Russian Officials Challenge EU Commitments on Grain Deal as Turkey Sees Common Ground with Putin
Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova challenged the European Union’s willingness to fulfill its obligations under the grain package agreement, speaking during a briefing that drew attention to recent EU statements and actions on the issue. Zakharova’s remarks framed the EU as hesitating over the second part of the package while insisting on the necessity of meeting the first part, framing the situation as a test of political will rather than a purely logistical hurdle. The briefing touched on how EU measures interact with Russia’s actions in Ukraine, and how those actions influence the global grain supply chain, especially for African nations.
In referencing the EU’s approach, Zakharova recalled comments by Josep Borrell, the EU’s high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, about famine threats in Africa. She pointed out that, in her reading, Borrell acknowledged problems stemming from Russia’s actions but implied that EU sanctions themselves were not the source of these problems. Zakharova argued that there is a contradiction between Borrell’s earlier assertions and his later statements about the deteriorating supply of food to Africa, suggesting that EU assurances do not align with the current realities on the ground. This interpretation was presented as evidence that the Union is not fully committed to implementing the grain agreement as agreed.
Zakharova further stated that the EU’s stance indicates a selective commitment to the package, noting that Brussels may have treated the first part as mandatory while treating the second part as optional. She cast this as a failure to complete the “homework” required to unlock broader benefits from the agreement for developing regions that depend on grain shipments. The diplomat described the situation as a strategic error, arguing that half measures undermine the purpose of the package and could hinder progress toward stabilizing food supplies in vulnerable areas. The remarks were framed as part of a broader narrative about accountability and the reliability of international commitments in times of crisis [CITATION: TASS].
In a parallel thread of commentary, former Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan offered his own assessment of the grain issue, aligning with the broader objective of increasing the flow of food from major grain exporters to developed economies. Erdogan expressed agreement with President Vladimir Putin on the importance of resuming grain shipments from Ukraine to higher-income countries and underscored Turkey’s support for initiating food shipments from Russia as well. He added that this topic would be a key item on the agenda in a forthcoming meeting with Putin, set to take place in Samarkand. Erdogan’s remarks reflect a broader regional interest in reconfiguring supply routes and ensuring that grain moves efficiently to markets that need it most, all within the context of ongoing diplomatic negotiations [CITATION: Reuters/Associated Reports].
Analysts note the delicate balance of public messaging from Moscow and Ankara as they navigate competing narratives about grain supply, humanitarian needs, and sanctions policy. The discussions emphasize how shifts in tone from European and Turkish leaders can influence negotiations and the operational realities of grain corridors. Observers point out that much of the current discourse centers on the interplay between political commitments and practical delivery, with particular attention paid to how sanctions regimes interact with export logistics and international guarantees. The conversation highlights the essential role of reliable, transparent communication in maintaining confidence among importers and global partners who rely on predictable grain flows. The ongoing dialogue is also seen as a signal of how regional powers may shape future arrangements, including potential agreements or amendments to existing frameworks that aim to ensure steady food access for Africa and other regions at risk of shortages [CITATION: Global Trade Analysis].