President Donald Trump’s escalating trade confrontation with India over Russian oil purchases represents a critical juncture in US-India relations and carries significant implications for Singapore and the broader Asian economic landscape. The dispute, characterized by conflicting narratives and the threat of sustained 50% tariffs on Indian goods, reflects deeper tensions in the evolving global order as America attempts to isolate Russia economically while Asian nations pursue pragmatic energy policies.
The Core Conflict: Energy Pragmatism vs. Geopolitical Alignment
India’s Strategic Calculus
India’s emergence as the largest buyer of seaborne Russian oil represents a calculated economic decision driven by several imperatives. Following Western sanctions on Russian energy exports after the 2022 Ukraine invasion, Moscow offered steep discounts—sometimes 20-30% below market prices—making Russian crude an attractive proposition for a developing economy where energy costs directly impact hundreds of millions of consumers.
India’s oil consumption has grown exponentially with its economic development, reaching approximately 5 million barrels per day. With limited domestic production covering only about 15% of demand, India remains heavily dependent on imports. Russian oil, priced at a significant discount, has allowed India to manage inflation, reduce its current account deficit, and maintain economic growth rates that are critical for Modi’s domestic political standing.
The Indian government’s position—that its “main concern was to safeguard the interests of the Indian consumer”—reflects a legitimate developmental priority. For a nation still grappling with poverty reduction and economic modernization, cheap energy is not merely an economic advantage but a social necessity. This stands in stark contrast to Western nations that can more easily absorb higher energy costs due to their developed economies and higher per capita incomes.
America’s Geopolitical Imperative
Trump’s hardline stance reflects America’s strategic objective of economically strangling Russia’s war machine. US officials argue that petroleum revenues constitute a primary funding source for Moscow’s military operations in Ukraine. By pressuring India—now Russia’s largest oil customer—Washington aims to cut off this financial lifeline.
The imposition of 50% tariffs on Indian goods, with half explicitly attributed to Russian oil purchases, represents an unprecedented use of economic coercion against a nation Washington simultaneously courts as a strategic partner against China. This approach reveals the Trump administration’s willingness to sacrifice long-term strategic relationships for immediate tactical gains in isolating Russia.
However, this strategy faces a fundamental challenge: India is not a treaty ally obligated to align its economic policies with American foreign policy objectives. Unlike NATO members or traditional US allies in East Asia, India maintains strategic autonomy as a core principle of its foreign policy. The Non-Aligned Movement’s legacy remains influential in Indian strategic thinking, even as New Delhi has moved closer to Washington through frameworks like the Quad.
The “He Said, He Said” Diplomatic Crisis
Competing Narratives
The public disagreement over whether Modi actually committed to stopping Russian oil purchases exposes a deeper diplomatic rift. Trump’s insistence that Modi made such a commitment, contradicted by India’s foreign ministry claiming ignorance of the conversation, creates three possible scenarios:
Scenario One: Miscommunication or Misinterpretation Trump may have interpreted diplomatic pleasantries or vague assurances as concrete commitments. This is not uncommon in high-level diplomacy where leaders often speak in general terms that can be understood differently by different parties.
Scenario Two: Deliberate Indian Ambiguity Modi may have offered sufficiently vague language to satisfy Trump temporarily while preserving India’s flexibility. Indian diplomacy has long mastered the art of strategic ambiguity, allowing different audiences to hear what they want to hear.
Scenario Three: Public Posturing Either or both leaders may be positioning for domestic and international audiences. Trump needs to appear tough on Russia for his political base, while Modi cannot be seen as capitulating to American pressure, which would be politically damaging domestically.
The White House “Halving” Claim
A White House official’s assertion that India has “halved its purchases of Russian oil” contradicted by Indian sources who saw “no immediate reduction” further muddies the waters. This discrepancy could reflect:
- Different time frames or measurement methods
- Seasonal variations in oil imports being misinterpreted as policy shifts
- Deliberate misinformation from either side
- Intelligence gaps in tracking actual oil flows
The reality, as reported, shows Indian imports of Russian oil set to rise 20% in October to 1.9 million barrels per day, directly contradicting any notion of reduction. This suggests either the White House claim was aspirational, premature, or simply incorrect.
