By Shishir Priyadarshi and Bidisha Bhattacharya
India has issued a sharp diplomatic riposte to the United States and the European Union over what it perceives as a growing trend of Western hypocrisy. In a strongly worded post on X (formerly Twitter), the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) pushed back against criticism of India’s oil trade with Russia, calling out the glaring double standards in the West’s own ongoing trade with Moscow.
At the heart of the controversy is the selective moral outrage expressed by the West, even as its own trade data tells a different story.
Let us start with the facts: India did not suddenly develop an affinity for Russian crude oil. Its pivot toward Russian energy was a necessity, not a choice.
After the Ukraine war broke out in February 2022, Europe, once reliant on Russian supplies, redirected its energy demand to the Middle East, squeezing India out of the traditional supplier markets. Ironically, at the time, the United States encouraged India to buy Russian crude to stabilise global prices and reduce the Kremlin’s leverage over Europe. This historical fact now seems conveniently forgotten.
However, the numbers do not lie, and the data points a disconcerting picture of Western duplicity.
The EU’s Russian appetite
In 2024, the European Union’s trade in goods with Russia stood at €67.5 billion, while trade in services in 2023 amounted to €17.2 billion. In stark contrast, India’s total trade with Russia was under €65 billion in the same period, including oil and non-oil items.
Despite high-minded rhetoric about “energy decoupling”, the EU imported a record 16.5 million tonnes of Russian LNG in 2024, more than 2022, when the war had just begun. EU countries also continued importing Russian fertilisers, chemicals, iron and steel, transport equipment and machinery.
For example,
* Russian fertiliser imports by the EU in 2024: Over €2.5 billion
* Iron and steel imports: Over €1.9 billion
* Russian LNG share in EU energy mix: approximately 15% in 2024
The EU calls these imports a “painful necessity.” However, if pain looks like significant economic allowances, the standard must be re-evaluated.
The US’s quiet dependencies
Even as Washington wags its finger at India, it maintains a discreet but substantial import relationship with Russia. A few examples from 2024-25 include,
# Uranium Hexafluoride (used in nuclear reactors): US remains dependent on Russian deliveries
# Palladium: Russia accounted for approximately 35% of the US. Palladium imports in 2024, with over 500,000 troy ounces imported in the first five months of 2025 alone
# Fertilisers: The US imported $1.3 billion worth of Russian fertilisers in 2024. This accounted for approximately 15% of the total US fertiliser imports.
# Other imports in 2024 include $876.5 million in non-ferrous metals and $683 million in inorganic chemicals.
These are not marginal flows; they are essential for sustaining US food production, manufacturing, and energy stability. Palladium imports, in particular, are indispensable to the booming American EV sector, revealing a strategic dependence that contradicts moral posturing.
India’s Reality: Economic sovereignty, not opportunism
India’s response, which resonates across the Global South, is rooted in pragmatic economics. With Gulf energy flows redirected to Europe post 2022, India turned to Russian oil for reasons of price and predictability. Russian crude was offered at up to $30 less per barrel than Brent during early 2023-24, helping India keep inflation in check and its current account stable.
India imported 1.7 million barrels per day (bpd) of Russian crude oil in 2024, but this still formed a relatively modest part of its overall import basket. In contrast, EU oil imports from Russia, albeit rebranded or via third countries, continue through grey channels, including shadow tankers, Turkish refiners, and Kazakhstan-origin labels.
India’s energy diversification efforts are ongoing, including greater engagement with Africa and Latin America (LMICs). However, until reliable, affordable alternatives emerge, expecting India to forego Russian energy while the West maintains its own flows is untenable.
A Global South pushback
India’s defiant tone is not merely a nationalist bravado. This reflects a broader fatigue in the Global South with Western lectures that are not matched by Western behaviour. If morality is to matter in foreign policy, it must be rooted in consistency rather than convenience.
Let us be clear: India is not defending Russia’s war in Ukraine. It is defending its sovereign right to economic stability in the face of volatile global energy politics. It defends the principle that developing economies should not be asked to make sacrifices that wealthier nations themselves are unwilling to make.
Until the US and EU conduct a thorough audit of their own shopping lists, which are quietly filled with Russian inputs, they would do well to hold off on their moral prescriptions.
In this game of geopolitical virtue signalling, the real moral deficit lies not with India but with those pointing fingers.
(Shishir Priyadarshi is President, Chintan Research Foundation, and Bidisha Bhattacharya is Senior Research Consultant at CRF.)
Views are personal and do not represent the stand of this publication.
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
