India today stands at the centre of a global tussle that blends geopolitics with energy economics. With a population of nearly 1.4 billion and a rapidly expanding economy, the country’s dependence on imported crude is a matter of necessity, not choice. More than 80 per cent of India’s oil is sourced from abroad, making affordable and stable supplies critical for national stability.
Since the outbreak of the Ukraine conflict disrupted global energy flows, Russia has offered crude oil at steeply discounted prices. For India, rejecting such supplies would mean higher import costs, inflationary shocks, and pressure on growth. Officials have consistently argued that the approach is pragmatic, not ideological — energy security takes precedence over geopolitical alignments.
This position, however, has sparked criticism abroad. The United States contends that India’s purchases indirectly fund Russia’s war effort and has responded with steep tariffs on Indian exports in a bid to alter New Delhi’s stance. Yet, observers note that other major importers of Russian energy, including European economies, have not been subjected to similar penalties — raising questions about the consistency and fairness of such pressure.
India’s position is rooted in the doctrine of strategic autonomy, a cornerstone of its foreign policy since independence. New Delhi has made clear that continuing oil imports from Russia does not signal endorsement of Moscow’s policies, nor indifference to the Ukraine crisis. Instead, it reflects a calibrated strategy: safeguarding energy security, maintaining ties with Moscow, engaging Kyiv diplomatically, and sustaining cooperation with Washington where interests align.
Economically, India may face short-term costs through higher tariffs on exports to the U.S. Politically, it risks renewed doubts about its reliability as a Western partner. Yet, in the long run, India’s insistence on sovereign choices could enhance its global credibility. Nations that consistently defend autonomy, even at economic cost, are more likely to be seen as respected, independent powers rather than compliant allies.
At its core, this debate is not just about oil. It is about agency. By choosing to buy energy where the terms are most favorable, India is asserting that its path to energy security — and, ultimately, its economic growth — will not be dictated from abroad. In a multipolar world, respect stems from sovereignty, not submission.
