Putin is in no hurry to agree to an energy ceasefire before winter - FT

The agreement between Ukraine and Russia on mutual cessation of strikes on energy facilities has not yet been concluded. Negotiations continue, but the Kremlin is in no hurry to agree to a ceasefire before winter, hoping to use strikes on Ukrainian energy as a lever of pressure on Kyiv.

This is reported by the Financial Times, citing officials directly involved in the negotiations and people familiar with the Kremlin's position.

According to the FT, the cessation of strikes on energy facilities has been discussed for a long time. Initially, this topic was raised during trilateral negotiations between the US, Ukraine and Russia, and after they stopped in February, contacts continued through separate channels and non-public negotiations.

Ukraine over recent months has proposed that Russia mutually cease not only strikes on energy facilities, but also attacks on ports and other critical infrastructure. FT interlocutors claim that Moscow has not shown interest in such an agreement, has rejected Ukrainian proposals and at the same time has stepped up attacks.

At the same time, a source familiar with Russia's position confirmed to the publication that negotiations on a possible energy ceasefire have resumed. However, people familiar with the Kremlin's logic claim that Vladimir Putin is not interested in a quick agreement before winter. Moscow expects that strikes on Ukrainian energy infrastructure during the cold period could increase pressure on Kyiv and force it to make concessions.

Against this background, US President Donald Trump's statement that Ukraine and Russia had allegedly already agreed not to attack each other's energy facilities effectively got ahead of the negotiation process. The FT writes that it caught Ukrainian officials by surprise, since at that point Kyiv had no reliable guarantees from Moscow.

An additional signal of the absence of a final agreement was the Kremlin's position after Trump's initial call to stop Ukrainian strikes on Russian refineries. Dmitry Peskov welcomed the call, but when asked whether Russia would in response stop strikes on Ukrainian economic infrastructure, he gave no specific promise.

A separate motive of the American side may be related to the sharp rise in the price of diesel fuel. Two senior Ukrainian officials told the FT that, in their view, Trump is seeking to demonstrate to American voters, unhappy with high fuel prices, an attempt to bring them down. According to the Associated Press, the average price of diesel in the US has already exceeded a record $6 per gallon.

At the same time, the assessment of the KSE Institute, conveyed to the Financial Times, contradicts Trump's claim that the main reason for the global diesel deficit were developments around Russia and Ukraine, not the war with Iran. According to the institute's calculations, from March to August exports of diesel and gasoil from the Persian Gulf countries fell by about 152 million barrels, while Russian exports fell by 68 million barrels. Thus, losses of supplies from the Persian Gulf were about 2.2 times greater.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian strikes did significantly affect the Russian fuel sector. According to KSE Institute, in July Russian seaborne exports of petroleum products fell by 31.6% month-on-month to 1.36 million barrels per day, the lowest level for the entire observation period. Amid the fuel shortage and attacks on refining facilities, Russia also introduced a ban on diesel exports in July.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, for his part, stated that Kyiv is ready to stop strikes on Russian energy only on condition that partners ensure a real cessation of Russian attacks on Ukrainian energy and other critical infrastructure. Ukraine expects concrete conditions and guarantees of implementation of such a deal.

Thus, the energy ceasefire has not yet come into effect: the parties continue contacts, but there are no final conditions and mutual guarantees. At the same time, information from the FT points out that the key obstacle remains the Kremlin's position, which may be interested in preserving the ability to attack Ukrainian energy infrastructure in winter.

Based on materials from: Financial Times, Associated Press, KSE Institute