Moscow Backs Proposed Energy Truce With Ukraine but Demands Sanctions Relief and Shipping Guarantees

The Kremlin announced on Tuesday that it is receptive to a United States proposal aimed at establishing a mutual moratorium on energy infrastructure strikes between Russia and Ukraine. However, Russian officials emphasized that any such arrangement must be accompanied by the lifting of Western economic sanctions and concrete security guarantees for commercial maritime navigation.

Addressing reporters in Moscow, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov characterized the proposal put forward by U.S. President Donald Trump as a constructive initiative. At the same time, Peskov cautioned that halting mutual strikes on energy installations would not, on its own, be sufficient to alleviate the severe price pressures currently destabilizing international energy markets.

According to the Russian leadership, stabilizing the international supply of refined petroleum requires addressing the broader legal and commercial restrictions imposed on Moscow. Peskov argued that Western sanctions on Russian energy exports represent unlawful barriers that directly impede the free flow of fuel to global consumers.

The Kremlin spokesperson maintained that only the formal removal of these economic measures would allow energy markets to normalize. He asserted that dismantling the sanctions regime is a necessary prerequisite for lowering global fuel prices and ensuring that nations worldwide receive adequate supplies of petroleum products.

In addition to sanctions relief, Moscow identified maritime security as an indispensable condition for any comprehensive energy settlement. Peskov underscored the urgent need to protect commercial shipping routes, with particular emphasis on ensuring unimpeded passage for oil tankers operating in contested waterways.

Peskov criticized authorities in Kyiv, claiming the Ukrainian government has failed to provide meaningful assurances regarding the safety of commercial vessels. He confirmed that Russian officials plan to maintain direct communication with their American counterparts to continue discussions surrounding the framework of Trump’s initiative.

The diplomatic overtures come amid conflicting accounts regarding the actual status of the proposed agreement. President Trump asserted on Monday that Moscow and Kyiv had already reached an understanding to halt attacks on energy assets. However, neither the Russian nor the Ukrainian government has formally confirmed the existence of an active ceasefire.

The reality on the battlefield further underscored the absence of a verified truce. On Tuesday, Russian forces carried out attacks against petrol stations in the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv, while Ukrainian military officials confirmed that their forces had launched a successful strike against a major oil refinery inside Russian territory.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy outlined Kyiv’s official position on Monday, stating that Ukraine remains open to an energy-specific ceasefire under specific terms. Zelenskiy made clear that Kyiv would only endorse such a pause if the United States could provide credible guarantees that Moscow is genuinely committed to concluding its broader military campaign.

Kyiv has consistently defended its deep-strike campaign against Russian industrial targets, maintaining that domestic refineries directly support the Kremlin's war effort and constitute legitimate military objectives. Ukrainian officials have also pointed to Russia’s relentless bombardment of Ukrainian power generation and municipal energy networks as justification for retaliatory actions.

The diplomatic push follows a direct appeal made by President Trump over the weekend. On Sunday, the U.S. leader urged President Zelenskiy to suspend strikes against Russian diesel refining facilities, warning that resulting fuel deficits were driving shortages and exerting severe economic harm on the global community.

Ukrainian precision strikes against Russian refining facilities over the summer significantly disrupted domestic fuel production, forcing Moscow to implement strict curbs on petroleum exports. This reduction in Russian supply exacerbated existing worldwide deficits of diesel, gasoline, and aviation fuel, contributing to broader inflationary trends across international economies.

While Washington has focused heavily on the European conflict’s role in energy market volatility, the Kremlin argued that the primary catalyst for global disruption lies in the Middle East. Russian officials reiterated on Monday that ongoing instability in the Persian Gulf remains the leading driver of international market turbulence.

The Middle Eastern crisis intensified significantly following military strikes launched by President Trump against Iran in February. In response to the American operation, Tehran moved to largely seal off the strategic Strait of Hormuz, a maritime chokepoint through which roughly twenty percent of the world’s petroleum and liquefied natural gas supplies traditionally transit.

Compounding the energy crisis, ongoing maritime clashes between Russia and Ukraine in the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov have added further strain to international supply chains. Both nations have repeatedly targeted commercial cargo vessels in the region, an escalation that has disrupted agricultural shipping and driven sharp increases in global grain prices.