Economic and Strategic Implications for India
The Tariff Burden
Fifty percent tariffs on Indian goods entering the United States represent a catastrophic barrier to trade. For context, India exported approximately $77 billion worth of goods to the US in 2024. Key sectors affected include:
- Pharmaceuticals: India is the world’s largest supplier of generic medicines, with the US being its largest market. Higher tariffs could increase American healthcare costs while devastating Indian pharmaceutical manufacturers.
- Textiles and Apparel: A traditional strength of Indian exports, where price competitiveness is crucial and 50% tariffs would be prohibitive.
- Information Technology Services: While services face different trade barriers, associated hardware and equipment exports would suffer.
- Jewelry and Diamonds: India dominates diamond cutting and polishing, with significant US market exposure.
- Agricultural Products: Including rice, spices, and processed foods that would face severe competitive disadvantages.
India’s Limited Options
India faces difficult choices, all with significant costs:
Option One: Capitulate to US Demands Stopping Russian oil purchases would force India to return to higher-priced Middle Eastern and other sources, potentially adding $15-20 billion annually to its import bill. This would fuel inflation, widen the current account deficit, and potentially slow economic growth—politically unacceptable for Modi’s government.
Option Two: Maintain Current Policy and Accept Tariffs The $77 billion in annual exports to the US would face severe headwinds, though India might offset some losses through currency depreciation, domestic consumption, or redirecting exports to other markets. However, the economic pain would be substantial.
Option Three: Negotiate a Middle Path Gradually reduce Russian oil imports while seeking partial tariff relief, perhaps committing to a timeline that allows adjustment. This saves face for both sides but requires complex negotiations and mutual trust currently lacking.
Option Four: Retaliate and Diversify Impose counter-tariffs on US goods and accelerate efforts to reduce dependence on the American market through deeper integration with Asia, Europe, and Africa. This long-term strategy involves short-term pain but preserves sovereignty.
Singapore’s Stake in the India-US Trade War
Direct Economic Exposure
Singapore’s position as a major financial and trading hub in Asia makes it particularly vulnerable to disruptions in Indo-US trade relations. Several channels of direct impact merit examination:
Financial Services Linkages Singapore serves as a critical financial intermediary for Indian companies accessing global capital markets. Indian firms have raised billions through Singapore-based structures, taking advantage of the India-Singapore Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) and favorable tax treaties. A weakened Indian economy facing tariff pressures would reduce capital flows, mergers and acquisitions activity, and financial services revenue for Singapore-based institutions.
Re-Export Trade Vulnerabilities Singapore’s economy relies heavily on re-export trade, where goods are imported, potentially processed or repackaged, and then exported to third countries. Indian goods transiting through Singapore to the US market, or American components being incorporated into Indian products via Singapore, would face disruption. While the volume is difficult to precisely quantify, the integrated nature of Asian supply chains means Singapore cannot isolate itself from bilateral trade disputes between major partners.
Petrochemical and Energy Trading Singapore is Asia’s oil trading hub and a major petrochemical refining center. Indian refiners purchase crude oil, refining equipment, and petrochemicals through Singapore. Conversely, Singapore refiners export products to India. Disruption to India’s economy or its energy sector would ripple through Singapore’s trading ecosystem. If India is forced to restructure its oil imports away from Russian sources, new trading patterns would emerge that might bypass Singapore’s traditional intermediary role.
Regional Supply Chain Disruptions
Manufacturing Networks Southeast Asian manufacturing increasingly integrates with Indian production, particularly in pharmaceuticals, electronics components, and automotive parts. Singapore-based multinational corporations often coordinate regional supply chains that include both Indian and Southeast Asian production nodes. Trade barriers on Indian goods create incentives to restructure these supply chains, potentially disadvantaging Singapore-based operations.
Aviation and Logistics Singapore’s Changi Airport and port serve as critical transshipment points for India-US cargo. Reduced trade volumes directly impact Singapore Airlines’ cargo operations, ground handling services, and the broader logistics sector that employs tens of thousands in Singapore. Shipping lines, freight forwarders, and logistics real estate could all see reduced demand.
The Broader Strategic Context
ASEAN-India Relations India represents a critical counterbalance to Chinese influence in Southeast Asia. Singapore has championed deeper ASEAN-India integration through mechanisms like the ASEAN-India Free Trade Area and joint naval exercises. A economically weakened India consumed by trade disputes with the US becomes a less effective strategic partner for Southeast Asia. This could shift the regional balance of power further toward Beijing, a development Singapore seeks to avoid as it carefully manages relations with both the US and China.
