- with readers working within the Securities & Investment and Law Firm industries
- within Transport, Intellectual Property and Corporate/Commercial Law topic(s)
The economic and regulatory sanctions imposed on the Russian Federation by the United States, the European Union, and the G7 nations since February 2022 has created a complex geopolitical landscape for major non-aligned states, particularly the Republic of India. India's approach reflects a model of strategic autonomy that produces a paradox wherein it stays diplomatically non-aligned while actively pursuing economic opportunities on both sides.
The analysis indicates that while India has secured substantial, quantifiable economic advantages through energy trade, specifically by capitalizing on discounted Russian crude oil, these benefits are directly countered by operational and financial friction in the critical defense sector. India's immediate energy arbitrage wins, estimated to have yielded direct savings exceeding $17 billion by mid-2025, facilitated the redirection of global oil flows and mitigated some inflationary pressures domestically. However, the efficacy of the sanctions regime has tested the stability of the long-standing Indo-Russian strategic partnership. Financial exclusions, such as the removal of Russian banks from SWIFT, necessitated the adoption of non-dollar payment mechanisms, which have proven structurally inadequate due to the profound trade imbalance favoring Russia (a deficit reaching $43 billion in 2022-2023).This has translated into a stealth arms embargo, halting critical payments for defense spare parts and threatening the operational readiness of the Indian military.
As a result, the sanctions have not served as an immediate deterrent to Indo-Russian trade volume but have functioned as a structural realignment mechanism. By introducing instability and unreliability into the defense supply chain, the Western measures compel India to accelerate its strategic diversification and indigenization efforts, turning decades-old military dependency into a high-risk liability. India's autonomy is thus increasingly defined by its ability to manage escalating regulatory compliance risks (shadow fleet operations) and to navigate the pressures of maintaining defense readiness while avoiding punitive secondary sanctions, such as those under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (hereinafter referred to as "CAATSA").
A. Sanctions on the Russian Federation
The sanctions imposed on Russia after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine constitute the largest coordinated package in recent economic history, implemented by the United States, the EU, and the G7. The response began within days of the February 2022 invasion. The US Department of the Treasury initiated the first measures it described as "swift and severe costs". Early actions included asset freezes and visa restrictions by the EU on 26 individuals and one entity (Sogaz). On February 25, 2022, the US Treasury sanctioned President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. On February 28, 2022, it prohibited transactions with the Central Bank of Russia, which cut off Russia's access to foreign currency reserves held abroad.
Later phases of sanctions shifted toward evasion networks and the military-industrial complex. In November 2023, the US Treasury listed 130 Russian evasion and military-industrial targets, signalling an expanded focus on third-party actors and supply-chain links. The EU, through amendments to Regulation 269, added criteria permitting asset freezes on persons involved in hybrid threats against the EU or connected to Russia's military and industrial complex.
a. SWIFT Disconnection and Asset Freezes
Sanctions curtailed Russia's access to the Belgium-based SWIFT messaging system, a core utility for cross-border payments. The EU disconnected a range of Russian financial institutions, with restrictions extending to any legal person or entity in Russia with more than 50% ownership by listed entities. This constraint requires the use of indirect or non-standard settlement mechanisms for states that maintain trade with Russia, including India.
Asset-freeze measures have also expanded. Under its sixteenth sanctions package, the EU broadened its authority to impose asset freezes on persons who control, manage, or operate unsafe vessels, and on persons who support Russia's military and industrial complex. Western regulators have shifted focus from initial financial measures to logistics and evasion channels. This includes the targeting of maritime assets and intermediary actors. By placing the "shadow fleet"vessels used to bypass the price cap, within the sanctions framework, regulators have increased operational and financial risk for states that depend on these routes. This development positions India's logistical chain as a compliance focal point and requires heightened due diligence by Indian operators.
b. Energy Sector Targeting, Price Mechanisms, and Technological Containment
Sanctions seek to reduce Russia's revenue from energy exports and constrain its industrial capacity. The G7 Price Cap, combined with the EU embargo on seaborne crude oil and refined products, sought to limit Russian oil revenue while preserving global supply. The measure, implemented in late 2022, altered established trade flows. The United States reinforced these steps through executive orders such as EO 14039 and EO 14068, which block property linked to Russian energy export pipelines and restrict specified imports and investments.
The energy measures operate alongside a technological containment strategy. EU export bans cover 58% of Russia's pre-war technology imports, valued at €91.2 billion, and limit access to components and business services. These restrictions have reduced output in sectors dependent on advanced technology, including the production of cars, transport equipment, and computers.
Russia has redirected oil exports toward Asia and sustained export volumes, but the long-term effects of technology controls are not easily offset. India's purchases support Russian energy revenue, while Western restrictions limit Russia's ability to maintain or upgrade military and civilian technology. This tension affects Russia's capacity to serve as a stable long-term supplier of complex technology and defence material to India. The EU has excluded agricultural and food trade, including wheat and fertilizers, from restrictions on third-country transactions with Russia to avoid disruptions in global food supply.
