The recent briefing delivered to the Security Council highlighted ongoing concerns about the implementation of the Black Sea grain corridor and the related export pathways for essential agricultural inputs. Senior UN officials emphasized that while the grain agreement outlines the mechanics for facilitating shipments, practical steps to export ammonia-based fertilizer from Russia have not yet been set in motion. This assessment follows reports from the Russian press agency TASS, which noted gaps in the procedural framework needed to move ammonia exports forward despite the broader grain corridor commitments.
During the discussion, Martin Griffiths, who serves as the UN Assistant Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs, reiterated that the Black Sea initiative is intended to support the transportation of critical agricultural supplies. However, he underscored that ammonia exports have not materialized within the expected timeline, creating concern about the broader fertilizer supply chain and its potential impact on global food security. The remarks reflect a patience-tested process where the grain corridor remains a cornerstone, but its ancillary components, including ammonia movement, require clearer operational agreements and timely actions from all involved parties.
In Ankara, Hulusi Akar, the former Minister of National Defense, noted Türkiye’s continued efforts to extend the grain deal and to ensure that the broader humanitarian and economic objectives linked to the corridor are preserved. The emphasis on sustained talks and practical commitments signals a recognition that a durable agreement must address multiple linked elements, not only the shipment of grains but also the ancillary inputs that support agricultural production and market stability across the region.
Concurrently, Stéphane Dujarric, the spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General, was asked about the ongoing disagreements surrounding a possible extension of the Black Sea grain agreement. He suggested that speculation should be set aside and that any extension discussions require careful, factual consideration of the evolving situation. His response pointed to the delicate balance between political consensus and on-the-ground practicality, noting that future decisions will hinge on verified conditions and the readiness of all parties to sustain, or even broaden, the corridor’s humanitarian benefits.
With the current term of the grain agreement approaching its expiration, the clock is ticking toward the scheduled deadline in mid-year. The assessment from UN officials is that the agreement remains a critical tool for stabilizing grain transfers from Ukraine while attempting to prevent price shocks for import-dependent economies. Yet the linkage to ammonia exports, which would broaden the scope of the humanitarian and agricultural relief framework, requires concrete progress in the form of coordinated shipments, secure logistics, and compliant regulatory steps across sectors and borders. Observers note that any extension would need to address not only the procedural logistics but also regional security assurances and the resilience of partner supply lines as global markets prepare for shifting demand and potential volatility as the consequence of policy changes, sanctions, or geopolitical developments.