The Kremlin called the energy truce a good idea and laid out conditions for Trump
The Kremlin called U.S. President Donald Trump’s idea of an “energy truce” between Ukraine and Russia a good one, but stated that, for it to be implemented, the safety of Russian oil tankers must be guaranteed and sanctions must be eased.
According to him, Moscow is awaiting public details of Trump’s initiative and supports negotiations toward a peaceful settlement.
“Overall, we certainly believe this is a very good idea, a good initiative. We are in contact with the Americans; we are always in favor of peaceful solutions,” Peskov said.
At the same time, the Kremlin spokesman stated that increasing oil production and refining alone will not solve global problems if Russia is unable to safely export petroleum products.
“It is necessary to ensure safe commercial shipping, particularly for oil tankers. The Kyiv regime is not yet inclined to create such security. And you know that it is not only our oil tankers that are suffering, but also respect for other countries,” Peskov said.
Thus, one of the conditions Moscow links to an energy truce is the cessation of strikes on Russian oil facilities and the assurance of safe navigation for tankers.
Peskov named the lifting of restrictions on the supply of Russian energy resources to global markets as the second condition.
“Of course, these restrictions must be lifted. These are illegal restrictions on the supply of energy resources worldwide. And only then—only then—will the world be saturated, and global markets and prices will go down,” he said.
According to the Kremlin’s logic, restoring full access for Russian energy resources to the international market should increase supply and help lower global prices.
The day before, Donald Trump stated that Ukraine and Russia had allegedly agreed not to strike each other’s energy facilities.
“Ukraine has agreed not to target any energy facilities, and Russia has agreed to do the same,” the U.S. president wrote.
A few hours later, Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated that Ukraine is ready to cease such strikes provided that its partners can guarantee that Russia will refrain from attacking Ukraine’s energy sector, critical infrastructure, and food transport routes.
“Ukraine is not convinced that Russia is willing to abide by any agreements,” Zelenskyy noted.
At the same time, a Russian source familiar with the course of negotiations in Moscow between the American delegation and Vladimir Putin stated that no decision on an “energy truce” was made during the latest meeting.
“Trump’s off-the-cuff remark,” the source said.
On Tuesday morning, Ukraine and Russia exchanged strikes on energy infrastructure facilities.
Trump’s statement came after he publicly criticized Ukrainian attacks on Russian oil refineries.
The day before, the U.S. president called on Ukraine to stop the attacks, which, he said, are disrupting Russian diesel fuel production. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, for his part, stated that such strikes help alleviate the fuel shortage and curb price increases.
Two high-ranking Ukrainian officials, speaking to the Financial Times, suggested that Trump’s position may be linked, in particular, to U.S. domestic politics. In their view, the president is seeking to demonstrate to voters concerned about high fuel prices that he is trying to help lower them.
Thus, the Kremlin supports the idea of an “energy truce,” but at the same time links it to a halt to strikes on Russian oil facilities, the protection of tankers, and the easing of sanctions against Russian energy resources.
This was stated by Russian Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov.
During the latest talks in Moscow between the U.S. delegation and Vladimir Putin, no decision was reached on an energy truce.
Trump claimed there was an alleged agreement between Ukraine and Russia not to attack energy infrastructure.
We also reported that Trump was quick to announce an energy ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia — FT
Ukraine proposed that Russia agree to stop attacks on infrastructure—Zelenskyy.
Zelenskyy warned Russia of a response to attacks on energy infrastructure.