Free Trade Principles Under Threat Singapore’s prosperity depends on rules-based international trade. The unilateral imposition of massive tariffs for geopolitical rather than purely economic reasons undermines the multilateral trading system that Singapore relies upon. If major powers increasingly use trade policy as a coercive foreign policy tool, smaller trading nations like Singapore become collateral damage. This precedent threatens the World Trade Organization framework that has underpinned Singapore’s economic model.
US-China Competition Intensifies The India-US dispute occurs against the backdrop of intensifying Sino-American rivalry. If Washington’s aggressive trade tactics push India closer to China, or if India seeks to balance US pressure by deepening economic ties with Beijing, Singapore’s careful hedging strategy becomes more complicated. Singapore has thrived by maintaining excellent relations with both powers; a more polarized Asia forces difficult choices.
Oil Markets and Singapore’s Energy Security
Regional Petroleum Dynamics
Singapore, despite having no oil reserves, operates one of the world’s largest refining centers and serves as Asia’s petroleum product trading hub. The India-Russia oil dispute has several implications for Singapore’s energy sector:
Refining Margins Under Pressure If India is forced to reduce Russian crude imports, it will compete more intensively for Middle Eastern and African crude that Singapore refiners also purchase. This increased demand could push up benchmark crude prices while potentially oversupplying the market with refined products if Indian refiners increase output to compensate for volume losses. Tighter margins would pressure Singapore’s refining sector, which already operates in a highly competitive environment.
Trading Pattern Shifts Currently, much Russian crude flows to Indian refiners via trading operations headquartered or executed through Singapore. If these flows cease or restructure, Singapore’s oil trading volumes and associated revenues decline. Conversely, if new trading patterns emerge connecting India with alternative suppliers, Singapore-based traders might capture new opportunities, though transition periods typically involve uncertainty and reduced profitability.
Price Volatility Risks Abrupt changes in global oil flows create price volatility. While traders can profit from volatility, Singapore’s economy broadly suffers from oil price spikes given its complete import dependence. Higher and more volatile oil prices increase costs for Singapore’s petrochemical sector, aviation fuel, and general energy expenses, potentially slowing economic growth.
Strategic Petroleum Reserves
Singapore maintains strategic petroleum reserves as part of the International Energy Agency framework. Disruptions to regional oil trade patterns could necessitate drawing on these reserves or restructuring supply agreements, creating additional costs and vulnerabilities. If India’s access to affordable Russian oil ends, upward pressure on regional oil prices could force Singapore to consider accelerating its renewable energy transition—a costly long-term investment with short-term budgetary implications.
Precedent and Principle: Risks to Small States
The Erosion of Trade Multilateralism
For Singapore, perhaps the most concerning aspect of the Trump-Modi dispute is what it represents rather than its immediate economic impact. The use of massive unilateral tariffs for geopolitical objectives outside the World Trade Organization framework threatens the rules-based system that allows small states to thrive.
Singapore’s founding father Lee Kuan Yew consistently emphasized that international law and multilateral institutions were crucial for small nations’ survival. When major powers resolve disputes through economic coercion rather than negotiation and established dispute resolution mechanisms, smaller nations become pawns rather than participants. Singapore has limited ability to influence US tariff policy or Indian energy procurement decisions, yet suffers consequences from both.
The Weaponization of Economic Interdependence
The modern global economy was built on the premise that interdependence creates shared interests that reduce conflict. The Trump administration’s approach—using economic interdependence as a coercive tool—inverts this logic. If economic relationships become primarily leverage points for geopolitical objectives, nations have incentives to reduce interdependence even at economic cost.
For Singapore, whose entire economic model depends on deep integration with global markets, this trend is existential. The city-state cannot be self-sufficient in food, water (beyond current agreements), energy, or most manufactured goods. If deglobalization accelerates driven by major powers wielding trade as a weapon, Singapore must fundamentally rethink its economic strategy—a wrenching adjustment with no easy answers.
Potential Scenarios and Outcomes
Scenario One: Indian Capitulation (Low Probability)
If Modi’s government agrees to stop Russian oil purchases to avoid tariffs, several consequences follow:
For India: Higher energy costs, inflation pressure, potential economic slowdown, and domestic political backlash against Modi for surrendering to American pressure. However, improved US relations could bring benefits like technology transfers, defense cooperation, and support against China.