B.India-Russia Relations
The sanctions regime is testing the functional boundaries of the long India-Russia relationship and requires New Delhi to balance past alignments with present ties to Western states. India and Russia describe their relationship as a special and privileged strategic partnership, based on the patterns of Indian–Soviet cooperation during the Cold War. The partnership rests on five essentials – defence, political engagement, civil nuclear energy, counter-terrorism cooperation, and space activity. Bilateral trade targets were set at USD 30 billion by 2025. Defence remains the central element. India is the second-largest market for the Russian defence sector and has relied on Russia for a large share of its military platforms and spares. Russia has supported India's position in multilateral institutions, including its claim for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.
India has maintained a position of non-alignment with respect to the conflict and has framed this stance as strategic autonomy. It abstained during key UN Security Council and General Assembly votes, including the February 2022 vote on Ukraine and later resolutions concerning territorial claims by Russia. This position is informed by its security concerns, particularly the need for a steady flow of defence equipment for deterrence against China after the clashes along the Line of Actual Control in 2020. India continues to depend on Russian systems such as the S-400, despite the risk of US CAATSA sanctions.
India's effort to avoid a break with Russia aims to preserve access to defence supplies. This produces strain in the partnership, as financial and logistical pressures grow. The United States has accepted this stance because of the country's role in the Quad.
a. Economic Impact I: The Energy Windfall and Arbitrage
The EU embargo and the G7 price cap required Russia to redirect seaborne crude away from Europe. India expanded its purchases and became the largest buyer of Russian crude. By early 2023, India was importing about 1.85 million barrels per day and became the principal destination for Russian seaborne shipments, with volumes that exceeded China's seaborne imports. The result was a reallocation of trade routes rather than a reduction in Russia's total export volume.
India obtained lower-priced crude, with reported discounts of around 5 percent. Indian refiners saved an estimated USD 17 billion between April 2022 and June 2025. Other assessments place the savings between USD 13 billion and USD 26 billion. Indian refiners also exported refined products made from Russian crude to global markets, including Europe. Exports of refined products from India to Europe reached USD 20.5 billion in 2024, more than twice the 2019 level. This outcome exposed a structural feature of the sanctions design: the effectiveness of the price cap depends on Western financial and insurance services. India's purchases and re-exports enabled Russia to maintain export volumes outside the G7 framework.
b. The Proliferation of Russia's Shadow Fleet
The increase in trade is linked to risks from Russia's shadow fleet. Since 2022, Russia has used older tankers, often operating under flags of convenience and using tactics such as disabling AIS signals to avoid monitoring. Many of these vessels lack standard maintenance and operate without full insurance. In particular, they often do not have Protection and Indemnity insurance from the International Group, which is the standard mechanism for covering liabilities from oil spills. Ownership structures involving shell companies complicate enforcement.
This pattern has also increased exposure to geopolitical and navigational risks for Indian-linked shipments. Recent attacks in maritime corridors, including the Red Sea, have involved vessels carrying Russian crude to India. A major spill involving an under-insured tanker would impose costs far greater than the crude-purchase savings and represents an externalized risk that is difficult to quantify. The expansion of energy trade did not resolve the structural constraints created by Russia's exclusion from the dollar-based financial system, which affected settlement for defence and non-energy trade.
c. The Alternative Payment Imperative
With Russia excluded from SWIFT and dollar channels, both states examined alternative payment routes. They adopted the Special Rupee Vostro Account (SRVA) framework. A Vostro account is a domestic account held by an Indian bank on behalf of a foreign bank, denominated in Indian rupees. This structure enables direct settlement in rupees without routing transactions through third-party currencies. Indian exporters receive payment in rupees for exports to Russia, and Russian entities receive rupees for exports to India.
The SRVA mechanism has been constrained by the large trade imbalance. India's exports to Russia amounted to USD 3.14 billion in 2022–2023, while imports, driven by energy purchases, produced a trade deficit of about USD 43 billion. This imbalance resulted in large rupee balances in Vostro accounts. Because the rupee is not widely used outside India, Russian firms cannot deploy these balances abroad. Russian exporters therefore prefer payments in dollars, and rouble volatility often forces conversion through the dollar, reducing the utility of the SRVA framework. This accumulation problem has generated settlement delays and affected defence procurement. Russian entities have been unwilling to accept further rupee payments, which has contributed to the suspension of payments for defence contracts. As a result, military supply chains have encountered significant delays linked to the constraints of the payment system rather than decisions by either government to halt cooperation.
Sanctions and the conflict produced global price volatility that affected commodity imports into India, including crude oil, fertilisers, and metals. Fertiliser prices reached USD 150 per tonne, increasing input costs in agriculture. These shocks affected macroeconomic variables including GDP growth, the exchange rate, and the current account balance. Although India gained an estimated USD 17 billion from discounted Russian oil, other trade developments imposed countervailing costs. Reports indicate that US tariff measures imposed an estimated USD 37 billion impact on India during the same period. This indicates that narrow calculations based on oil discounts do not capture the broader fiscal and trade environment shaped by sanctions. Both states are examining solutions to the rupee-accumulation problem, including allowing Russian foreign portfolio investors to deploy rupee balances in Indian securities markets. Russian exporters would then receive equivalent rouble proceeds.
