grain deal
Russia observes the situation around the grain deal with careful attention, and President Vladimir Putin has stated that Moscow is weighing the option to suspend participation if not all commitments are fully honored. This approach reflects a broader assessment of how the agreement is being implemented and whether the promised actions align with Russia’s security and strategic interests.
“One potential path is to extend the agreement, then face delays or non-fulfillment of promises, but first see those promises fulfilled, and only then consider Russia’s continued involvement. That is a clear option I wanted to outline. We may pause our participation in this transaction if the terms are not met,” said the president, highlighting the conditional nature of any further engagement under the current framework.
“If everyone repeats the assurances that all commitments will be honored, let them actually fulfill those promises, and Russia will promptly rejoin the agreement,” Putin added in the same discourse. He attributed to the United Nations and its secretary-general, António Guterres, a sincere effort to ensure that the terms of the deal are observed, while noting in his assessment that those efforts have not achieved the desired success yet.
A Kremlin spokesman later clarified that the final decision on Russia’s participation in the grain agreement has not been made at this time. Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov emphasized that there is currently no grounds for optimism about a simple extension of the deal, underscoring a cautious stance until concrete progress is observed.
The grain deal is set to expire on Monday, July 17. It was originally signed on July 22, 2022, by representatives of Russia, Turkey, Ukraine, and the United Nations. The agreement facilitates the export of Ukrainian grain, food products, and fertilizers across the Black Sea, using three ports including Odessa, and is designed to address global food security concerns while managing maritime traffic in a volatile region.
Causes of SVR
In reiterating the rationale behind Russia’s military operation in Ukraine, Putin pointed to what he described as a real threat posed by Ukraine joining NATO. He framed that eastward expansion as a direct challenge to Russia’s security landscape, explaining that the alliance’s growth would heighten strategic risks for Moscow.
“One of the main factors behind the special military operation is the likelihood of Ukraine’s entry into NATO,” the president asserted. He warned that Ukraine’s accession would increase global instability and provoke additional tensions on the international stage, arguing that Russia must act to prevent such a scenario from unfolding.
Putin contends that NATO membership for Ukraine would not only alter military dynamics but would also complicate efforts to maintain strategic equilibrium in the region, making diplomacy more arduous and the security environment more volatile overall.
Guarantees to Ukraine
The leader also touched on the topic of security guarantees, saying that Kyiv does not object to discussing them, provided they do not compromise Moscow’s own security. He stressed that Russia is not against engaging in talks on guarantees for Ukraine, as long as those talks respect Russia’s legitimate security concerns and interests.
“Russia does not oppose discussions about security guarantees for Ukraine, but not at the expense of its own safety,” Putin stated. He noted that the positions announced by various Western actors, including those in NATO and the G7, do not present a barrier to such questions in principle, underlining a readiness to engage in dialogue on a careful, reciprocal basis.
Putin framed the issue as one of balance and proportionality, suggesting that security arrangements must preserve parity and avoid creating new lines of strategic vulnerability for Russia, while also acknowledging that Ukraine’s security needs are a real matter of concern for its own sovereignty and stability.
“Nothing Critical”
In a broader interview, Putin acknowledged that missiles supplied to Ukraine have caused damage to Russia, yet he characterized the impact as not having produced a critical shift on the front lines. He indicated that while losses and damage occur, they do not represent a tipping point that would fundamentally alter the course of the conflict in the near term.
He also commented on the broader expectations around long-range weapons, noting the considerable hope placed on their delivery and impact. Moscow remains attentive to how these weapons could influence strategic calculations on both sides, while continuing to monitor the evolving dynamics of the war and the broader international response.