On October 9, 2026, United States (US) President Donald Trump announced that an agreement had been reached regarding the supply of diesel fuel from Russia, following a telephone conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Under the agreement, it is anticipated that Russia will provide more than 300 thousand tons of diesel fuel in the initial phase, with an additional supply of 500 thousand tons in November.[i] Following this development, the US Department of the Treasury issued a temporary general license permitting certain transactions related to the sale, delivery, unloading, and import of Russian-origin diesel fuel until April 7, 2027.[ii]
Shortly after this development, it was reported that the Trump administration was considering lifting sanctions on certain ships, referred to as the “shadow fleet”, which have transported oil and petroleum products from countries such as Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, due to global maritime freight rates reaching record levels. This initiative aims to facilitate the transportation of oil and petroleum products not subject to US sanctions via these vessels and to increase shipments made from the Persian Gulf. [iii]
Evaluated together, these developments signal a possible shift in Washington’s sanctions policy toward Russia, while also bringing the dilemma between economic interests in energy markets and geopolitical objectives to the agenda. Although the initiative regarding the shadow fleet is still in the evaluation phase, the occurrence of these two developments within a short timeframe raises the question of whether a new approach to the use of sanctions has emerged in US foreign policy. Within this framework, the extent to which sanctions, relaxed in response to economic conditions, can maintain their long-term political effectiveness and credibility gains importance.
The economic pressures faced by the US occupy a significant place in the background of the diesel agreement reached with Russia. In particular, the disruptions caused by the war in Iran in global energy markets and rising fuel prices have brought Washington’s efforts to reduce energy costs to the forefront. As a matter of fact, when announcing the agreement, Trump declared that lowering prices for the American people, primarily for farmers, ranchers, and truck drivers, was a priority.[iv]
Economic and political concerns also come to the fore in the evaluation of easing sanctions on the shadow fleet. While tanker transportation rates have reached record levels due to the impact of the wars in Iran and Ukraine, the rising costs have reduced the accessibility of US oil for Asian refineries and directed these countries toward alternative supply sources in the Middle East and Latin America. On the other hand, high oil and fuel prices pose a political risk for the Trump administration ahead of the November 3, 2026, midterm elections, where Republicans aim to maintain their majority in both chambers of Congress. [v]
Both developments demonstrate the impact of domestic political and economic dynamics on foreign policy decisions. Considering the pressures created by the war in Iran on global energy markets and the approaching midterm elections, Washington’s aforementioned initiatives can also be associated with domestic political priorities. Therefore, these steps can be evaluated as short-term measures responding to specific economic and political needs, rather than a radical change in the US sanctions policy toward Russia.
Evaluated from Russia’s perspective, the economic benefits of this agreement come to the forefront. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak stated that the agreement is a positive development for the Russian economy and announced that diesel fuel will be exported both to global markets and directly to the US.[vi] The temporary easing of US sanctions may allow Russian exporters to reduce transportation costs and increase their export earnings by utilizing a wider fleet of tankers. Similarly, the realization of the proposal to lift sanctions on certain ships in the shadow fleet could indirectly alleviate the logistical constraints Russia faces in its energy exports. However, the continuation of European Union sanctions limits the scope of these economic gains. [vii]
The geopolitical importance of the agreement for Moscow goes beyond the limited economic gains it will provide. While the war in Ukraine and sanctions against Russia continue, Washington’s facilitation of Russian diesel’s access to international markets and its consideration of easing restrictions on the shadow fleet demonstrate that Russia’s strategic importance in global energy markets persists. However, the fact that these steps are largely linked to the US’s short-term economic priorities and that the initiative regarding the shadow fleet is still in the evaluation phase does not mean they will turn into a permanent diplomatic gain for Russia.
