The political-military analyst Dmitri Snegirev emphasizes that the so-called “energy armistice” should primarily be viewed in a political context. According to him, the very emergence of such signals is an indicator of the parties’ negotiation capacity and their potential readiness for further negotiations.
“An energy armistice is not a matter of who benefits more from it, Ukraine or Russia. Such formulations seem, in general, undiplomatic. It’s a signal from both parties about their readiness to negotiate,” the expert explains to Focus.
According to Snegirev, the emergence of information about a possible ban on strikes on energy infrastructure is not accidental. It serves a kind of “probing” – both of public opinion and of the positions of key participants in the potential negotiation process: Ukraine, Russia, and the United States. It’s about checking the level of trust and the real readiness of the parties to respect the agreements.
The analyst reminds that these signals appear against the backdrop of extremely limited public information about negotiations, especially after the contacts in Abu Dhabi. According to him, the very list of issues discussed there is indicative: not individual strikes or limited agreements, but the possibility of a complete cessation of the active phase of hostilities and mechanisms for verifying violations on the front line.
“In this context, the energy armistice is just one of the testing elements. If it works, then it makes sense to discuss broader agreements. If not, no negotiation table makes sense,” notes Snegirev.
The expert pays special attention to the reasons why Russia might be interested in such a format of agreement. According to his assessment, attacks on Russian oil refining infrastructure, oil and gas production have caused direct losses to the Russian economy of tens of billions of dollars. Russia’s budget deficit has reached record levels, and the increase in costs and decrease in revenues from energy exports create risks of social instability.
“For the Kremlin, not the strikes themselves are extremely dangerous, but their social consequences – fuel shortage, price increases, and tensions in the regions. This is what Putin fears the most,” the analyst emphasizes.
At the same time, according to Snegirev, Ukraine is also under serious pressure due to internal challenges. The situation in the energy sector, as well as in the coal and gas production sectors, remains critical. Strikes on infrastructure facilities, especially on oil transportation routes, create risks not only for the heating season but also for the stability of the Ukrainian economy as a whole.
Read more HERE