For Singapore: Reduced trade volatility in the medium term, but concerns about precedent. If economic coercion works against India, other nations—including Singapore—might face similar pressure. Short-term relief but long-term systemic risk.
For Oil Markets: Reduced Russian oil exports (unless diverted to China or other buyers), potentially higher global prices benefiting producers but hurting consumers. Singapore’s refining sector faces margin pressure from higher crude costs.
Scenario Two: Prolonged Standoff (Medium Probability)
India maintains Russian oil purchases while absorbing tariff costs, leading to extended trade tensions:
For India: Economic pain from tariffs but preserved policy autonomy. Modi potentially strengthens domestically by standing up to America, though economic costs eventually erode support. India accelerates efforts to find alternative export markets and reduce US dependence.
For Singapore: Extended period of trade uncertainty and reduced India-US commerce. Singapore-based companies reassess supply chains and investment plans involving both markets. Gradual erosion of Singapore’s intermediary role between the two economies.
For Oil Markets: Status quo continues with India purchasing Russian oil. Markets adjust to new normal of divided energy flows—Russian crude to Asia, Middle Eastern and other sources to the West. Price bifurcation possibilities if distinct markets emerge.
Scenario Three: Negotiated Compromise (High Probability)
India agrees to gradually reduce Russian oil over 12-24 months while US phases in tariff reductions:
For India: Face-saving formula allowing adjustment time. Economic impact manageable if timeline is sufficient and tariff relief is front-loaded. Modi can claim he negotiated rather than capitulated.
For Singapore: Best outcome for stability. Predictable adjustment allows supply chain restructuring and business planning. Trade flows stabilize rather than experiencing abrupt disruption. Singapore maintains intermediary role with both powers.
For Oil Markets: Gradual shift in flows allowing market adjustment without price spikes. Alternative suppliers have time to increase production and export capacity. Trading patterns evolve smoothly rather than experiencing disruptive shocks.
Scenario Four: Indian Retaliation and Regionalization (Medium Probability)
India imposes counter-tariffs on US goods and deepens economic integration with Asia and Europe:
For India: Short-term economic pain but long-term strategic autonomy. Accelerated Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) accession discussions, deeper ASEAN integration, and expanded Europe trade. India potentially emerges stronger and less dependent on any single market.
For Singapore: Mixed impact. Reduced India-US trade hurts, but Singapore benefits from deeper India-ASEAN integration. Singapore could serve as hub for India’s expanded Asian trade. However, risk of broader trade wars as US retaliates against nations increasing India ties.
For Oil Markets: Russian-Asian energy integration solidifies with India at the center. Long-term implications for energy security as the world increasingly divides into separate trading blocs. Singapore’s hub status becomes more valuable but also more complex to maintain.
Policy Recommendations for Singapore
Diplomatic Engagement
Maintain Studied Neutrality Singapore must avoid taking sides in the India-US dispute while privately encouraging both parties toward negotiated solutions. Public statements should emphasize support for rules-based trade and multilateral dispute resolution without criticizing either party directly.
Leverage ASEAN Platform Working through ASEAN, Singapore can advocate for principles that serve smaller nations’ interests without appearing to directly oppose American policy. ASEAN statements supporting multilateral trade frameworks and opposing unilateral tariffs gain strength from collective voice.
Strengthen India Bilateral Ties Regardless of US-India tensions, Singapore should deepen its relationship with India through expanded CECA provisions, increased investment both directions, and enhanced people-to-people ties. A stronger Singapore-India relationship provides optionality if US relations deteriorate and supports India’s ability to withstand pressure.
Economic Hedging
Diversify Trade Partners Accelerate efforts to expand trade relationships with Africa, Latin America, and Central Asia to reduce relative dependence on major powers whose disputes create collateral damage. Singapore’s extensive trade agreement network should be activated more aggressively to spread risk.
Enhance Supply Chain Resilience Encourage Singapore-based multinational corporations to build flexibility into supply chains allowing rapid reconfiguration if trade barriers emerge. Government support for redundant sourcing and increased inventory might be economically inefficient in normal times but provide insurance against trade disruptions.
Financial Services Innovation Position Singapore as a neutral jurisdiction for trade finance and payments systems that aren’t subject to US or Chinese control. The city-state’s credibility and rule of law make it attractive for nations seeking to reduce exposure to politically weaponized financial systems.
