The US House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Democratic panel has strongly criticised former President Donald Trump and his administration over what they describe as a “misguided and punitive” approach in singling out India for penalties tied to Russian oil imports, while sparing other major importers such as China.

The criticism comes in response to the Trump administration’s decision to impose steep tariffs on Indian goods, a move Democrats argue not only strains bilateral relations but also inflicts direct harm on American consumers and businesses.

According to the committee’s statement, Trump decided to levy tariffs of 50 percent on a wide range of Indian goods, linking the move explicitly to India’s continued purchases of heavily discounted Russian crude.

The decision, however, has drawn widespread scrutiny for its selective enforcement. China, which remains the largest purchaser of Russian energy, has not been subjected to corresponding trade restrictions, creating what critics call one of the “most confusing policy outcomes” of Trump’s tenure.

A report cited by the panel notes that had the administration opted to uniformly apply sanctions or secondary penalties on all countries importing Russian oil, the policy might have carried greater consistency and credibility. Instead, focusing almost exclusively on India has raised questions about the true intent of the measures, with Democrats suggesting that the move appears “less about Ukraine and more about political signalling.”

The new tariff regime has doubled the levies on Indian goods, raising import duties from the earlier 25 percent to a staggering 50 percent. This escalation coincides with a sensitive phase in India-US trade relations, which had been expanding over the past decade through bipartisan efforts to deepen economic ties.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has expressed concern over the blow these tariffs may inflict on India’s export sector, estimating an impact of approximately $48.2 billion worth of exports. Indian officials warned that the steep tariffs could render Indian shipments to the American market commercially unviable, threatening to undercut jobs and wider economic growth in both countries.

Despite the economic pressures, Prime Minister Modi has vowed not to yield to international pressure tactics, signalling that India will continue pursuing its national interest-driven purchasing decisions, especially regarding energy security.

The US has granted certain exemptions for Indian pharmaceuticals and electronic goods—two critical sectors in bilateral trade—offering limited relief. Yet, officials in New Delhi remain wary that the broader tariff policy could dampen investment confidence and hinder future trade expansion.

The Democratic panel emphasised that these actions unravel decades of careful bipartisan diplomacy that built a strategic foundation for India-US relations. Since the early 2000s, cooperation has broadened across defence, energy, technology, and education, and India was among the earliest nations to engage in trade negotiations with the Trump administration.

However, despite prolonged discussions, a comprehensive trade deal has remained elusive, with Washington continuing to press India for greater market access, particularly in agriculture and dairy.

Analysts warn that the tariff confrontation risks poisoning the broader strategic partnership at a time when both nations are supposed to be aligning more closely to balance China’s influence in the Indo-Pacific.

Trump’s unilateral pressure on India could deepen scepticism in New Delhi about Washington’s reliability as a long-term partner, particularly when China—despite being a far larger buyer of Russian oil—remains untouched by comparable punitive measures.

The Democrats’ attack underscores their concern that the fallout of such policies will reverberate not only in India but domestically, as higher tariffs will drive up costs for American consumers and businesses reliant on Indian supply chains.

The Democrats have accused President Trump of pursuing an incoherent and counterproductive trade strategy that undermines both US foreign policy objectives and its economic interests.

By disproportionately targeting India, the administration risks alienating a crucial partner while failing to address China’s dominant role in financing Russian energy exports. Unless recalibrated, the policy could deliver long-term setbacks to one of America’s most strategically significant bilateral relationships and erode bipartisan progress achieved over the past two decades.

Based On A NDTV Report