Key Takeaways

• External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar condemned unilateral sanctions at the BRICS Foreign Ministers meeting on Thursday, May 14, 2026.
• India’s daily oil imports from Russia surged to 1.96 million barrels per day in May, reflecting a strategic pivot amid regional tensions.
• The U.S. has indicated no extension for the waiver, which expires on May 16, 2026, despite current high procurement rates.
• While India maintains a non-UN sanctions policy, it has previously complied with U.S. sanctions on Iranian and Venezuelan oil for commercial reasons.
• Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal stated that future decisions will be strictly guided by the interests of 1.4 billion Indians.

External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar has firmly challenged the legitimacy of unilateral coercive measures, describing them as unjustified and inconsistent with international law. During the BRICS Foreign Ministers meeting chaired by India on Thursday, May 14, 2026, he called upon the grouping of emerging economies to collectively address the growing problem of such sanctions. This diplomatic push comes at a critical juncture, just days before the expiration of the United States’ waiver allowing Indian refiners to continue importing Russian crude oil. The meeting was notably attended by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, representing two of the countries most heavily sanctioned by Washington, underscoring the geopolitical sensitivity of the discussions.

The urgency of these diplomatic maneuvers is reflected in the dramatic surge of Russia oil waiver dependent trade. According to data from real-time maritime analytics provider Kpler, the volume of Russian crude oil imported by India has risen sharply to 1.96 million barrels per day since the start of May. This figure represents a significant increase from the 1.57 million barrels per day recorded during the full month of April. The spike in procurement indicates that Indian refiners are aggressively securing stable supplies from Moscow, a move likely driven by the desire to diversify away from West Asian supplies, which have become mired in tensions due to the ongoing war in that region.

This current surge mirrors previous patterns; India’s import of Russian oil stood at 1.98 million barrels per day in March, a period that coincided with the U.S. granting a waiver on Russian oil purchases on March 12. Despite crude oil being priced at a premium of as much as $5 for every barrel, imports have continued to rise, demonstrating the resilience of this trade relationship despite financial costs. However, the window for this specific arrangement is closing. The U.S. had granted month-long waivers for oil imports from Iran and Russia, which India had taken advantage of. While the waiver on Iran lapsed last month, the waiver on Russia is set to expire on May 16. U.S. officials have indicated that there will be no extension of this waiver.

Speaking to the media on April 25, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent clarified the administration's stance on these waivers. He stated that he had agreed to the initial waivers due to requests from "more than 10 of the most vulnerable and poorest countries." However, he added, "I wouldn’t imagine that we’d have another extension," noting that the Russian oil available on-board ships covered by the waiver had already been bought up. This statement suggests that the U.S. expects the flow of sanctioned oil to cease once the current waiver expires, forcing India to seek alternative suppliers or absorb higher costs.

In response to these pressures, S. Jaishankar emphasized the disproportionate impact of such measures on developing nations. "We must also address the increasing resort to unilateral coercive measures and sanctions inconsistent with international law and the UN Charter," he said. "Such measures disproportionately affect developing countries." He further argued that "These unjustifiable measures cannot substitute dialogue, nor can pressure replace diplomacy." His comments at the BRICS meeting highlight India’s official position against non-UN sanctions, even as it navigates complex commercial realities.

The practical application of India’s foreign policy reveals a nuanced approach. While the Modi government maintains a traditional position of not accepting non-UN sanctions, in practice, it has complied with a series of sanctions from the U.S. for commercial reasons. This includes adherence to restrictions on oil from Iran, Russia, and Venezuela, as well as limitations on trade with Iran and the development of the Chabahar port. This dual strategy allows India to maintain diplomatic principles while protecting its economic interests in the short term.

As the May 16 deadline approaches, questions remain regarding India's next steps. When asked on Wednesday, May 13, about whether India would consider cutting oil imports from Russia if the U.S. does not extend the waiver, Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal provided a guarded response. He stated that the government’s policy is "guided by the interests of 1.4 billion Indians." However, he declined to comment on reports that India had asked the U.S. for an extension, leaving the outcome of the waiver negotiation unclear.

India Navigates Post-Waiver Energy Strategy

The expiration of the U.S. waiver on May 16 marks a pivotal moment for India oil imports and regional energy security. With U.S. officials signaling no further extensions and Treasury Secretary Bessent noting that existing covered supplies are already purchased, India faces an immediate transition. The recent surge in imports suggests that refiners have maximized their purchases under the current framework. Going forward, India must rely on its diversified supplier base and diplomatic leverage within BRICS to mitigate potential supply shocks. The government’s assertion that policy will be guided by national interests suggests a pragmatic approach, likely prioritizing energy stability over compliance with unilateral sanctions. This stance may deepen economic ties with sanctioned nations like Russia and Iran while potentially straining diplomatic relations with the United States, setting a precedent for how emerging economies navigate geopolitical coercion in the coming years.