The US is set to sign the Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, which grants the President authority to impose tariffs of up to 100% on countries buying Russian oil and gas, with India’s Ministry of External Affairs saying it is closely monitoring the situation while remaining committed to energy security for its population.
The key detail buried in that summary is worth pulling out explicitly: the bill doesn’t automatically impose these tariffs on India, it merely authorizes the President to do so at his discretion.
That distinction — between a law granting power and a government actually exercising it — is where most consequential diplomacy quietly happens, because a discretionary authority functions less like an automatic trigger and more like a standing threat that can be used as leverage in ongoing negotiations.
For a country like India, weighing energy affordability for 1.4 billion people against the risk of a tariff that may or may not ever be applied, the practical response is exactly what’s described here: monitor closely, state a clear position, and continue current policy rather than react to a power that hasn’t yet been used.
It’s a useful pattern to recognize in policy coverage generally — a bill ‘giving authority to’ do something is meaningfully different from a government committing to do it, and conflating the two tends to generate more alarm than the situation, at least for now, actually warrants.
Indian refiners have cited cost savings from discounted Russian crude as a key factor supporting the country’s energy affordability in recent years.
The US has previously raised concerns over India’s Russian oil purchases, with earlier rounds of tariff threats and penalties discussed in prior years.
Energy security has remained a consistent priority in India’s foreign policy, with the government emphasizing diversified sourcing to manage price volatility.
Jamnagar Refinery, India (representative image), Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0