India's External Affairs Minister, S. Jaishankar, delivered a firm and pointed defence of India's decision to continue purchasing Russian oil while speaking at the Kultaranta Talks in Finland. Responding to criticism from Western observers regarding India's energy relationship with Russia, Jaishankar argued that European nations and other Western countries lacked the moral standing to question India's choices. He emphasised that while weapons manufactured in Europe had repeatedly been supplied to countries that later used them against India, New Delhi had never provided arms that posed any threat to Europe or its security interests.
Addressing a session titled "Emerging Powers and the New Geopolitical Competition" during his visit to Finland, Jaishankar explained that India's energy decisions were based on practical considerations such as affordability, availability, and national interest rather than ideological preferences. He stressed that following the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict in 2022, global energy markets underwent significant disruptions, forcing countries to secure supplies wherever they were most accessible and economically viable. According to him, India's increased imports of Russian crude oil were the result of these circumstances rather than any political alignment with Moscow.
The remarks came after a journalist questioned India's stance on the Russia-Ukraine war and suggested that New Delhi appeared overly sympathetic towards Russia due to its continued purchase of Russian oil. In response, Jaishankar rejected the criticism and explained that the geopolitical and economic realities of the time had left India with limited alternatives. He pointed out that after the war began, European nations significantly increased their purchases of oil from the Middle East, a region that had traditionally supplied a large share of India's energy requirements. As European demand surged, India was compelled to explore other reliable sources of crude oil, with Russia emerging as a major supplier.
Drawing upon his experience as a seasoned diplomat, Jaishankar noted that India's actions were driven by necessity rather than preference. He explained that when Europe's energy needs shifted towards Middle Eastern suppliers, the availability of Russian oil on the global market increased substantially. Faced with rising energy requirements and the need to maintain economic stability, India naturally moved towards purchasing Russian crude, which was both accessible and competitively priced.
Jaishankar also used the opportunity to highlight what he described as a double standard in Western criticism. He argued that several European countries had, for decades, exported military equipment and weapons systems to nations in India's neighbourhood, many of which later employed those capabilities in conflicts or hostile actions against India. In contrast, he noted that India had never supplied weapons that threatened European countries or undermined their security.
Making his point clear to the audience, Jaishankar remarked that no European nation had ever been attacked using Indian-made weapons. He then observed that he wished the same could be said regarding European-made weapons that had been used in situations affecting India's security. The statement served as a reminder of India's long-standing concerns about the consequences of Western arms exports in South Asia.
When asked to elaborate further, Jaishankar reiterated that India's concerns regarding European arms sales were not recent but stretched back many years. He stated that weapons originating from Europe had consistently found their way into the arsenals of countries that had engaged in military confrontations with India. Therefore, he argued, it was difficult for Europe to claim the moral high ground while simultaneously criticising India's energy purchases.
Turning specifically to the issue of Russian oil imports, Jaishankar explained that India evaluates energy purchases primarily based on cost and availability. Since the beginning of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, India has significantly increased its imports of Russian crude oil, replacing part of the supply it traditionally received from the Middle East and Gulf nations. By August 2025, Russian exports to India had reportedly reached around two million barrels per day, making Russia India's largest supplier of crude oil.
According to Jaishankar, Western sanctions imposed on Russia after the invasion of Ukraine dramatically altered the global energy landscape. The restrictions reduced the flow of Russian energy to Western markets and created significant uncertainty across the international oil sector. In response, countries around the world sought alternative arrangements to secure their energy requirements. India, he explained, adapted to these changes by purchasing oil from sources that were economically sensible and readily available.
He stated that India's approach was straightforward and based on national interests. Oil was purchased according to price and availability, and during the early stages of the conflict, a substantial portion of the crude available on international markets happened to be Russian. Meanwhile, European countries were increasingly sourcing supplies from the Middle East, creating competition for resources that India had traditionally relied upon. As a result, circumstances naturally pushed India towards Russian energy imports.
Jaishankar further revealed that the United States itself had encouraged India in 2022 to continue purchasing Russian oil to prevent further instability in global energy markets. He explained that Washington recognised the importance of maintaining market balance at a time when sanctions and geopolitical tensions were disrupting supply chains worldwide. According to him, India was directly asked to continue buying Russian crude as part of broader efforts to stabilise international oil prices and ensure adequate supply.
During his address, Jaishankar reiterated that India had consistently followed a practical policy regarding energy procurement. The country's decisions were not influenced by political pressure but by the need to secure affordable energy for its population and economy. He maintained that this approach remained unchanged regardless of the source of the oil.
Beyond defending India's energy choices, Jaishankar again challenged European criticism by pointing to the history of Western arms exports. He stressed that numerous weapons manufactured in Europe had been sold to countries that later used them against India. This, he argued, weakened Europe's position when attempting to question India's foreign policy decisions.
Highlighting India's own record, Jaishankar said that New Delhi had never endangered European security and that no Indian weapon had ever been used against a European nation. He argued that this distinction was important and deserved recognition in discussions about international responsibility and morality. India, he said, had consistently acted in a manner that did not threaten Europe, making criticism from European capitals seem particularly misplaced.
To provide context for his argument, attention was drawn to Pakistan's military inventory, which includes a significant amount of European-origin equipment despite the country's growing reliance on Chinese defence systems. The Pakistani military continues to operate various weapons and platforms developed in Europe. These include German-designed rifles and machine guns manufactured under licence, French-built Mirage fighter aircraft, Swedish Saab 2000 Erieye airborne early warning systems, and French Agosta-class submarines operated by the Pakistani Navy.
Historical examples were also referenced. During the 1971 India-Pakistan war, the Indian Navy frigate INS Khukri was sunk by a Daphne-class submarine operated by Pakistan, a vessel originally built in France. Such examples have long contributed to India's concerns regarding the implications of Western military exports in the region.
Through his remarks in Finland, Jaishankar sought to make India's position unmistakably clear. He argued that India's purchases of Russian oil are driven by economic necessity, market realities, and national interest rather than political loyalty. At the same time, he contended that Western nations, particularly those in Europe, should be cautious about criticising India's choices when their own weapons exports have historically strengthened countries that have posed direct security challenges to India. In his view, the debate is not merely about energy purchases but also about consistency, fairness, and the application of the same moral standards to all sides.
