US trade war: What if Russian oil is excluded from markets? Envoy Alipov warns ‘world will not cope’
Washington's New Tariff Threat Over Russian Oil: Moscow's Envoy in Delhi Warns Global Markets Cannot Absorb the Shock
Theindiapostdaily.com – The United States Senate voted 86 to 11 last month to advance the bipartisan Lindsey O Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, a measure that would hand President Donald Trump sweeping authority to impose tariffs of up to 100 percent on goods imported from nations that continue purchasing significant volumes of Russian crude oil or natural gas. The legislation, which cleared the upper chamber with broad cross-party support, frames continued energy trade with Moscow as a direct pipeline of revenue funding Russia's military campaign in Ukraine. If enacted into law, the bill would allow the White House to target the five largest buyers of Russian hydrocarbons with punitive import duties, a provision that places India and China squarely in its crosshairs.
Within days of the Senate vote, Russian Ambassador to India Denis Alipov issued a pointed response, telling ANI that the global energy market would be unable to function if Russian oil were effectively locked out of international commerce. He framed the issue not merely as a bilateral matter between New Delhi and Moscow but as a systemic risk to worldwide supply chains, arguing that the sheer volume of Russian crude flowing into global markets makes its sudden removal an economic impossibility.
Moscow Signals Unlimited Supply Willingness to New Delhi
Alipov made clear that Russia stands ready to ship as much crude oil to India as the latter wishes to purchase, positioning Moscow as a dependable supplier regardless of external pressure. He emphasized that India has consistently demonstrated its capacity to defend its own energy security interests, even while navigating layers of sanctions and tariff threats tied to its oil imports from Russia.
"The question is — how confident is India? India has shown that it's able to stand its ground and defend its national interests. And when we speak about the sanctions pertaining to oil trade, the tariffs are also related to the cooperation between Russia and India in oil supplies. These interests are paramount for India. We would be ready to supply as much oil as India needs."
The ambassador went further, casting the Western sanctions architecture as a counterproductive exercise in coercion rather than constructive diplomacy. In his view, the pressure campaign has backfired by making it impossible for sanctioning nations to present India with a more attractive oil-supply proposition than Moscow already offers.
"Unfortunately, those who impose sanctions and tariffs have taken the path of pressure tactics instead of honest cooperation, which prevents those countries from offering a better deal to India in oil than us. The world will not cope if Russian oil is excluded. The energy markets cannot afford that. Russian oil will stay in the market for India and other countries. We are interested in supplying oil to India. India is interested in buying that oil…"
The Legislative Backdrop: Secondary Tariffs and Broader Sanctions
The Lindsey O Graham Act goes well beyond energy trade. Its text calls for additional sanctions directed at Russian President Vladimir Putin, senior political and military officials, financial institutions, energy-sector projects, and other entities linked to Moscow's war effort. The bill's central economic mechanism, however, is the secondary tariff provision: if a foreign government maintains "significant purchases" of Russian crude or gas, the US President gains discretion to levy duties as high as 100 percent on that country's exports to American markets.
For India, which has become one of the world's largest importers of Russian crude since 2022, the stakes are substantial. New Delhi's energy strategy has leaned heavily on discounted Russian barrels to keep domestic fuel costs manageable while insulating the economy from Middle East supply volatility. A 100 percent tariff on Indian goods entering the US would compress export margins across textiles, pharmaceuticals, IT services, and agricultural products, forcing a painful recalibration of trade policy.
China, the other principal buyer of Russian hydrocarbons, faces an analogous exposure. Together, the two Asian economies account for the overwhelming majority of Russian oil and gas exports, meaning the proposed secondary tariffs would effectively target the backbone of post-2022 energy trade flows.
Washington Softens the Rhetoric: Navarro Invokes Personal Diplomacy
Despite the severity of the legislative language, the White House has attempted to temper alarm among New Delhi's policymakers. US Presidential Counsellor Peter Navarro, speaking on the tariff question, stressed that President Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi maintain a "very good working relationship" and would resolve any friction over Russian-oil-linked duties through direct bilateral channels.
"That's not how we resolve problems here in America. With respect to your question, the President and your Prime Minister have a very good working relationship. They are going to work that out amongst themselves, and it's not for me or any gaggle to get between that," Navarro stated.
Navarro's remarks suggest the administration views the tariff authority as a negotiating lever rather than an immediate instrument of punishment. Whether that interpretation holds once the bill clears the House and receives presidential signature remains an open question, particularly given the bipartisan momentum behind the measure.
Broader Implications for Global Energy Architecture
Alipov's warning that the world "will not cope" without Russian oil touches on a structural reality: Russia exports roughly 10 million barrels per day of crude and condensate, along with substantial volumes of refined products and liquefied natural gas. No single alternative supplier can replace that volume overnight without triggering price spikes that would ripple through inflation, shipping rates, and industrial input costs worldwide.
India's position is particularly delicate. As a net energy importer dependent on seaborne crude, New Delhi has cultivated a hedged supply portfolio spanning the Middle East, West Africa, the Americas, and Russia. The US tariff threat does not eliminate Russian barrels from Indian refineries, but it raises the political cost of continuing to buy them. The question now facing Indian policymakers is whether the economic benefit of discounted Russian crude outweighs the potential revenue loss from a punitive US tariff regime — a calculus that will shape bilateral energy diplomacy for years to come.
For now, both sides of the equation have spoken: Washington has codified its leverage into legislation, and Moscow has declared its supply commitment unconditional. The market, as Alipov insists, will ultimately decide whether either position can be sustained.
Related Reading
Frequently Asked Questions
What is US trade war?US trade war is the main topic of this guide. The article explains the context, practical details, and next steps readers should understand.
Why does US trade war matter?US trade war matters because readers are looking for a useful answer, not just a short summary. Good content should match search intent and help them decide what to do next.