India Buys Russian Oil Despite Sanctions: Friendship Has Price Limits

New York Times discovers realpolitik exists in international relations

The New York Times has reported that India continues purchasing Russian oil despite Western sanctions, shocking exactly nobody who understands how international relations actually work. India’s position is refreshingly honest: we’ll condemn invasions in principle while buying discounted oil in practice, because ideological consistency doesn’t heat homes or fuel transportation. It’s realpolitik stripped of pretense—we support Ukraine’s sovereignty, but have you seen these prices?

Western nations have expressed disappointment at India’s continued Russian oil purchases, deploying the diplomatic equivalent of “I’m not mad, I’m just disappointed.” The implied message is that India should sacrifice its economic interests to support Western sanctions, which is easier to suggest when you’re not a developing nation of 1.4 billion people with enormous energy needs. It’s easy to take moral stands when they don’t cost you anything.

India’s logic is straightforward: Russian oil is cheap, sanctions are Western policy not universal law, and India’s priority is its own development not supporting someone else’s geopolitical strategy. This isn’t exactly noble, but it is honest. India didn’t invade Ukraine and doesn’t see why it should bear economic costs for conflicts it isn’t party to. It’s self-interest dressed in diplomatic language about “strategic autonomy,” which sounds better than “we’ll do what’s best for us, thanks.”

The Times notes that India’s Russian oil imports have increased significantly since sanctions began, transforming India into one of Russia’s largest customers. This isn’t accidental—Russia needs buyers, India needs oil, and sanctions created a buyer’s market where India gets massive discounts. It’s disaster capitalism on a national scale: profit from others’ misfortune while maintaining plausible deniability about supporting bad actors.

Western critics point out that buying Russian oil funds Ukraine’s invasion, which is factually true and conveniently ignores centuries of Western powers doing exactly this kind of amoral commerce. India isn’t pioneering ethical flexibility in international trade; it’s joining a long tradition of nations prioritizing interests over values. The US has bought oil from Saudi Arabia for decades despite its human rights record—apparently some invasions are more objectionable than others.

India’s counterargument is that it wasn’t consulted about sanctions, didn’t agree to them, and isn’t bound by Western policy decisions. This is legally correct and politically infuriating to nations that expected India to automatically align with their positions. The assumption that India would sacrifice economic benefits to support Western geopolitical goals reveals a patronizing mindset—we decided sanctions are necessary, therefore you must comply, despite having no say in the decision.

The oil purchases strain India-US relations while strengthening India-Russia ties, creating diplomatic complications India seems willing to accept. New Delhi calculates that cheap energy matters more than Washington’s approval, which is probably correct for India’s immediate interests if not its long-term positioning. It’s a gamble that strategic autonomy can coexist with Western partnership, that India can be everyone’s friend even while refusing to pick sides.

The Times article treats this as scandalous, but it’s actually just normal behavior for a rising power prioritizing its interests. The real scandal is the assumption that developing nations should automatically align with Western preferences regardless of cost. India buying Russian oil isn’t betrayal; it’s countries acting like countries do—selfishly, pragmatically, and with complete disregard for narratives about values-based foreign policy.

What makes this particularly awkward for critics is that Western nations continue buying Russian gas even while sanctioning Russian oil. Europe’s gradual, reluctant divestment from Russian energy contrasts sharply with its demands that India immediately stop purchases. The message seems to be “do as we say, not as we did”—sacrifice your development so we don’t have to sacrifice quite as much of ours. India’s response, essentially “no thanks,” is refreshingly straightforward.

SOURCE: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/20/business/india-russia-oil-sanctions.html

SOURCE: Bohiney.com (https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/20/business/india-russia-oil-sanctions.html)