‘US won’t let India become next China’: Russian envoy claims ‘Freudian slip’ revealed Washington’s concerns
New Delhi: Russian Ambassador Denis Alipov on Sunday claimed that a senior American official had let slip Washington’s real thinking about India’s rise. Speaking at the NDTV Defence Summit, he pointed to remarks made earlier this year at the Raisina Dialogue and called them a “Freudian slip.” “I think this year at the Raisina Dialogue, one of the top US officials revealed and spoke publicly that the ‘US will never allow India to become the next China’ as a competitor. It was like a Freudian slip,” Alipov said. “So as India becomes stronger and stronger, and eventually a superpower — which is inevitable — the US would be doing everything possible to contain India.” The official he appeared to be referring to is US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau. In March, Landau told the Raisina audience that America would not repeat the mistakes it made with China twenty years ago. Washington, he said, would not simply open its markets and watch another Asian power grow into a commercial rival that starts beating the United States in key sectors. The US wanted to work with India and unlock its potential, but not at the cost of American workers and interests. Alipov linked those comments to current American pressure on India over Russian oil. He singled out the Lindsey Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026, signed by President Donald Trump. The law allows the United States to impose tariffs of up to 100 per cent on countries that continue buying Russian oil and gas. Alipov argued the measure is aimed as much at limiting India’s rise as it is at hurting Russia. “India is buying Russian oil not for the sake of Russia. India is buying Russian oil for the sake of its own economy and its own people. Because it is there at a competitive offer,” he told NDTV. He praised New Delhi’s stance as a show of strategic autonomy. “In response to this, I think India has shown strategic autonomy and strength. The US has articulated to pressure Russia with this act. It is by itself absurd. And the US, I would repeat that, very well knows that. And I think as India rises, this kind of pressure tactics will continue and will aggravate, will increase.” The ambassador also used the occasion to underline the depth of India-Russia ties. Diplomatic relations began in 1947 with the Soviet Union and continued after 1991. Next year marks 80 years. Alipov described the partnership as one built on trust and consistency rather than short-term convenience. “Trust and respect are the very qualities that characterise our relationship. You don’t do business with untrustworthy partners,” he said. “Throughout all these decades, we have been friends who have been reliable partners to each other — not only Russia to India, but both ways. We have never conditioned our relations on any immediate global disposition, so we have never regarded our relationship as a zero-sum game.” He pointed to the recent meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Vladimir Putin on the sidelines of the BRICS summit in New Delhi on September 11 as proof that the relationship still has a full agenda. Alipov also presented BRICS as part of a wider effort by countries like India and Russia to secure a bigger voice in global decision-making. The remarks come at a time when India-US relations have grown more complicated. Tariffs, secondary sanctions linked to Russian energy, and a sharper transactional approach under the Trump administration have replaced the warmer strategic partnership of earlier years. American officials still speak of India as an important partner in the Indo-Pacific and a potential counterweight to China. Yet comments like Landau’s and laws like the Graham Act have fed a different reading in some capitals: that Washington is comfortable with India’s rise only up to a point. India, for its part, has continued to buy discounted Russian crude because it makes economic sense for a country that imports most of its energy. Officials in New Delhi have repeatedly said these purchases are driven by national interest, not geopolitical alignment. Strategic autonomy remains the core principle — engaging multiple partners without becoming dependent on any single one. Alipov’s intervention will not rewrite policy overnight. But it sharpens an uncomfortable question that has been circulating for months. Does the United States genuinely want India to become a major power, or does it prefer a version of India that remains useful without becoming fully competitive? The Russian ambassador clearly believes the answer slipped out in March, and he is not shy about saying so. Whether one accepts his reading or sees it as classic great-power messaging, the tension is real. India is growing, its economy is expanding, and its global weight is increasing. How Washington chooses to handle that reality — genuine partnership, managed competition, or something in between — will shape the relationship for years ahead. For now, the Russian envoy has made sure the conversation stays public and pointed. Sources: @Rohit Manral
100% tariffs on India? After Senate, US House passes Russia sanctions bill, awaits Trump’s signature