Strategic Communications
Educate Stakeholders Singapore’s government should clearly communicate to businesses and citizens the risks from eroding multilateral trade frameworks. Public understanding of why rules-based trade matters to Singapore enables political support for potentially costly hedging strategies.
Lead Intellectual Debate Singapore’s thought leaders, academics, and officials should contribute prominently to global debates about trade policy, sovereignty, and multilateralism. Small state perspectives are often marginalized in discussions dominated by major powers; Singapore must ensure its voice is heard in forums like the WTO, G20, and regional platforms.
Conclusion: Navigating an Era of Geoeconomic Fragmentation
The Trump-Modi confrontation over Russian oil represents more than a bilateral trade dispute; it exemplifies the dangerous trend toward using economic interdependence as a coercive tool rather than a mutual benefit. For Singapore, a nation whose prosperity depends entirely on open markets and rules-based trade, this trend poses existential questions.
The immediate economic impact on Singapore—while real—is manageable through the channels discussed above. More concerning is the precedent and principle at stake. If the international order increasingly operates on the basis of major power coercion rather than negotiated rules, smaller nations lose the framework that has allowed them to thrive.
Singapore cannot prevent major powers from pursuing their interests as they define them. However, Singapore can strengthen its resilience through economic diversification, diplomatic engagement supporting multilateral principles, and careful hedging that avoids over-dependence on any single market or power. The city-state has navigated major power rivalries throughout its history—from the Cold War to current US-China tensions. Successfully managing the emerging era of geoeconomic fragmentation will require similar deftness, pragmatism, and strategic clarity.
The India-US oil dispute is one episode in a larger restructuring of the global economic order. How it resolves will signal whether negotiation and compromise remain possible in international affairs, or whether unilateral coercion becomes the dominant paradigm. For Singapore, no outcome is ideal, but some are far more manageable than others. The city-state’s challenge is to influence what it can, adapt to what it cannot change, and preserve its core interests in an increasingly fragmented and confrontational world.
Weaponizing History: Russia’s Anti-Colonial Narrative in India and the Geopolitics of Strategic Autonomy
Abstract
This paper analyzes Russia’s strategic deployment of anti-colonial narratives in India, particularly through the state-funded media outlet RT and its new program “Imperial Receipts” featuring prominent Indian politician and scholar Dr. Shashi Tharoor. Amidst Russia’s geopolitical isolation following its invasion of Ukraine, Moscow has intensified its public diplomacy efforts to strengthen partnerships, with India emerging as a key priority. This paper argues that RT’s anti-colonial programming serves as a sophisticated strategic communication tool designed to resonate with India’s historical grievances, reinforce its commitment to strategic autonomy, and subtly promote an anti-Western geopolitical stance, thereby countering Western efforts to distance New Delhi from Moscow. By examining the content, promotion, and broader context of Russia’s media push in India, this paper sheds light on the evolving dynamics of great power competition and the weaponization of historical narratives in contemporary international relations.
- Introduction
The early 21st century is characterized by a reshaping of the global geopolitical landscape, marked by a contest for influence among major powers and the emergence of a more multipolar world order. In the wake of its 2022 invasion of Ukraine, Russia has faced significant diplomatic and economic isolation from Western nations (United States, Canada, Europe), prompting a strategic pivot towards strengthening alliances and partnerships in the Global South. India, a rising economic and military power with a history of non-alignment and strategic autonomy, has emerged as a crucial focus for Moscow’s foreign policy and public diplomacy efforts.
This paper critically examines a prominent instance of this renewed Russian engagement: the launch of “Imperial Receipts,” a weekly anti-colonial series produced by the Russian state media entity RT (formerly Russia Today), featuring the distinguished Indian opposition politician and author, Dr. Shashi Tharoor. Advertisements for the program, showcasing Dr. Tharoor, widely appeared in Indian cities and newspapers in August 2025, ahead of its September 1 debut. The series, broadcast on RT’s free-to-air channel and widely shared on Dr. Tharoor’s YouTube channel and WhatsApp, delves into the systemic exploitation and cultural destruction perpetrated by British colonialism in India.
