When U.S. President Donald Trump launched an unusually sharp attack on India earlier this week—accusing it of profiting from the Ukraine war, purchasing discounted Russian oil, and turning a blind eye to civilian casualties—many were left questioning the motive behind the outburst. Why target a long-standing strategic partner? And why now?
According to analysts, the answer may lie not in New Delhi, but in Moscow.
A Deadline and a Diplomatic Collapse
President Trump, who returned to office in January 2025, had boldly declared that he would bring the war in Ukraine to an end “within one week.” That timeline has since been extended, retracted, and ultimately compressed into a self-imposed ultimatum: a ceasefire deal by August 8.
As that date now looms, frustration in the White House appears to be mounting. After months of unanswered diplomatic overtures to Russian President Vladimir Putin—including multiple visits by Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff—Trump’s tone has shifted dramatically. What began as a conciliatory reset with the Kremlin has veered into threats, sanctions, and, more recently, open hostility.
Caught in this fallout is India.
“Trump's frustration with Putin is spilling over,” said Michael Kugelman, a senior South Asia analyst based in Washington, D.C. “If Putin were cooperating with Trump's ceasefire plan, India likely wouldn’t be facing this level of scrutiny for buying Russian oil.”
Kugelman also pointed to economic factors. “Before Russia’s invasion, India was one of the largest markets for U.S. crude. The subsequent pivot to Russian supplies has economic consequences—but this goes well beyond oil. This is personal diplomacy turning punitive.”
From Strategic Overtures to Escalation
In the early months of his second term, Trump appeared confident. Washington reopened backchannels with Moscow, signaled flexibility at the UN by blocking resolutions critical of Russia, and emphasized personal rapport. Russian media welcomed the shift, with one symbolic gesture seeing Putin gift a framed portrait of Trump to envoy Witkoff.
But with little progress on a ceasefire, patience thinned. In late July, Trump slashed his diplomatic window from 50 days to just ten, demanding a cessation of hostilities by August 8. As the deadline approached, his language hardened: Russian attacks were now “disgusting” and “disgraceful,” and new rounds of sanctions were threatened—not only against Russia, but against nations continuing to trade with it.
A particularly volatile moment came when Trump labeled both Russia and India as “dead economies.” Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev responded with a nuclear-tinged rebuke, invoking the Cold War-era "Dead Hand" retaliation system. Hours later, Trump ordered two U.S. nuclear submarines to undisclosed locations in a dramatic show of force.
Though disconnected from ceasefire diplomacy, the move marked a shift from negotiation to confrontation.
The Indian Angle: Collateral Damage or Convenient Target?
Trump’s most direct attack on India came via Truth Social on August 4. “India is not only buying massive amounts of Russian Oil,” he wrote, “they are then… selling it on the Open Market for big profits. They don’t care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine. Because of this, I will be substantially raising the Tariff paid by India to the USA.”
Just days earlier, Trump had already imposed a 25% blanket tariff on Indian exports, even while referring to India as “a friend with high tariffs.” The rhetoric now seemed less about persuasion, and more about punishment.
Analysts suggest this pivot reflects Trump’s frustration with Putin—and a broader attempt to preserve his credibility. Having failed to deliver the promised ceasefire, the White House may be redirecting pressure toward India, one of Moscow’s highest-profile trade partners, as a scapegoat.
“This is less about what India is doing, and more about what Russia isn't doing,” Kugelman noted.
New Delhi Pushes Back
India’s response was swift and firm. In a rare six-point statement, the Ministry of External Affairs rebutted Trump’s accusations, clarifying that India’s increased Russian oil imports began only after Western suppliers diverted their cargoes to Europe—with Washington’s tacit support at the time.
The statement also called out the West’s double standards. In 2024 alone, the European Union traded €67.5 billion worth of goods with Russia—significantly more than India’s trade volume. The U.S. itself continues to import Russian uranium and critical materials such as palladium and fertilisers.
“The targeting of India is unjustified and unreasonable,” the ministry asserted. “India will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security.”
On the resale claim, experts dismissed the suggestion of profiteering. Ajay Srivastava, a former trade official and co-founder of the Global Trade Research Initiative, said: “There is no evidence to support the claim that India is reselling Russian oil to third countries for profit. Indian refineries make procurement decisions based on commercial viability and supply logistics.”
Strategic Voices Speak Out
India’s stance has drawn support from several leading strategic thinkers. Former Foreign Secretary Kanwal Sibal took to X (formerly Twitter), writing: “India has explained the rationale behind its energy trade choices and exposed the hypocrisy of the West. We will not bow to intimidation.”
Brahma Chellaney, a prominent strategic affairs analyst, went further: “Trump’s actions reflect a dangerous volatility. He is behaving like a bull in the geopolitical china shop. His policies are unpredictable—and for a country like India, which prefers strategic stability, that is deeply problematic.”
Chellaney also underscored the irony: “The West continues to send far more money to Russia through trade—even as it arms Ukraine. India is being criticised for a far smaller and more transparent transaction.”
A Broken Promise, and a New Front
The escalating war of words may ultimately reflect the political fallout of Trump’s faltering promise to end the war in Ukraine. Unable to secure a ceasefire, unwilling to penalise Russia too aggressively for fear of appearing inconsistent, Trump has turned his focus elsewhere.
His inner circle, including senior aide Stephen Miller, has amplified the narrative that “India is funding the war” on U.S. media outlets—a possible deflection from Washington’s own diplomatic failures.
Caught between a stalled peace deal and deteriorating trade relations, India now finds itself accused of moral indifference, not by virtue of action, but by virtue of inaction in a geopolitical game it did not create.
Looking Ahead: Strained but Not Severed
The India-U.S. strategic partnership is unlikely to unravel entirely. The two nations share deep cooperation in defense, technology, and counterterrorism. But the current shift in tone—from strategic warmth to transactional hostility—marks a significant departure from the norm.
With August 8 approaching and Trump’s envoy preparing for what could be a final attempt at Moscow diplomacy, India remains outside the battlefield, yet squarely within the blast radius of a failed geopolitical bargain.
In the end, Trump’s feud with India may say less about Delhi’s decisions—and far more about Washington’s disillusionment with Moscow.
.png)
The opinions posted here do not belong to 🔰www.indiansdaily.com. The author is solely responsible for the opinions.
As per the IT policy of the Central Government, insults against an individual, community, religion or country, defamatory and inflammatory remarks, obscene and vulgar language are punishable offenses. Legal action will be taken for such expressions of opinion.