The US’s diesel agreement with Russia has drawn reactions from various actors, primarily Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy argued that the agreement would not be sufficient to compensate for the impact of disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz on global energy markets, but would instead provide Russia with additional revenue that could be used to finance the war.[viii] Similarly, the agreement was criticized by the European Union, which emphasized that sanctions against Russia would continue despite Washington’s decision. Kaja Kallas, High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, stated that pressure on Russia must be increased to end the war, while Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kęstutis Budrys expressed his concerns that the agreement weakens transatlantic unity.[ix]
Despite these criticisms, it appears that Washington attributes a different diplomatic meaning to the diesel agreement. It was reported that Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, representatives of US President Donald Trump, stated during a meeting with Ukrainian officials in Miami that the agreement was part of an effort to guide Russia back to peace negotiations. In this context, it was evaluated that the agreement, by conveying a message to Moscow that the US is open to cooperation, could soften Russia’s stance and contribute to the resumption of peace talks.[x]
The steps taken by Washington indicate that a more selective and pragmatic approach in line with economic needs and diplomatic goals has been adopted, rather than a complete departure from the current sanctions policy toward Russia. Nevertheless, the fact that the easing of sanctions on the shadow fleet was brought to the agenda shortly after the diesel agreement makes it difficult to evaluate these steps solely as temporary economic measures and raises the possibility that a more comprehensive change in US policy on Russia may occur. Whether this approach will gain continuity can be evaluated more clearly in line with the policies Washington will pursue, especially after the midterm elections.
In conclusion, the diesel agreement reached with Russia and the proposal regarding the shadow fleet reveal the delicate balance between Washington’s economic priorities and geopolitical goals. These developments also demonstrate that sanctions can be used in different ways in line with economic and diplomatic objectives, rather than solely to create economic and political pressure. However, stretching sanctions in line with specific goals carries the potential to provide short-term gains, while also raising question marks regarding the effectiveness and credibility of sanctions in the long run. Therefore, the main issue for Washington is the extent to which the steps it takes in line with its economic interests and diplomatic goals will affect the integrity of its sanctions policy toward Russia.
[i] Michelle L. Price ve Collin Binkley, “Trump strikes deal with Putin to get diesel in sharp reversal of US policy weeks before midterms”, AP News, https://apnews.com/article/trump-russia-diesel-midterms-12baccc7aade559bf329079b0548c9da, (Date of Access: 18.10.2026).
[ii] U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Issuance of Russia-related General License”, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), https://ofac.treasury.gov/recent-actions/20261009_33, (Date of Access: 18.10.2026).
[iii] Timothy Gardner ve Jarrett Renshaw, “US considers removing sanctions on some shadow fleet vessels to cut freight rates, official says”, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-considers-easing-sanctions-shadow-fleet-vessels-cut-freight-rates-official-2026-10-15/, (Date of Access: 18.10.2026).
[iv] Michelle L. Price ve Collin Binkley, a.g.m.
[v] Timothy Gardner ve Jarrett Renshaw, a.g.m.
[vi] “Kremlin Says Russia Restarts Diesel Exports After Deal With Trump”, The Moscow Times, https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2026/10/15/kremlin-says-russia-restarts-diesel-exports-after-deal-with-trump-a93977, (Date of Access: 18.10.2026).
[vii] Sergey Vakulenko, “How Will Trump and Putin’s Diesel Deal Impact Russia and Global Markets?”, Carnegie Endowment, https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/politika/2026/10/russia-usa-diesel-agreement, (Date of Access: 18.10.2026).
[viii] Lili Bayer, Andrew Gray ve Yuliia Dysa, “Zelenskiy blasts Trump’s diesel deal and calls Russian peace moves a ‘parody’”, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-leaders-rally-around-zelenskiy-trump-calls-ukrainian-strikes-russia-disgrace-2026-10-16/, (Date of Access: 18.10.2026).
[ix] Jorge Liboreiro, “EU decries ‘concerning’ Trump-Putin deal, insists sanctions on Russia will continue”, Euronews, https://www.euronews.com/2026/10/12/eu-decries-concerning-trump-putin-deal-insists-sanctions-on-russia-will-continue, (Date of Access: 18.10.2026).
[x] Erin Banco, Daniel Flynn ve Gram Slattery, “US hopes diesel deal can ‘soften’ Moscow on peace talks, sources say”, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-hopes-diesel-deal-can-soften-moscow-peace-talks-sources-say-2026-10-12/, (Date of Access: 18.10.2026).