While ostensibly a historical critique, this paper posits that “Imperial Receipts” transcends mere academic discourse. It represents a calculated strategic communication initiative by the Russian state to leverage deeply embedded anti-colonial sentiments within India, thereby weaving a narrative that subtly aligns with Moscow’s current anti-Western geopolitical agenda. By promoting a discourse that emphasizes India’s right to independent choices and a critique of Western historical dominance, RT aims to reinforce India’s existing foreign policy doctrine of strategic autonomy and resist Western pressures for New Delhi to distance itself from Moscow. This paper will analyze the content and promotion of “Imperial Receipts,” Russia’s broader media strategy in India, and the geopolitical implications of this nuanced engagement.
- Theoretical Framework: Public Diplomacy, Strategic Narratives, and Post-Colonial Resonance
This analysis draws upon several theoretical constructs to understand Russia’s media strategy in India.
Firstly, public diplomacy serves as a foundational concept. It refers to the efforts of states to influence foreign public opinion and build support for their policies. Unlike traditional diplomacy, which targets governments, public diplomacy aims at shaping the perceptions of foreign publics through various channels, including media, cultural exchange, and educational programs (Leonard, 2002). In this context, RT’s “Imperial Receipts” functions as a public diplomacy tool, seeking to cultivate a favorable image of Russia and its geopolitical perspectives by aligning with Indian national sentiments.
Secondly, the concept of strategic narratives is crucial. Strategic narratives are overarching stories that states construct and disseminate to shape perceptions of international reality, legitimize their actions, and delegitimize those of adversaries (Miskimmon et al., 2013). By framing Britain’s colonial history in stark terms of exploitation and linking it to a contemporary “anti-West” message, Russia constructs a strategic narrative that positions itself as an ally in decolonization narratives while subtly criticizing Western hypocrisy and dominance. The narrative of “making its own choices” directly supports India’s existing foreign policy framework.
Thirdly, the enduring legacy of post-colonialism provides the resonant backdrop for this initiative. Post-colonial theory examines the lasting impacts of colonialism on societies and cultures, including the psychological, economic, and political ramifications that extend beyond political independence (Said, 1978; Spivak, 1988). In India, the memory of British colonial rule, particularly its economic plunder and cultural suppression, remains a powerful and emotionally charged aspect of national identity. Tapping into these deep-seated sentiments allows Russia to establish a connection rooted in shared historical grievances against Western imperial powers.
Finally, the paper touches upon the dynamics of information warfare and media influence. In an increasingly polarized global media landscape, state-sponsored media like RT play a significant role in shaping public discourse and influencing perceptions (Monbiot, 2016). By strategically deploying content that resonates with specific target audiences and amplifying it through local platforms, these outlets aim to advance their national interests and counter competing narratives.
- “Imperial Receipts”: Leveraging Anti-Colonialism for Geopolitical Gain
RT’s “Imperial Receipts” is not merely an academic exploration of history but a carefully constructed narrative designed with contemporary geopolitical objectives in mind. The program’s content, featuring veteran politician and respected scholar Dr. Shashi Tharoor, meticulously documents the extensive exploitation and destruction unleashed by British rule in India. Dr. Tharoor’s articulation, as quoted in the article, powerfully contrasts Britain’s rise to a “great outpost of human civilisation, prosperity, gold and commerce” with India’s descent into a “poster child for third-world destitution, poverty, disease, malnutrition and suffering.” This framing effectively uses historical facts to evoke strong emotional responses and reinforce a narrative of systemic injustice.
The choice of Dr. Shashi Tharoor as the face of the program is highly strategic. As a well-known Indian opposition politician, author, and diplomat with a formidable reputation for his scholarship on British colonialism (e.g., “An Era of Darkness: The British Empire in India”), Dr. Tharoor brings significant intellectual credibility and public recognition. His presence lends an air of academic rigor and authenticity to the program, making its anti-colonial message resonate more powerfully with Indian audiences. His involvement likely amplifies the program’s reach, especially through his official YouTube channel which has accumulated substantial views, and through widespread sharing on WhatsApp, demonstrating a successful multi-platform dissemination strategy.
The promotional strategy further underscores the program’s strategic intent. Advertisements featuring Dr. Tharoor were prominently displayed on hoardings and in newspapers across Indian cities. The fact that these were funded by RT, a foreign state media entity, rather than Dr. Tharoor’s own political party, highlights the external agency behind this narrative push. Furthermore, the anachronistic setting of the interviews—a “pearl-white colonial-era hotel in Delhi that vaunts its ‘old-world European charm with its colonial impressions’”—can be interpreted as a subtle yet potent visual statement. It serves to emphasize the lingering presence of the colonial past and subtly critiques the continued appeal of such aesthetics even in post-colonial contexts, reinforcing the program’s core message.
