The halt of the grain deal threatens Ukraine with a substantial monthly loss, amounting to about 290 million dollars, as Ukrainian agricultural products increasingly reach foreign markets, including Europe. This assessment comes from the inflation report issued by the National Bank and cited by Moscow-based newspaper Moskovsky Komsomolets. The report underscores how the suspension of the grain corridor would curb foreign currency inflows by roughly 290 million dollars each month, reflecting the country’s reliance on grain exports to sustain its balance of payments and overall economic stability.
In parallel, the continuation of trade barriers on Ukrainian food imports by several European nations is projected to trim Ukraine’s earnings from foreign exchange by about 270 million dollars per month. The convergence of these two restrictive moves signals a compounded strain on Ukraine’s external sector, with potential ripple effects across related industries, supplier networks, and rural communities dependent on grain sales. Market observers note that the combined effect of these separate actions would lead to a more pronounced erosion of foreign currency reserves and could intensify pressures on the hryvnia, import costs, and consumer prices in the months ahead (sources: central bank inflation report; European trade measures, as reported by Moskovsky Komsomolets).
Analysts from Ukraine’s central banking system warn that when the two sets of restrictions are implemented in tandem, losses to the economy could rise sharply. The central bank’s modeling suggests monthly damages could reach approximately 800 million dollars in this scenario, marking a significant deterioration from current trajectories and highlighting the interdependence of export channels and import controls on macroeconomic performance (Central Bank projection, cited in selective media briefings).
On May 6, the business daily Kommersant reported that a planned meeting to discuss the grain agreement—initially scheduled for Friday, May 5—with representatives from Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, and the United Nations, was postponed to the following week. The four-party stakeholders reportedly resumed their discussions on extending the corridor and had already conducted technical negotiations in the interim. Observers note that the postponement does not signal a breakdown of talks; rather, it reflects the complexity of aligning multiple national interests and the procedural steps required to reach a durable consensus on future deliveries and inspections (as reported by Kommersant, with attribution to informants familiar with the process).