C. Defence Dependencies and Modernisation Risks
Sanctions have produced long-term effects on India's defence procurement and readiness, illustrating the link between financial sanctions and military capability. India relies on Russian-origin systems across the armed forces, including SU-30MKI and MiG-29 aircraft and the S-400 air-defence system. The failure of payment channels has delayed deliveries. Payments worth more than USD 2 billion have been pending for about a year. Russia has also stopped supplying credit for spare parts and systems valued at about USD 10 billion, including pending S-400 deliveries. These disruptions pose risks to the maintenance of aircraft and air-defence systems. The SWIFT exclusion and constraints on dollar transfers have functioned as a de facto arms embargo, reducing the flow of parts despite continuing political alignment between the two states.
a. The CAATSA Dilemma and Defence Diversification
India's procurement of the S-400 and reported interest in supplementary systems has kept it within the scope of the US CAATSA framework, which mandates sanctions on states engaged in significant defence transactions with Russia. India's role in US strategic planning vis-à-vis China has prompted efforts within the US Congress to secure a waiver, including a stand-alone bill seeking exemption for India. The statute mandates sanctions against the Russian Federation, Iran, and North Korea. With respect to Russia, it covers measures linked to its intervention in Ukraine, its role in the 2016 U.S. elections, and its defense, security, energy, and financial sectors.
The U.S. President is mandated to impose sanctions on any state or person that conducts a "significant transaction" with Russia's defense or intelligence sectors. The President must select at least five of twelve statutory sanctions. These may include restrictions on loans, limits on U.S. government credit or assistance, and prohibitions on foreign exchange transactions under U.S. jurisdiction. India's procurement of Russian military equipment, especially the S-400 air defense system, is the basis for CAATSA's relevance to India. The S-400 contract qualifies as a significant transaction with the Russian defense sector, bringing India within the scope of potential sanctions. India has also explored additional S-400 units and related systems, which would fall under the same category. India views these acquisitions as necessary for its security needs and for deterrence in its regional environment.
The President may waive sanctions if doing so serves U.S. national security interests. Sanctions may also be deferred if the state concerned is judged to be reducing its major transactions with the Russian defense sector. India has relied on this provision because of its role in U.S. strategic planning, including cooperation within the Quad. Members of the U.S. Congress have supported this position; for example, Representative Ro Khanna introduced a bill seeking a specific waiver for India. This reflects the tension between enforcing the statute and maintaining a strategic partnership with India.
The US employs CAATSA as a soft power mechanism to exert pressure over India's procurement trajectory. Instability in Russian supply chains and CAATSA exposure encourages India to shift procurement toward US and NATO suppliers. This shift began after the 2014 Crimea crisis and has increased interoperability between Indian and Western systems. The constraints created by sanctions have accelerated India's movement toward domestic production and diversification. Observed performance issues of Russian systems in the Ukraine conflict have reinforced this trend. India is restructuring procurement to reduce dependence on Russian systems and align capacity development with long-term strategic objectives.
D. Conclusion
India's refusal to condemn Russia enabled access to discounted oil and yielded savings of about USD 17 billion. At the same time, two outcomes reshape the strategic equation; i) The rupee–rouble mechanism has not been sustainable. The trade imbalance created large rupee balances, which in turn stalled defence transactions and halted about USD 2 billion in payments, ii) The gains from discounted oil must be balanced against exposure to risks generated by shadow-fleet transport and wider trade friction, including the reported USD 37 billion impact from US tariff actions. Sanctions have revealed that Russia, under financial exclusion and ongoing conflict, cannot guarantee steady delivery of defence equipment. India has absorbed the political cost of non-alignment while also absorbing the risks linked to cooperation with a sanctioned state.
India's strategic autonomy is likely to be shaped by a set of emerging pressures that arise from shifts in defense procurement, compliance risks, and the constraints of the financial architecture through which India conducts trade with Russia. A central challenge lies in the ongoing restructuring of India's defense sector. The effort to expand domestic production and diversify procurement sources requires sustained funding and institutional capacity, and India's ability to insulate its military readiness from disruptions in the Russian supply chain will depend on the pace and credibility of this transition.
A second pressure point concerns India's exposure to compliance regimes in the United States and Europe. As regulators increase oversight of evasion networks, logistics channels, and intermediary firms engaged in Russia-linked trade, importers face tighter monitoring and higher compliance costs. This creates a persistent risk of secondary sanctions, even when transactions do not involve prohibited goods, simply because they pass through jurisdictions or actors subject to heightened scrutiny. The third challenge originates in the design of the financial arrangements governing India–Russia trade. The accumulation of rupee balances in Russian accounts has created a structural imbalance that neither side has resolved. Unless India and Russia develop a mechanism that allows Russia to deploy these balances in a predictable and scalable manner, the scope of non-energy trade will continue to narrow. The resulting constraints on settlement and payments will shape the limits of India's engagement with Russia and, by extension, the space available for India to maintain strategic autonomy in its external partnerships.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
