The U.S. sanctions on Russian oil reveal the limitations of multilateral consensus in global energy governance. Critically examine with reference to G7 and India's energy security.

Q. The U.S. sanctions on Russian oil reveal the limitations of multilateral consensus in global energy governance. Critically examine with reference to G7 and India's energy security. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

Global energy governance rests on coalitions of the willing — the G7 price cap, IEA reserve releases, UN security guarantees for chokepoints — rather than binding law. The June 2026 G7 summit, where President Trump signalled a swift return of sanctions on Russian oil shipments after having eased them months earlier [1], exposes how thin that consensus is, though it does not render it worthless.

Limitations exposed - Unilateral reversibility: Washington expanded a Russian oil waiver to all global buyers in March 2026 to tame prices [2], overriding objections from G7 partners including Chancellor Merz — sanctions became an instrument of domestic price management, not collective strategy. - Non-binding G7 architecture: G7 outcomes are political commitments; the $60 price cap depends on Western insurers and shippers, and a shadow fleet of non-Western tankers steadily eroded it. - UNSC paralysis: Russia and China vetoed a Gulf States' draft resolution to safeguard shipping through the Strait of Hormuz [3]; the General Assembly could only debate the veto, not reverse it [4]. - Chokepoint leverage over rules: roughly a fifth of global oil moves through Hormuz [5], so physical control outweighs normative consensus.

Where consensus still worked — the cap did compress Russian revenues without triggering a supply shock, and coordinated IEA reserve releases stabilised markets in 2022, showing plurilateral tools have real, if limited, reach.

Implications for India's energy security - Discounted Russian crude cushioned India's import bill; reimposition risks a wider current account deficit and imported inflation. - Secondary sanctions create compliance risk for Indian refiners, insurers and payment channels. - Policy volatility — waiver, reversal, re-imposition within one year — makes long-term supply contracting difficult.

Energy governance is thus consensual in design but unilateral in practice. India's response should be structural rather than reactive: deeper source diversification, expanded strategic petroleum reserves, rupee-and-local-currency settlement, and accelerated renewables and green hydrogen under its net-zero-by-2070 commitment. Strategic autonomy is best secured not by choosing between blocs, but by reducing the leverage any bloc holds.

(~330 words)

Sources: 1. Trump signals he may reimpose sanctions on Russian oil as G7 refocuses on Ukraine — PBS News, June 2026 — G7 summit signal on reimposing sanctions 2. US expands Russian oil waiver to all buyers in bid to tame prices — Euronews, 13 March 2026 — March 2026 waiver expansion over allied objections 3. China, Russian Federation Veto Security Council Draft Resolution by Gulf States to Safeguard International Shipping through Strait of Hormuz — UN Press, SC/16330 — UNSC veto on Hormuz shipping security 4. General Assembly Debates Strait of Hormuz Closure after China, Russian Federation Veto Security Council Draft Resolution — UN Press, GA/12758 — UNGA veto-initiative debate without binding effect 5. The Strait of Hormuz: Security Developments and Impacts on Oil, Gas, and Other Commodities — Congressional Research Service, R45281 — share of global oil transiting Hormuz