriber, have a point of view, please send it to us. If not, do subscribe here: https://theprint.in/subscribe/
In the shadowy corridors of global power, where economic leverage masquerades as diplomacy, India is caught up in a high-stakes game orchestrated by Washington. The recent ‘trade deal’ announced by US President Donald Trump on 2 February 2026, which saw tariffs on Indian goods slashed from 50% to 18%, was no benevolent olive branch. It is a calculated act of coercion, dangling the prospect of economic relief in exchange for India’s capitulation on Russian oil imports. Trump boasted on Truth Social that Prime Minister Narendra Modi had ‘agreed to stop buying Russian oil’, framing it as a victory in starving Russia’s war machine in Ukraine. However, beneath the official rhetoric lies a stark portrait of American blackmail, gradually eroding India’s sovereignty.
This isn’t mere negotiation; it’s economic warfare disguised as partnership. For months, the US has used a range of tactics — public threats, hidden pressures and outright ultimatums — to force Delhi to cut its supply of cheap Russian oil. The stakes? Billions of dollars in potential losses for India’s economy, a blow to its industrial backbone and a humiliating dent to its status as an independent geopolitical player. As the dust settles on this so-called deal, one question remains: has Modi bowed to the inevitable, or is India teetering on the brink of forced surrender that could jeopardise its energy future?
The web of pressure: from tariffs to shadowy sanctions
The pressure mounted in earnest in 2025 when India’s imports of Russian oil surged to account for over 35% of its total crude needs, peaking at two million barrels per day by the middle of the year. Russia, offering deep discounts after its invasion of Ukraine in 2022, became India’s top supplier, saving billions on import bills and fuelling refineries optimised for its heavy, sour crude. However, Washington, determined to isolate Moscow, saw this as an insult — funding Putin’s aggression while undermining US energy exports.
Publicly, the US increased tariffs as a blunt instrument. In August 2025, Trump doubled duties on Indian goods to 50%, adding a 25% “reciprocal” tariff to an existing 25% penalty explicitly tied to Russian oil purchases. The White House officials openly declared that this was punishment for “financing Putin’s war”. By October, sanctions had been imposed on Russian giants Rosneft and Lukoil, which supply 60% of India’s oil imports, accompanied by veiled threats of secondary sanctions on Indian refiners and banks. Imports plummeted, falling from 1.8 million barrels per day (bpd) in November 2025 to 1.2 million bpd in December, and dropping further to 1.1 million bpd in early 2026.
Behind closed doors, the pressure was even more insidious. Diplomatic ultimatums were conveyed through backroom channels, including direct phone calls between Trump and Modi. During these calls, the US president repeatedly demanded that India “stop buying Russian oil” or face escalation. Washington leaned on international financial institutions and allies — think IMF nudges and EU hypocrisy — to amplify the squeeze. European nations, which were still indirectly importing Russian energy in the form of refined products, joined the chorus, thereby exposing the West’s double standards: preaching isolation to the Global South while quietly sustaining Moscow’s revenues.
And what of the ‘gesture of goodwill’? Trump’s tariff cut is conditional and embedded in an executive order that requires the US to monitor India’s oil imports. Resume purchases ‘directly or indirectly’, and the 25% penalty will be reinstated. This isn’t reciprocity; it’s blackmail, forcing India to trade its energy autonomy for temporary relief on exports worth billions.
Winners and losers: Who profits from India’s pain?
Follow the money and the beneficiaries of this coercion become clear. The US stands to gain massively. Trump explicitly touted India switching to American and Venezuelan oil, which could potentially funnel billions into US energy firms. Since sanctions eased in 2024, Venezuela, under US influence, has offered similar heavy crude — but at a premium. Analysts estimate that this shift could increase US exports by 10–20%, while reducing Russia’s revenues by $4 billion per month if India were to exit completely. It’s a geopolitical jackpot: weakening Russia would give the US more leverage in the Ukraine talks, while locking India into dependence on Western suppliers.
For India, however, the costs would be catastrophic. Abandoning Russian oil, which is discounted by $10–12 per barrel, could increase the annual import bill by $6–11 billion — equivalent to the federal health budget. Refineries such as Nayara, which is majority-owned by Rosneft, are facing operational chaos, with higher processing costs and lower yields causing fuel prices to spike by 2%. The industry is grinding to a halt: the petrochemicals, manufacturing and transport sectors are absorbing the hit, fuelling inflation that is burdening ordinary citizens who are already struggling with the post-pandemic recovery. Daily losses could reach $3–6 million if imports were to halt abruptly. And the irony? Global oil prices spike, benefiting the very US producers who are pushing this agenda.
Modi’s dilemma: signals, risks and the erosion of sovereignty
At the centre of this storm stands Narendra Modi, navigating a minefield of signals from Washington that scream dominance. Trump’s repeated claims — echoed in White House briefings — that Modi personally ‘committed’ to halting Russian imports paint a picture of submission. Diplomatic cables and summits, such as the February 2025 joint statement on ‘Mission 500’ for $500 billion in bilateral trade, mask the ultimatums: ‘diversify or face isolation’. If Modi gives in completely, the risks are existential. Economically, losing access to the US market — India’s largest export destination — could reduce GDP by 0.9%. In geopolitical terms, it would undermine India’s strategic autonomy, which is a cornerstone of Modi’s foreign policy. Ties with Russia, a reliable arms supplier and a counterweight to China, would fray as Moscow redirected oil to Beijing, thereby strengthening the Sino-Russian alliance. India’s global stature would diminish, transforming it from a multipolar player to a US vassal vulnerable to future whims regarding issues such as defence deals or Iran ties.
Modi’s responses — vague assurances of ‘energy diversification’ via Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal — reek of evasion, not defiance. While Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri recently asserted that India would not depend on a single source, X posts and analyst scepticism suggest that he was forced into this position by internal pressure from exporters. This isn’t leadership; it’s walking a tightrope over an abyss, where giving in to US coercion undermines the “Vishwaguru” image that Modi is trying to cultivate.
Exposing the Hypocrisy: Rhetoric vs. Reality
Washington’s pious rhetoric about halting Russian oil to ‘end the war in Ukraine’ crumbles under scrutiny. US officials denounce India’s purchases as funding for the war, yet Europe imports refined Russian products through loopholes, thereby sustaining Moscow’s economy. Trump’s deal promises ‘peace’, but the real consequences for India are economic strangulation: higher costs, inflation and dependency. Compare statements: Trump hails ‘mutual benefits’, while Indian officials avoid confirming this, revealing the imbalance.
The West’s contradictions are glaring. Sanctions on Russia are failing as China buys up discounted oil, yet India, which is buying legally above the G7 price cap, is bearing the brunt. This double standard reeks of neo-colonialism: dictating terms to emerging powers while safeguarding your own interests. Indian leaders once criticised this ‘hypocrisy’; now, silence speaks volumes.
A forced choice: Undermining India’s Future
India is not at a crossroads, but at a dead end engineered by US coercion. The ‘choice’ is illusory: comply or face economic ruin. By linking trade to geopolitics, Washington has weaponised interdependence, forcing Delhi to sacrifice cheap energy for tariff concessions. This deal does not secure India’s future; it jeopardises it by eroding energy security amid rising demand and compromising strategic independence in a multipolar world.
Modi must reclaim agency by diversifying without surrendering, perhaps through quiet circumventions or bolder alliances. However, as imports dwindle and US monitoring looms, it is clear that this is not partnership, but subjugation. India, the world’s third-largest oil consumer, deserves better than to be a pawn in America’s endless games.
These pieces are being published as they have been received – they have not been edited/fact-checked by ThePrint.