China and Russia decry US ‘sanctions bill from hell’ 

A US sanctions package aimed at increasing pressure on Russia has opened two very different fronts at once: Washington’s attempt to raise the economic cost of the Ukraine war, and the potential impact on countries such as India that continue to buy Russian energy. 

The US House of Representatives has passed the Lindsey O. Graham Sanctioning Russia and Iran Act of 2026 by 262-159. The legislation, which had already cleared the Senate, gives President Donald Trump the authority to impose tariffs of up to 100% on countries purchasing Russian oil and natural gas. India and China are among the major buyers that could potentially be affected. 

The important distinction is that the bill does not automatically impose a 100% tariff on Indian goods. It gives the US president the power to impose such tariffs. The next step therefore rests with Trump and how his administration chooses to use the new authority. 

The legislation also targets Russia’s energy and defence sectors and vessels associated with sanctions evasion. Its broader objective is to increase economic pressure on Moscow and make the continuation of the war more costly. 

Moscow sees a threat to the peace track 

The Kremlin, meanwhile, has warned that the legislation could make efforts to end the Ukraine war more difficult. 

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov described the proposed measures as “unfriendly actions” and said additional US sanctions would complicate efforts to find a peace settlement in Ukraine. The comments come against the backdrop of months of limited diplomatic progress and continuing fighting. 

That creates a tension within Washington’s strategy. Supporters of tougher sanctions argue that increasing the economic cost for Russia could strengthen pressure on Moscow to negotiate. Russia’s position is that further sanctions could instead make diplomacy more difficult. The two sides therefore differ sharply on whether economic pressure helps create the conditions for talks or makes compromise harder. 

For Ukraine and its supporters, sanctions remain an important instrument for limiting Russia’s ability to finance its war. The new legislation consequently represents another attempt to increase that pressure. 

India caught between energy security and tariff risk 

For New Delhi, the issue is more immediate. India has significantly increased its purchases of Russian crude since the Ukraine war disrupted global energy markets. Russian oil has become an important component of India’s diversified energy sourcing, partly because refiners have been able to access crude at commercially attractive prices. 

The Indian government responded cautiously after the House vote. The Ministry of External Affairs said India remains “firmly committed” to ensuring energy security for its 1.4 billion people through diversified sourcing and evolving market conditions. It also said the potential implications of the US legislation for the India-US relationship and the international energy market had been clearly communicated to American interlocutors. 

New Delhi added that it would take all necessary measures to protect its trade and economic interests and would work with Indian trade and industry bodies to assess the implications. 

The stakes extend beyond crude purchases. If Washington ultimately imposes punitive tariffs on Indian exports, the consequences could reach sectors far removed from energy, depending on the scope and implementation of the measures. 

For India, the challenge is therefore to preserve access to competitively priced energy while limiting the impact on its increasingly important economic relationship with the United States. 

The episode also illustrates how the economic consequences of the Ukraine war continue to travel well beyond Russia and Europe. A measure designed in Washington to pressure Moscow can affect Indian refiners, American trade policy, global oil flows, and the diplomatic space for negotiations over the war. 

For now, the legislation creates the possibility of a 100% tariff rather than imposing one. Its eventual impact will depend on whether Trump signs the bill and, subsequently, whether and how his administration exercises the authority it provides.