A moratorium on attacks on ships in the Black Sea seems to be contingent on sanctions relief — a key Kremlin demand.
The Kremlin is pressing its advantage with a White House that is impatient to show that US President Donald Trump is the only leader who can deliver peace in the Kremlin’s war against Ukraine.
At first blush, the deal agreed by US negotiators in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday offers concession on concession to the Kremlin, leaving observers to question whether Russia had given anything to secure its first offer of sanctions relief since the beginning of the war.
Russia and Ukraine have agreed to a moratorium on attacking each other’s ships in the Black Sea — a theater of the war where Ukraine’s use of seaborne drones and special operations units had put the Russians on the defensive, largely penning the Russian fleet close to the shore.
However, the White House account of the agreement did not even include the fine print. In its readout, the Kremlin said that it would only implement the Black Sea ceasefire once the US delivers sanctions relief on Russian agricultural products and fertilizers, as well as delisting a major state-owned bank called Rosselkhozbank that services the Russian agricultural industry.
That would be the first significant rollback of sanctions on Russia since the war began, and indicates that Moscow would seek a dual price to halt its war against Ukraine: political and military concessions from Ukraine as well as an escape from the international isolation that began after its full-scale invasion in 2022.
So far, it looks like that is a deal that the Trump administration is willing to make.
“The ‘Russian art of the deal’ is selling Russian demands as Russian concessions to the Americans, and then demand sanctions relief on top,” wrote Janis Kluge, a researcher who focuses on the Russian economy at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, a think tank.
“The demand here is that Ukraine is not allowed to attack Russian warships any more and Russia gets to inspect Ukrainian ships,” Kluge wrote.
Any sanctions relief on Russia would be limited by the readiness of Europe to take similar steps — but Tuesday’s deal still reflects a serious reorientation of the diplomacy around Ukraine and leaves Europe more isolated in restraining Russia.
Ukraine had opposed any rollback on sanctions against the Kremlin. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said that he considered it to be a “weakening of our position and the easing of sanctions” against Russia, a position that was not compatible with an “unconditional ceasefire” against energy infrastructure and at sea.
It also appears that either the White House hid the plans to ease sanctions — or US negotiators were themselves surprised by the Russian demand that limits on trade and finance be eased to achieve the main deliverable that the White House wants: the ability to declare even a partial ceasefire in Ukraine.
“This wasn’t in the agenda before the meeting,” Zelenskiy said on Tuesday. “The Russians, as far as we know, have raised the issue of the American assistance to transport their agricultural products ... We didn’t agree to that so that it would be in our common [statement].”
Zelenskiy sought to sound upbeat during his remarks, and said that at least now Kyiv could appeal to the White House if Russia chose to violate the ceasefire against Ukraine in the coming month.
Ukraine could also demand new sanctions against Russia if that happens, he said.
However, there are considerable doubts that Trump would be ready to slap further sanctions on Russia. His envoy Steve Witkoff has spent “really a lot of time in dialogue with Putin,” Zelenskiy said, explaining why the White House messaging on the war sounds so much like the Kremlin narrative.
In negotiations, a deal that does not work for both sides would collapse sooner or later. Tuesday’s agreement — and the separate statements that have emerged — would raise further questions of whether the US can mediate a conflict in which it appears to clearly sympathize with the Kremlin.
Andrew Roth is the Guardian’s global affairs correspondent based in Washington. He covers the US Department of State and US foreign policy. He was previously based in Russia for more than a decade, where he was the Guardian’s Moscow correspondent and reported on the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
RSS