The United States has sharply criticized Europe over its newly concluded trade agreement with India, accusing the European Union of indirectly financing the Russia–Ukraine war through energy-related trade flows.
Senior officials from President Donald Trump’s administration argued that while Europe has publicly reduced direct energy ties with Moscow, it continues to benefit from loopholes in the global oil market. According to the criticism, Russian crude is being sold to India, refined there, and then exported to Europe as finished petroleum products—allowing European economies to profit while sanctions remain in place.
The remarks came as India and the European Union finalized negotiations on a long-pending free trade agreement, expected to be formally announced this week. The deal has been described by European leaders as one of the most significant trade pacts ever concluded between the two sides.
U.S. Treasury officials framed the issue as a question of uneven burden-sharing among allies. They pointed to Washington’s efforts to weaken Russia’s energy revenues, including the imposition of steep tariffs on countries purchasing Russian oil. India has been targeted with tariffs totaling 50 per cent, including penalties linked specifically to its energy imports from Russia.
In contrast, U.S. officials said Europe continues to benefit economically by importing refined fuels that originate from Russian crude, undermining the broader goal of isolating Moscow financially. They argued that this dynamic allows Europe to avoid the full economic cost of sanctions while the United States absorbs greater financial and political pressure.
The criticism also came amid renewed U.S. efforts to push for a negotiated end to the Russia–Ukraine conflict, with Trump administration officials asserting that Washington has made greater sacrifices than its European partners in pursuit of that goal.
India and the European Union began negotiations on their trade agreement nearly two decades ago, and the deal is intended to strengthen economic ties at a time of growing uncertainty in global trade. European leaders have promoted the pact as a strategic economic reset, while U.S. officials have cast it as a contradiction of Europe’s stated position on the war in Ukraine.
As geopolitical tensions continue to reshape global trade and energy flows, the dispute highlights widening differences between Washington and its allies over how sanctions, diplomacy, and economic partnerships should be balanced in a rapidly changing world.