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.
Two weeks ago, Malaysian actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) raised hackles in Taiwan by posting to her 2.6 million Instagram followers that she was visiting “Taipei, China.” Yeoh’s post continues a long-standing trend of Chinese propaganda that spreads disinformation about Taiwan’s political status and geography, aimed at deceiving the world into supporting its illegitimate claims to Taiwan, which is not and has never been part of China. Taiwan must respond to this blatant act of cognitive warfare. Failure to respond merely cedes ground to China to continue its efforts to conquer Taiwan in the global consciousness to justify an invasion. Taiwan’s government
Earlier signs suggest that US President Donald Trump’s policy on Taiwan is set to move in a more resolute direction, as his administration begins to take a tougher approach toward America’s main challenger at the global level, China. Despite its deepening economic woes, China continues to flex its muscles, including conducting provocative military drills off Taiwan, Australia and Vietnam recently. A recent Trump-signed memorandum on America’s investment policy was more about the China threat than about anything else. Singling out the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as a foreign adversary directing investments in American companies to obtain cutting-edge technologies, it said
The recent termination of Tibetan-language broadcasts by Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) is a significant setback for Tibetans both in Tibet and across the global diaspora. The broadcasts have long served as a vital lifeline, providing uncensored news, cultural preservation and a sense of connection for a community often isolated by geopolitical realities. For Tibetans living under Chinese rule, access to independent information is severely restricted. The Chinese government tightly controls media and censors content that challenges its narrative. VOA and RFA broadcasts have been among the few sources of uncensored news available to Tibetans, offering insights
“If you do not work in semiconductors, you are nothing in this country.” That is what an 18-year-old told me after my speech at the Kaohsiung International Youth Forum. It was a heartbreaking comment — one that highlights how Taiwan ignores the potential of the creative industry and the soft power that it generates. We all know what an Asian nation can achieve in that field. Japan led the way decades ago. South Korea followed with the enormous success of “hallyu” — also known as the Korean wave, referring to the global rise and spread of South Korean culture. Now Thailand
RSS