India won't be lectured by a West that still funds Putin

India Today

a day ago

There's an unwritten rule in geopolitics: do as the West says—not as it does. When Europe buys Russian gas, it's painted as a 'strategic necessity.' When India purchases Russian oil, it's condemned as a 'moral failure.' When NATO nations quietly maintain trade links with Moscow even as they publicly criticise others, they call it leadership. But for many observers in the Global South, this looks less like principle—and more like privilege.advertisement Since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, India has faced sustained pressure from Western capitals to align with their sanctions regime against Russia. The messaging from Washington, Brussels, and London has been consistent—cut ties with Moscow, reduce dependency, and don't undermine the collective response to Russian aggression. Yet for all the rhetoric of unity, the reality tells a different story.
India Under PressureIn the wake of Russia's invasion in February 2022, Western nations imposed sweeping sanctions targeting Russian banks, energy exports, technology transfers, and key individuals. The stated aim was clear: isolate Russia economically and diplomatically. Yet, two and a half years later, it is evident that not all nations are being held to the same standard.India has become a focal point of Western concern. Senior U.S. and European officials have repeatedly urged New Delhi to reconsider its burgeoning trade with Moscow—especially its purchase of discounted Russian crude. The message is implicit but firm: buying from Russia risks undermining the West's sanctions architecture.But what many in India ask is simple: why is India being singled out when many Western countries themselves have continued or quietly resumed trade with Russia?The Numbers Tell a Different StorySince 2022, India has ramped up its imports of Russian crude to over a million barrels per day—up from almost zero prior to the war. The purchases are made at discounted rates, often paid in rupees or dirhams. India argues that this is about securing affordable energy for its 1.4 billion citizens. Western critics argue that it's helping finance Putin's war.But India is not alone in this energy calculus. Despite loudly proclaiming support for sanctions, European Union countries continue to import Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) at near-record levels. Spain and Belgium, in particular, have become top buyers of Russian LNG. Meanwhile, Germany, after cutting off pipeline gas, has quietly increased LNG imports from Russia via port terminals.Italy, too, despite its vocal condemnation of Moscow, continues to receive Russian oil products through third-party channels. Even the United States, leading the charge on sanctions, still imports critical Russian commodities such as uranium, essential for powering its nuclear energy infrastructure.A Tale of Double StandardsThe disparity is striking. When India buys Russian oil, it's accused of complicity. When Europe purchases Russian gas, it's considered necessity. When India uses alternative currencies, it's accused of evading sanctions. When Europe employs financial loopholes, it's called pragmatic policy.advertisementConsider this: in 2022 alone, the EU paid over $120 billion to Russia for fossil fuels. India's total was less than half that—around $50 billion. And yet, India finds itself at the receiving end of Western lectures.India's External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar has been blunt: Europe must not assume that its problems are the world's problems. Nor should it expect developing nations to prioritise Eurocentric moral binaries over their own developmental needs.Defence Ties and Strategic NecessityBeyond oil, India's longstanding defence partnership with Russia is also under scrutiny. Roughly 60–70% of India's military hardware is of Russian origin. From fighter jets and submarines to missile systems and spare parts, the Indian Armed Forces remain heavily reliant on Russian platforms.India argues that severing defence ties abruptly would be strategically reckless. NATO, on the other hand, labels continued cooperation as unacceptable.Yet here, too, the hypocrisy is hard to ignore. Turkey, a NATO member, bought the Russian S-400 missile system in 2019—triggering U.S. sanctions under the CAATSA law. But Turkey remains firmly within NATO. More tellingly, Ankara today maintains a dual posture—arming Ukraine with drones while trading grain and gas with Russia. And Washington turns a blind eye.advertisementThe Sanctions TrapIn March 2024, U.S. lawmakers revived the threat of secondary sanctions on countries facilitating Russian trade. Though India wasn't directly named, the intention was unmistakable. Reports emerged that Indian refineries processing Russian crude and exporting it to Europe were being closely monitored.The irony? Europe continues to import refined Russian-origin fuel through Indian intermediaries—and then warns India for buying the crude in the first place.This paradox underlines a broader issue: are sanctions truly about isolating Russia—or are they about preserving Western strategic comfort? And if the West isn't prepared to apply sanctions uniformly, why should others bear the brunt?Multipolarity and Sovereign ChoiceIndia has remained clear-eyed. It condemns the war. It supports diplomacy. But it refuses to play along with what it sees as a selective and self-serving sanctions regime.New Delhi's position finds support across the Global South. Nations in Asia, Africa, and Latin America view India's choices not as betrayal—but as realism. Like India, many rely on Russian energy, fertilisers, grain, and arms. And they, too, have rejected the binary of 'with us or against us.'advertisementAt the BRICS Summit, India joined other member states in calling for a more balanced global financial architecture—less beholden to the U.S. dollar, and less exposed to Western sanctions. The sentiment was clear: the rules of global trade cannot change based on who is writing them.As Brazilian President Lula da Silva put it, 'We don't want an emperor. Our countries are sovereign.' His remarks, interpreted as a response to former U.S. President Donald Trump's threats of retaliatory tariffs, encapsulate a growing frustration with Western economic coercion.The West's Credibility CrisisSince the war began, over 500 Western companies have pulled out of Russia. But hundreds of others remain—protected by waivers, exemptions, or discreet arrangements. From pharmaceuticals to chemicals to machinery, the West's economic ties to Russia have not been severed—they've merely been sanitised.Indian firms, however, receive little such leeway. When they request flexibility, they're met with threats.This inconsistency chips away at the West's credibility. If sanctions are to be moral instruments, they must be applied universally. Otherwise, they become little more than geopolitical tools.Privately, many in New Delhi believe the West's real discomfort is not with oil—or even with Moscow—but with India's growing strategic autonomy. Once a junior partner, India is now asserting its independent course—one that does not always align with Western preferences.advertisementRebalancing PartnershipsIn response, India has begun diversifying its global partnerships. It is strengthening ties with the Gulf, deepening trade with Africa and Latin America, and intensifying economic engagement across Southeast Asia. The West remains a key partner—but no longer the only one.India is walking with the West—but not behind it.Should Western powers escalate their sanctions rhetoric, they risk pushing India further into alternative economic systems—such as BRICS-led financial structures or bilateral arrangements with China and Russia. That would be a strategic misstep for Washington and Brussels.Peace, Not PressureIndia is not seeking conflict. It has sent humanitarian aid to Ukraine. It has engaged diplomatically with both President Zelensky and President Putin. But New Delhi has made it clear: distant wars will not dictate domestic policy. Especially not when the countries demanding restraint refuse to show it themselves.At the heart of this debate lies a fundamental truth. Sanctions, to be effective, require consistency. Moral authority, to command respect, must be universal.By selectively targeting India while tolerating its own contradictions, the West risks not only weakening its case—but undermining the very principles it claims to uphold.In the end, this debate isn't just about Russian oil. It's about the shape of the emerging global order. It's about whether leadership is rooted in fairness—or in double standards.And in today's world, leadership can no longer be demanded. It must be earned.- EndsMust Watch