White House trade adviser Peter Navarro sharply criticised India’s energy and trade policies, accusing New Delhi of aiding Moscow’s war in Ukraine while blocking American exports.

In an opinion piece for the Financial Times, Navarro — a close confidant of US President Donald Trump — claimed India had become a “global clearing house” for Russian crude, refining discounted oil and reselling it abroad while allowing Russia to pocket badly needed foreign currency. “If India wants to be treated as a strategic partner of the United States, it needs to start acting like one,” he wrote.

The intervention has caused unease in New Delhi, with government sources rejecting the allegations as a misrepresentation of India’s position. Officials stressed that Russian oil purchases had helped shield Indian consumers from inflationary shocks after the Ukraine war disrupted global markets, and insisted that Washington was well aware of India’s compulsions.

Navarro, who has long advocated protectionist trade policies, has hardened his rhetoric during Trump’s second term, urging steeper tariffs to curb US trade deficits. Shortly after Trump announced an additional 25 per cent tariff on Indian imports of Russian oil — taking the total rate to 50 per cent — India condemned the move as “unfair, unjustified and unreasonable” and vowed to defend its economic interests.

Indian refiners point out that Russian oil is not under direct US sanctions, and argue their imports are guided by commercial logic. Before the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Russia accounted for less than 2 per cent of India’s crude purchases.

Today, it supplies 35–40 per cent, making it India’s single largest source, after Western sanctions forced Moscow to offer deep discounts.

Western officials themselves had previously acknowledged that India’s purchases were stabilising global energy supplies. The Biden administration, for example, maintained that once Russian crude is refined into fuel products, it cannot legally be considered of Russian origin — a position reiterated by former US officials including ambassador Eric Garcetti and Treasury aide Anna Morris.

Navarro, however, dismissed that distinction, claiming that India’s refiners were “profiteering” while funnelling resources to the Kremlin’s war chest. He also linked the issue to America’s trade deficit with India — estimated at nearly $50 billion annually — and argued that Indian tariffs and non-tariff barriers punish US businesses.

His critique extended to defence ties, noting India’s continued reliance on Russian hardware and suggesting that technology transfers from the US could ultimately aid rivals. “India is now cosying up to both Russia and China,” he warned, arguing that this undermined trust in the bilateral partnership.

New Delhi has countered that its military purchases from Moscow are a legacy of decades-long ties and that its diversification towards the US, France and Israel reflects its evolving security needs. Officials privately contend that Washington’s targeting of India, while avoiding criticism of Europe and China’s own energy dealings with Moscow, highlights a double standard.

For the Trump administration, however, the tariffs are framed as both an economic corrective and a geopolitical tool. As Navarro put it: “This two-pronged policy will hit India where it hurts — its access to US markets — even as it seeks to cut off the financial lifeline it has extended to Russia’s war effort.”

With PTI inputs