New Delhi- White House Senior Counselor for Trade and Manufacturing Peter Navarro has stirred controversy with his latest comments on India's trade practices, accusing "Brahmins" of profiteering from discounted Russian oil imports amid escalating U.S.-India tariff tensions. The remark, made during a Sunday appearance on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures," has drawn sharp rebukes from Indian political figures and experts, who accuse Navarro of invoking caste-based stereotypes rooted in colonial-era narratives.

Others, however, interpret it as a metaphorical nod to economic elites, drawing parallels to terms like "Boston Brahmin" in American lexicon. As U.S. President Donald Trump's administration doubles down on 50% tariffs on Indian goods, half attributed to India's Russian oil ties, the episode highlights deepening fissures in bilateral relations.

Navarro's comments came as he defended the Trump administration's punitive tariffs, imposed earlier this month to pressure India into curtailing its energy trade with Russia. Since Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, India has ramped up imports of discounted Russian crude, now accounting for over 40% of its oil needs, saving billions while helping stabilize global energy prices. Indian refiners process this oil and export refined products to Europe, Africa, and Asia at premiums, a practice Navarro branded as "laundromat for the Kremlin" that indirectly funds Moscow's war efforts.

In the interview, Navarro escalated his rhetoric: "You've got Brahmins profiteering at the expense of the Indian people. We need that to stop." He praised Prime Minister Narendra Modi as a "great leader" but questioned India's alliances with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping, urging the "biggest democracy in the world" to align with Western interests. Navarro also labeled India the "Maharaja of tariffs" for its high import duties, claiming they harm U.S. workers and taxpayers while exacerbating the Ukraine conflict.

This isn't Navarro's first salvo; he previously called the Ukraine war "Modi's war" and accused India of "refinery profiteering." India has countered by pointing to Western hypocrisy, noting that Europe continues to buy Russian gas and the U.S. imports Russian uranium, while emphasizing its actions have prevented global price spikes

Backlash from Indian Leaders

The "Brahmins" reference quickly ignited outrage in India. Congress leader Pawan Khera slammed it as "baseless," arguing that the U.S. should refrain from making unsubstantiated statements that interfere in India's internal affairs. "America should not make baseless statements like this," Khera stated on Monday, criticizing the remark as an attempt to justify unfair tariffs.

Trinamool Congress MP Sagarika Ghose offered a nuanced defense, suggesting the term might not be inherently casteist in an international context. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Ghose explained: "“Boston Brahmin” was once a widely used term in the US to refer to the American New England wealthy elite. “Brahmin” is still a term used in the English-speaking world to denote social or economic “elites” (in this case the rich). The illiteracy on X is astonishing." Ghose's comment highlights how "Brahmin" has evolved in English to signify privilege, akin to "blue blood" or "aristocrat," rather than strictly referring to India's Hindu priestly caste.

Economist and member of Prime Minister Modi's Economic Advisory Council, Sanjeev Sanyal, took a sharper view, linking Navarro's words to historical prejudices. Sanyal posted on X: "This latest jibe from Navarro - that 'Brahmins are profiteering' from Russian oil - tells us a lot about who controls narratives about India and Hindus inside the policy/intellectual spaces of America. This is derived directly from 19th century colonial jibes going back to the likes of James Mill. Edward Said's point about Orientalism is perhaps more correct for India than his original thesis on Middle East."

Other reactions poured in on social media. Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Priyanka Chaturvedi called it a "classic case of ignorance," while opposition figures decried it as a "casteist slur" aimed at dividing Indians. On X, users like @TheRealDharm labeled it "pathetic" and stereotypical, while @spvaid warned it could be a tactic to "weaken the Modi government by dividing society."

The debate centers on intent and interpretation. Critics argue the remark is casteist because it invokes "Brahmins", India's traditional upper caste, in a context unrelated to actual caste dynamics in the oil sector. India's refining industry is dominated by diverse players, including state-owned firms like Indian Oil Corporation and private giants like Reliance Industries, led by Mukesh Ambani (from the Bania community, not Brahmin). No evidence links Brahmins disproportionately to oil profits; the sector's leadership spans castes. Sanyal's invocation of James Mill, a 19th-century British historian who portrayed Brahmins as exploitative, suggests Navarro's words echo outdated, divisive colonial tropes used to justify imperial rule.