Speaking in Lucknow on Saturday, Singh said the government’s first priority was the welfare of India’s 1.4 billion people and that decisions would be taken according to national interests rather than pressure from other countries. His remarks followed President Donald Trump’s signing on Friday of legislation authorising wider sanctions, tariffs and prohibitions involving Russia.
“We do not operate under pressure from any other nation,” Singh said, reiterating that foreign policy choices would be made independently. He said the government would take every necessary step for the “strength and stability” of the country and for the interests of its people.
Energy security would remain central to those decisions, the minister said. India would seek supplies from sources that were commercially viable and economical, he added, signalling that cost and availability would continue to influence purchasing decisions as New Delhi assesses the implications of the new US law.
The White House said Trump signed H. R. 5334, the Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, on September 18. The measure expands statutory sanctions, tariff authorities and prohibitions concerning Russia while extending existing sanctions on Iran. It gives the US administration powers that can affect countries continuing significant energy trade with Russia.
The legislation has attracted particular attention in New Delhi because India remains a major buyer of Russian crude. The law provides authority for tariffs of up to 100 per cent on goods from countries that continue to import Russian oil and gas, though implementation is not automatic and the measure gives the US president discretion over how those provisions are applied.
The measure also allows exceptions for countries judged to be reducing dependence on Russian energy, adding another layer of presidential discretion to any decision on tariffs under the law.
Singh’s comments build on a formal position set out by the Ministry of External Affairs after the legislation cleared the US Congress. The ministry said India remained “firmly committed” to ensuring energy security for its 1.4 billion people through diversified sourcing and decisions based on evolving market conditions.
The ministry also said the issue had been discussed at high levels with US interlocutors and that New Delhi had explained the possible implications for bilateral relations and the international energy market. It added that India would take necessary measures to protect its trade and economic interests and work with domestic trade and industry bodies on the consequences of the legislation.
Washington’s legislation is intended to increase economic pressure on Moscow over the war in Ukraine by tightening sanctions on Russian officials, financial institutions and energy-linked activity. The tariff provisions are designed to give the White House leverage over major purchasers of Russian energy, a category that includes India and China.
For India, the immediate question is whether the Trump administration will invoke those powers against its exports and, if so, on what scale and timetable. The law creates authority for punitive trade measures but leaves key implementation decisions with the US president, meaning the commercial impact will depend on how the administration uses that discretion.
Singh did not announce any change in India’s current energy sourcing arrangements. His emphasis was instead on maintaining policy autonomy while ensuring affordable supplies, a position consistent with the External Affairs Ministry’s statement that sourcing would remain diversified and responsive to market conditions.
The minister also described tariffs being imposed on India as unfair, linking the sanctions debate to broader concerns over trade measures affecting the country. New Delhi has said it will protect both energy security and economic interests while continuing discussions with Washington.
The sanctions legislation was passed by the US House of Representatives on September 16 after earlier Senate action and was signed into law two days later. It followed months of debate in Washington over how to increase pressure on Russia while preserving presidential flexibility in applying secondary economic measures.
