Winter Is Coming, But Russia Refuses To Stop The Energy War On Ukraine
By Ariel Cohen, Fletcher School alum and Senior Fellow at Atlantic Council
A massive attack by Russia against the Ukrainian energy infrastructure on Sunday, November 17th may have caused the Biden Administration to green-light Ukraine’s use of the U.S. ATACMS long-range missiles. Ukraine took parts of the Kursk region during its 2024 summer offensive and is struggling to hold on in the region as some 50,000 Russian forces, bolstered by North Korean troops, fight to regain control. Biden’s OK, long awaited by Kyiv, was followed by green lights from the French and British for use of their SCALP/Storm Shadow missiles, with a range of 250 km. Yet, most military experts and analysts doubt that the addition of these long-range systems into the battle for Kursk will bring a decisive turn in the ongoing war, let alone a Ukrainian victory.
Both sides in the hard-fought Russian invasion of Ukraine have endured strikes on their energy infrastructure. In a war that has killed and wounded hundreds of thousands on each side, these attacks have devastating, wide-spread impact, leading to significant economic strain and increased suffering even beyond the conflict zone.
Since March 2024, Russia has succeeded in destroying about half Ukraine’s electricity generation capacity, including key hydroelectric dams. In response, Ukraine struck Russia’s fuel infrastructure, damaging the refining capacity of Russian oil companies. In the global south, the impact of these energy fluctuations on fertilizer production, combined with the cutdown in Ukrainian agricultural exports due to the war, pushed the number of people suffering from acute food scarcity to an all-time high of 258 million.
Throughout spring and summer, Russia heavily targeted Ukraine’s natural gas storage sites, causing significant damage. Then came a lull that lasted for some two months, with no large-scale attacks on either side’s energy sectors. Some hoped that this might serve as the starting point for negotiations around a comprehensive peace agreement based, in part, on mutual interests in energy security.
Andriy Yermak, Head of the President’s Office for Ukraine, recently confirmed ongoing negotiations in Qatar regarding energy security, though these talks did not include Russia. Notably, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stressed that halting attacks on key infrastructure is crucial to de-escalating the fighting as part of the recent tour to present his Victory Plan to world leaders, including President Biden.
With winter coming in fast, a critical item at issue is the gas transit contract between Russia and Ukraine, which is set to expire on January 1, 2025. To date, even as the war has raged, Russian gas flowed to Europe. However, contract renewal now appears increasingly unlikely.
The reason for Ukraine’s occupation of the city of Sudzha as part of operations in Russia’s Kursk region is clear in this context. The city is situated on the transit corridor from Russia’s Western Siberian gas fields, until 2022 a massive money-maker for the Kremlin. The gas is piped through Ukraine to Europe, and the Sudzha district includes a gas metering station near the border. Sudzha could serve as a bargaining chip for Ukraine in future peace talks, possibly in trade for the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, captured by the Russians from Ukraine shortly after the start of the invasion in February 2022 and inactive since then.Donald Trump’s electoral sweep in the U.S. makes an energy-centric peace more likely. Under Trump’s leadership, the White House is likely to push hard to expand U.S. production and maintain low energy prices. Part of the package included in a potential peace deal might involve the U.S. reconsidering the sanctions it imposed on the Russian Federation in the wake of the 2022 invasion.
Statements by members of Trump’s inner circle suggest a possible freezing of the conflict along the current front lines, with European troops securing the demarcation along an 800-mile demilitarized zone, like in Korea.
After Trump’s inauguration, the global energy market may stabilize due to reduced sanctions pressure on Russia, or face turbulence if Russia rejects peace negotiations. The Kremlin’s reaction so far has been cautious: Putin congratulated Trump on the second day post the U.S. elections, calling the president-elect’s remarks on ending the war worthy of attention. However, Putin has also stated that the U.S. is Russia’s adversary in the struggle for the “new world order” regardless of who sits in the White House.
Russia has insisted on sanctions being lifted as a condition for a peace agreement, and now has renewed its destructive attacks on the Ukrainian energy sector. The recently proposed Zelenskyy Victory Plan met with considerable skepticism from Western partners, and Trump advisors have dismissed some of the Ukrainian government’s demands as unrealistic. Calls for an end to the war are growing louder.
In the past, the Trump administration used energy resources as leverage in trade and negotiations. A preliminary agreement between the warring parties to refrain from large-scale strikes on each other’s energy and fuel sectors could provide a first step toward a cease-fire. The incoming U.S. administration’s eagerness to end the conflict, Western skepticism of Zelensky’s Victory Plan, and threats to energy security are combining to press on Ukraine toward entering into negotiations. Still, it is imperative that Western support of Ukraine’s independence and territorial integrity remain the guiding principles of any future agreements.
(This post is republished from Forbes.)