Crucially, the article explicitly states that the program “is not just a critique of Britain’s dark colonial history; it is also a gamble to set a contemporary geopolitical narrative.” By tapping into “widespread anti-colonial sentiments among Indians,” RT’s “Imperial Receipts” “slips in a not-so-subtle anti-West message that aligns neatly with Moscow’s current strategic goals.” Dr. Tharoor’s quote in RT’s press release – “The last thing you (India) want to do is to surrender as an independent nation your right to have your own view to anybody else” – directly serves this purpose. It interprets historical grievances as a contemporary call for independent decision-making, implicitly cautioning against aligning too closely with Western powers and framing such alignment as a new form of subservience. This message is a direct exhortation to India to maintain its strategic autonomy.
- Russia’s Broader Media Offensive and India’s Strategic Autonomy
The “Imperial Receipts” program is not an isolated initiative but part of a broader, concerted Russian state media offensive in India. This offensive aims to consolidate Russia’s position as a reliable partner and counter Western influence in a strategically vital nation.
Since its invasion of Ukraine, Russia has faced an unprecedented level of isolation from Western countries. This has prompted a redoubling of efforts to cultivate non-Western alliances. India, with its relatively neutral stance on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, its historical ties extending back to the Cold War, and its continued strong defense and economic partnerships with Moscow, has become a “key priority.” Despite increasing criticism and pressure from Western powers, including steep US-imposed tariffs, New Delhi has steadfastly defended its choices as being rooted in “national interests and strategic autonomy.” India continues to procure cheap Russian oil and participate in joint military exercises, such as the Zapad exercises in Belarus, which simulated conflict with NATO countries.
This context provides fertile ground for Russia’s media strategy. As articulated by Nandan Unnikrishnan, a former journalist and head of the Eurasia Programme of Studies at the Observer Research Foundation, “It’s a battle for which side of the fence India will fall on.” Russia aims to ensure India remains on its side, or at least committed to its independent path, thereby resisting a “tighter Western embrace.”
RT’s plans to launch a dedicated channel, “RT India,” by the end of 2025, with a studio already set up in the Delhi National Capital Region and claiming a “potential reach” of 626 million viewers, signals a significant, long-term commitment. This expansion demonstrates Russia’s intent to tailor content specifically for the Indian audience, ensuring maximum resonance and impact. Similarly, Sputnik, another Russian state-owned news agency, has ramped up its operations in India, launching a Hindi handle on X (formerly Twitter) in July, in addition to its English presence. Sputnik’s self-proclaimed mission of offering “news free of Western bias” directly challenges the narratives propagated by Western media and implicitly positions Russian media as an alternative, more trustworthy source for countries disillusioned with perceived Western hegemony.
Therefore, “Imperial Receipts” functions as a psychological operation within a broader information war. It uses a popular, historically grounded narrative to create a sense of solidarity between Russia and India, while simultaneously bolstering India’s existing foreign policy stance of strategic autonomy against Western pressures.
- Implications and Future Directions
The Russian state media’s strategic use of anti-colonial narratives in India carries several significant implications for international relations, media studies, and India’s foreign policy.
Firstly, it highlights the increasing sophistication of great power competition in the information domain. Russia is effectively deploying soft power and strategic communication to counteract hard power pressures and diplomatic isolation. By tapping into existing historical grievances and national pride, Moscow seeks to cultivate a favorable environment for its geopolitical objectives, making it more challenging for Western powers to sway Indian public opinion or government policy.
Secondly, the involvement of a respected public intellectual and opposition politician like Dr. Shashi Tharoor raises questions about the ethics and implications of public figures lending their credibility to state-sponsored media of foreign powers, particularly those with controversial human rights records or aggressive foreign policies. While Dr. Tharoor’s motivations may stem from genuine academic interest in anti-colonial discourse, his association inadvertently legitimizes RT’s broader agenda and amplifies its reach. This underscores the blurred lines between objective journalism, historical commentary, and strategic propaganda in the contemporary media landscape.
Thirdly, this strategy reinforces India’s commitment to strategic autonomy. The narrative of “making its own choices” resonates deeply with India’s long-standing foreign policy tradition of non-alignment (though now often termed multi-alignment or strategic autonomy). By acknowledging and validating this pillar of Indian foreign policy, Russia positions itself as an enabler of India’s independence, contrasting with Western narratives that might be perceived as prescriptive or demanding. This approach is likely to strengthen the existing strategic partnership between India and Russia, making it more resilient to external pressures.
