Image Source:assets
The Allegation: “Modi’s War”
Peter Navarro, trade adviser to former President Donald Trump, unleashed a fiery critique of India’s energy policy in the context of the Ukraine–Russia war. In a Bloomberg interview, he charged Prime Minister Narendra Modi with fueling the conflict by importing discounted Russian oil — labeling the situation “Modi’s war”.
Navarro contended that India’s oil purchases are allowing Russia to financially sustain its military campaign in Ukraine. He further offered to halve U.S. tariffs on Indian goods if New Delhi ceased buying Russian oil — a pointed incentive reflecting deep diplomatic strain.
Tariffs: A Financial Strike
This comes amid sweeping U.S. tariffs on Indian imports: an initial 25% reciprocal levy has been escalated to 50% by adding another 25% specifically targeting India’s continued energy ties with Russia.
Navarro framed these punitive duties as a response to India’s role in indirectly supporting the “war machine.” He warned that the international road to peace partly runs through New Delhi.
India as a “Global Clearinghouse for Russian Oil”
Navarro’s Financial Times op-ed detailed his view that Indian refiners are transforming discounted Russian crude into lucrative fuel exports. This, he argued, effectively launders money into Moscow’s war chest while evading Western sanctions.
He criticized India’s shift from minimal reliance on Russian oil pre-2022 to a dramatic surge afterward — asserting that oil imports now account for over 30% of India’s consumption, and that the operation is driven by profiteering rather than domestic needs.
Strategic and Diplomatic Fallout
This confrontation is part of a broader diplomatic and trade crisis between the U.S. and India. Despite two decades of strategic alignment, relations have soured sharply, fueled by arguments over energy, tariffs, and geopolitical loyalties.
Indian officials have vocally defended their position, citing energy security and accusing the U.S. of hypocrisy — pointing to its own continued engagements with Russia in sectors like fertilizers, uranium, palladium, and rare earth materials.
A Geopolitical Chessboard
Some commentators frame Navarro’s remarks as part of a calculated strategy to pressure India amid stalled trade talks, rather than a principled stand on global justice. They argue the criticism spotlights a double standard in how global powers engage with Russia.
Meanwhile, other U.S. officials like Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent have echoed the message, highlighting India’s energy strategy as a destabilizing factor in global efforts to isolate Russia.
What’s at Stake?
India–U.S. Relations: Deep repercussions for strategic partnerships, defense cooperation, and economic diplomacy.
Energy Policy: A broader debate on balancing national energy needs with international moral imperatives.
Global Alliances: India’s ties with both Russia and China place Washington’s expectations of alignment under strain — especially amidst rising multipolarism.
What began as an op-ed grew into a full-blown diplomatic crisis. Navarro’s pointed framing of India’s energy policy as actively sustaining Russia’s war machine has reignited contentious debates about strategic autonomy, global responsibility, and the balance between moral considerations and geoeconomic imperatives.
[Newsroom staff written original, where key claims or facts are used, I’ve referenced the original sources (like The Washington Post,
The Economic Time,
The Times of India, Reuters, FT, etc.) transparently.]
