noreferrer" href="https://www.newindianexpress.com/amp/story/world/2026/Sep/04/ready-to-fulfil-indias-energy-needs-says-russian-envoy-calls-western-sanctions-pressure-tactics">newindianexpress.com), both based on Denis Alipov’s remarks, said the ambassador cast Western sanctions and tariff threats as coercive rather than competitive. At the same time, Bloomberg Tax (
news.bloombergtax.com) reported on 3 September that the US sanctions bill behind the latest tariff threat has run into resistance in the House of Representatives.
Alipov’s language has been unusually blunt. According to Web India 123 (news.webindia123.com), he said Russia would be ready to supply India with as much oil as it needed and challenged sanctioning countries to beat Moscow on price instead. “Who prevents those countries from offering a better deal to India in oil than us? But nobody is able to do that. Hence the pressure and punitive measures,” he said. Moneycontrol (moneycontrol.com) reported that he also framed India’s buying decisions as a sovereign economic choice rather than a geopolitical favour to Moscow, saying: “India does not buy Russian oil for the sake of helping Russia. It is buying oil for itself and its own national development.”
The immediate trigger for the row is legislation named for the late Senator Lindsey Graham. A Congressional Research Service analysis published on 3 September (everycrsreport.com) says the Senate passed the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026 on 7 August and that, if it became law, it would authorise tariffs of up to 100 per cent on goods imported from countries that keep buying Russian crude or gas and rank among the top five such importers. The same analysis says the bill would also cover the top five countries deemed to be facilitating Russian oil sanctions evasion. A House version, H.R. 10076, was introduced on 10 August and referred to seven committees, according to the US Government Publishing Office’s bill record. (govinfo.gov)
Yet the measure is no longer moving with the same momentum it had in the Senate. Senator Katie Britt said after the 86-11 Senate vote that the bill had White House backing and should be sent to President Donald Trump. (britt.senate.gov) But House Democrats Don Beyer and Gregory Meeks warned that the legislation would hand Trump “sweeping new tariff authorities” he could “weaponize with abandon”. (beyer.house.gov) Bloomberg Tax (news.bloombergtax.com) said the bill is likely to remain stalled at least until the November election because lawmakers in both parties fear broader tariff powers and higher oil prices.
That legislative uncertainty matters because the tariff picture is already muddled. Hindustan Times (hindustantimes.com) said the United States had imposed a 50 per cent tariff on India and later granted a temporary oil waiver during the Strait of Hormuz blockade, while also pointing to the separate Senate bill threatening tariffs of up to 100 per cent. Reuters, in reports carried by Investing.com on 9 January and 6 February, said Trump had earlier doubled tariffs on Indian goods to 50 per cent, including a 25 per cent levy tied to Russian oil purchases, but then rescinded that 25 per cent punitive duty on 6 February as part of a trade deal. (investing.com) The result is a mix of past tariffs, temporary waivers and proposed new powers that Indian officials are now having to navigate.
New Delhi’s public line has remained steady. The Economic Times, carrying ANI reporting from a 5 September briefing, (m.economictimes.com) quoted foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal as saying: “Our national interest guides our energy purchases, and the imperative for us to meet the energy requirements of 1.4 billion people is what guides us.” A day earlier in Kyiv, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said pressure over commodity buying would not end the war. Hindustan Times (hindustantimes.com) and The New Indian Express (newindianexpress.com) both reported him saying the conflict would be solved by “dialogue”, “diplomacy” and “negotiation”, not by deciding whether individual countries should buy oil, metals or fertiliser.
The dispute also sits inside a broader India-Russia relationship that both sides are keen to show is not reducible to sanctions. An Economic Times video report from 4 September (economictimes.indiatimes.com) said Alipov described India and Russia as “on the same page”, linked that to India’s stated support for peace, and said bilateral trade had risen by about 16 per cent, with Indian exports up 10 per cent. Web India 123 (news.webindia123.com) added that Alipov said the two countries had a “clear picture” of how to continue energy cooperation.
For now, that leaves all sides holding their line. Russia is signalling it will keep selling and argues the market cannot absorb its exclusion. India is insisting that affordability and energy security, not outside pressure, will determine what it buys. Washington’s tougher tariff threat exists on paper in a Senate-passed bill, but as of Monday, 7 September 2026, it still faces a more uncertain path in the House. (news.bloombergtax.com)
Source: Noah Wire Services
