Foreign affairs experts have issued a strong warning that India must begin strategic de-risking from the United States, arguing that the passage of the Russia sanctions bill in the US Senate could mark a permanent shift in bilateral relations rather than a temporary obstacle.

They criticised the legislation as a clear example of the extraterritorial application of US laws, raising concerns about its long-term impact on India’s economic and foreign policy framework.

The bill, passed in the Senate with an 86 to 11 bipartisan vote, proposes tariffs of up to 100 per cent on the top five countries purchasing Russian crude oil and natural gas, including China and India.

An exemption exists for nations importing less than 15 per cent of Russia’s total natural gas exports. The measure also includes mandatory sanctions on senior Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, and foreign companies supporting Russia’s defence industrial base.

Foreign affairs expert Sushant Sareen highlighted that Donald Trump had earlier imposed a 25 per cent tariff on India for buying Russian oil, and warned that upcoming measures could escalate further. He noted that such bills often contain opt-out clauses allowing the president to waive implementation if deemed against American national interest.

However, Sareen questioned whether Washington would apply punitive tariffs universally, particularly against China, suggesting that Beijing’s potential retaliation could deter US enforcement.

Sareen emphasised that New Delhi must abandon the belief that current tensions are temporary. He argued that aggressive measures like a 100 per cent tariff would effectively nullify the economic relationship between India and the US.

He urged policymakers to adopt a long-term strategy of de-risking from the United States, similar to India’s earlier approach towards China, warning that Washington under Trump and possibly beyond would remain a hostile power.

Former diplomat Mahesh Sachdev condemned the legislation as a blatant case of extraterritoriality, asserting that Washington was exceeding its remit by penalising third-party nations. He described the bill as a violation of the rule-based international trade order, warning that it could destabilise global energy markets.

Sachdev explained that forcing countries like India and China off Russian and Iranian energy would distort supply chains, driving up global crude prices while leaving Russian and Iranian oil cheaper due to reduced demand. He also accused President Trump of employing legislative subterfuge to reinstate tariff powers after the US Supreme Court had previously struck down broad wartime duties.

Former diplomat KP Fabian urged calm in New Delhi, noting that the bill still faces hurdles in the House of Representatives, which could amend the text and trigger lengthy negotiations with the Senate. He pointed out that the legislation grants Trump the option to impose or revoke tariffs, making its final shape uncertain.

Fabian argued that enforcing such tariffs would backfire on the US economy by sharply increasing global oil prices at a time when domestic indicators, including job losses reported by the Labour Department, already show signs of strain. He concluded that India should not overreact, as Washington itself faces significant risks in implementing the measure.

The debate underscores the growing unease in India’s foreign policy circles, with experts warning that the sanctions bill could permanently alter the trajectory of India-US relations. While economic ties may not vanish entirely, the imposition of severe tariffs would fundamentally weaken the partnership, compelling India to rethink its strategic alignment and energy security framework.

ANI