The US House of Representatives has just cleared a tough new sanctions package aimed at Russia, and the part that has people in New Delhi sitting up is the authority it gives President Donald Trump to hit major buyers of Russian oil and gas with tariffs of up to 100 percent. India is right in the middle of that conversation. On Wednesday the House voted 262 to 159 in favour of the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026. The Senate had already passed it last month by a big 86-11 margin. The bill now sits on Trump’s desk. He has indicated he plans to sign it. The heart of the measure is an attempt to cut the money Russia earns from energy sales that help fund its war in Ukraine. It goes after Russian officials, oligarchs, banks and the so-called shadow fleet of tankers used to move oil around existing restrictions. It also extends sanctions on Iran’s energy and weapons sectors for another five years, something Trump wanted included. The provision that matters most for India is the one on secondary tariffs. The law would allow the president to place tariffs of up to 100 percent on goods from the five countries that imported the largest volumes of Russian crude oil or natural gas in the year before the law takes effect, if those countries keep buying after a short grace period. The same authority can be used against countries judged to be helping Russia dodge oil sanctions. China and India are the two biggest buyers of Russian crude, so both names come up repeatedly in the debate. Importantly, the bill does not automatically slap a 100 percent tariff on Indian exports the day it becomes law. It hands the president the power to do so under certain conditions. Trump would still decide whether, when and at what level to use that power. There are also some exemptions written in for countries whose Russian gas imports are relatively small and that are taking clear steps to reduce them. Democratic opposition in the House was strong. One hundred and fifty-two Democrats voted against the package, arguing that it hands Trump too much extra tariff authority at a time when he has already used trade powers aggressively. Fifty-eight Democrats still crossed the aisle and supported it, along with the large majority of Republicans. House Speaker Mike Johnson called the vote a show of American unity and said the bill gives the administration more tools to pressure Moscow. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina had spent more than a year pushing versions of this legislation before his death in July. Lawmakers renamed the final package in his honour. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had also urged Congress to move it forward. For India the timing is awkward. New Delhi has steadily increased its purchases of discounted Russian crude in recent years. Russian oil has made up a large share of India’s imports at various points this year. Indian officials have repeatedly said the decisions are driven by energy security and price, not politics. At the same time, India and the United States have been talking about a possible trade deal, so any new tariff threat lands in the middle of those discussions. Trade analysts note that a 100 percent tariff would be severe if ever applied across a wide range of Indian goods. It would raise costs for American buyers of Indian products and could disrupt supply chains. Whether Trump actually uses the authority remains an open question. He has often preferred to keep maximum flexibility on sanctions and tariffs rather than lock himself into congressional mandates. Still, the mere existence of the power changes the negotiating climate. Supporters of the bill say the goal is simple: make it more expensive for countries to keep buying Russian energy so that Moscow feels real economic pain. Critics worry the tool could be used more broadly and end up hurting US relationships with partners who are not adversaries. India falls into that complicated middle category—an important strategic partner that has refused to fully cut energy ties with Russia. The bill also requires the administration to reassess the list of top buyers every six months, which means the pressure would not necessarily be permanent. Countries that reduce their purchases could move off the list. That gives New Delhi some room to manoeuvre if it chooses to adjust its import mix over time. Right now the immediate next step is the White House. Once Trump signs the measure, the administration will have a new set of sanctions and tariff options. How aggressively those options are used against India, China or others will depend on the broader state of relations, the war in Ukraine, and the energy market itself. For the moment, Indian exporters and policymakers are watching closely. The legislation does not equal an automatic 100 percent tariff on Indian goods. But it does create a clear legal path for one, and that path now leads straight to the president’s desk. The coming weeks will show whether the threat stays on paper or turns into something more concrete. Sources:New York Times reporting on House passage and bill provisions; Reuters and Times of India coverage of the vote and India-specific impact; NBC News, CBS News and Politico accounts of the bipartisan vote and Democratic objections; India Today and Business Today analysis of the tariff authority; official descriptions of the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026. @Rohit Manral