Future research could explore the audience reception of “Imperial Receipts” within India, analyzing its actual impact on public perceptions and political discourse. A comparative analysis of Russian media strategies in other Global South nations, particularly those with significant colonial histories, would also provide valuable insights into the broader patterns of Russia’s public diplomacy. Furthermore, investigating the long-term effectiveness of such campaigns in shaping foreign policy decisions and challenging dominant international narratives would be a crucial area of study.
- Conclusion
The launch and extensive promotion of RT’s “Imperial Receipts” in India, featuring Dr. Shashi Tharoor, represents a potent example of Russia’s strategic communication and public diplomacy efforts in a rapidly evolving geopolitical landscape. Amidst its isolation from the West, Moscow is adeptly leveraging deeply resonant anti-colonial narratives to strengthen its partnership with India. By framing the show’s content as a call for India to assert its independent choices against perceived external pressures, RT subtly promotes an anti-Western message that aligns with Russia’s current strategic goals while simultaneously reinforcing India’s cherished doctrine of strategic autonomy.
This initiative is part of a broader, sustained Russian media offensive in India, characterized by significant investment in platforms like RT India and Sputnik. The use of a credible public figure like Dr. Tharoor, coupled with widespread promotional activities, enhances the legitimacy and reach of this narrative. Ultimately, Russia’s “weaponization of history” through anti-colonial discourse serves to counter Western influence, solidify its long-standing ties with India, and contribute to the ongoing global “battle for which side of the fence India will fall on.” As the international order continues to shift, such sophisticated deployments of narrative power are likely to become increasingly central to great power competition and the shaping of future alliances.
References
Leonard, M. (2002). Public Diplomacy. The Foreign Policy Centre.
Miskimmon, A., O’Loughlin, B., & Roselle, L. (2013). Strategic Narratives: Communication Power and the New World Order. Routledge.
Monbiot, G. (2016, November 9). Russia Today is a menace to the free world. The Guardian.
Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. Pantheon Books.
Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the Subaltern Speak? In C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture (pp. 271-313). University of Illinois Press.
Tharoor, S. (2017). An Era of Darkness: The British Empire in India. Aleph Book Company.
Maxthon
In an age where the digital world is in constant flux, and our interactions online are ever-evolving, the importance of prioritizing individuals as they navigate the expansive internet cannot be overstated. The myriad of elements that shape our online experiences calls for a thoughtful approach to selecting web browsers—one that places a premium on security and user privacy. Amidst the multitude of browsers vying for users’ loyalty, Maxthon emerges as a standout choice, providing a trustworthy solution to these pressing concerns, all without any cost to the user.
Maxthon, with its advanced features, boasts a comprehensive suite of built-in tools designed to enhance your online privacy. Among these tools are a highly effective ad blocker and a range of anti-tracking mechanisms, each meticulously crafted to fortify your digital sanctuary. This browser has carved out a niche for itself, particularly with its seamless compatibility with Windows 11, further solidifying its reputation in an increasingly competitive market.
In a crowded landscape of web browsers, Maxthon has forged a distinct identity through its unwavering dedication to offering a secure and private browsing experience. Fully aware of the myriad threats lurking in the vast expanse of cyberspace, Maxthon works tirelessly to safeguard your personal information. Utilizing state-of-the-art encryption technology, it ensures that your sensitive data remains protected and confidential throughout your online adventures.
What truly sets Maxthon apart is its commitment to enhancing user privacy during every moment spent online. Each feature of this browser has been meticulously designed with the user’s privacy in mind. Its powerful ad-blocking capabilities work diligently to eliminate unwanted advertisements, while its comprehensive anti-tracking measures effectively reduce the presence of invasive scripts that could disrupt your browsing enjoyment. As a result, users can traverse the web with newfound confidence and safety.
Moreover, Maxthon’s incognito mode provides an extra layer of security, granting users enhanced anonymity while engaging in their online pursuits. This specialized mode not only conceals your browsing habits but also ensures that your digital footprint remains minimal, allowing for an unobtrusive and liberating internet experience. With Maxthon as your ally in the digital realm, you can explore the vastness of the internet with peace of mind, knowing that your privacy is being prioritized every step of the way.