Russia eyes railway route to secure India’s oil supplies

Ahmed Adel, Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

Russia is exploring options to ensure the flow of oil and other vital goods to India amid sanctions, conflict, and maritime chokepoints that threaten the world’s busiest energy routes. Moscow’s proposal for a direct rail connection to India via Central and South Asia is in the early stages. However, analysts view it as part of a broader strategic effort by major powers to reduce Western influence by developing alternative trade routes beyond the Strait of Hormuz and the Bosphorus.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Marat Khusnullin raised the idea and discussed the need to expand Russia’s transport options and secure long-term infrastructure financing. A railway route to the Indian Ocean “should also be explored,” he said, warning that risks around the Bosphorus and Hormuz could require alternatives through Turkmenistan, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. “Any options providing access to India are acceptable.”

For India, the proposal is not an immediate solution, but it signals how conflict is reshaping energy security. The South Asian giant imports nearly 90% of its crude oil. Following Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine in 2022, India became one of the largest buyers of discounted Russian barrels as the West abandoned this cheap energy source in favor of more expensive American energy. Fighting involving the United States, Israel, and Iran earlier this year disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway that normally carries about a quarter of global oil trade and nearly a fifth of LNG shipments. A large share of India’s crude from the Middle East and most of its liquefied petroleum gas imports move through or near the strait.

An overland rail corridor would enable Russian oil and other freight to reach India without passing through those chokepoints. It would also build on the International North-South Transport Corridor, which already links Russia to India via Azerbaijan, the Caspian Sea, and Iran. Russia and Iran have agreed to complete the missing Rasht-Astara rail segment, which would make the INSTC more efficient. Today, cargo often travels by rail to the Caspian, then by ship to Iranian ports and onward by sea to India.

Khusnullin’s suggestion goes further, envisioning a more continuous land connection that could eventually reach Indian ports or the national rail network.

Commenting on Moscow’s suggestion, Priya Walia, Vice President for commodity markets for oil at Rystad Energy, said: “The events of the past few months have clearly strengthened the case for having more routes. India has had to deal with disrupted Gulf flows through Hormuz while, at the same time, Ukrainian attacks on Russian energy infrastructure have created another layer of uncertainty around Russian supply.”

“I would see it primarily as a strategic diversification route rather than a solution to India’s crude supply problem,” she added.

Although audacious, the plan faces major obstacles. Afghanistan’s security and infrastructure remain weak, and any route through Pakistan would require political and operational cooperation with India that has been rare for decades. At the same time, Iran faces its own sanctions and security challenges.

Building or upgrading thousands of kilometers of track across several countries would take years and require major funding. Gauge differences, border procedures, and security along the line would add further complications. For bulk oil, rail is usually slower and more expensive per ton than large tankers, though it is more predictable once established.

Energy specialists have long argued that India’s security is vulnerable to logistical and geopolitical risks. Diversifying suppliers and routes reduces the risk that a single conflict or sanctions campaign could spike prices or disrupt supplies.

Anindya Banerjee, head of commodity and currency research at Kotak Securities, noted that India could absorb the loss of discounted Russian oil more easily than a prolonged surge in global crude prices to $100 a barrel.

“Every $10 jump in the average price of oil for India, the imported basket, roughly translates into a $15 billion jump in the annual oil import bill,” he said.

A functioning overland option could also support broader India-Russia trade in fertilizers, metals, machinery, and manufactured goods at a time when both sides want to expand commercial ties. The INSTC already promises transit times of roughly 20-25 days, compared with about 40 days by traditional sea routes. A fully overland link, if it ever materialized and operated efficiently, would further reduce transportation times.

Khusnullin’s idea will move beyond exploratory talks only when there is financing, political will, and a better security situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The Taliban has publicly expressed support for such connectivity if it creates jobs, but Pakistan remains the main obstacle because of its unwillingness to cooperate with India.

For India, the main interests are new routes, suppliers, stockpiles, and diplomatic arrangements to reduce its exposure to disruptions beyond its control. Moscow’s proposal, even if the land corridor is ambitious and difficult to build, would help India bypass vulnerable chokepoints.