Vasily Nebenzya, the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, stated that Moscow does not see a path to extending the grain agreement at this time. The message from Russian diplomacy centers on a core precondition: any further extension requires full implementation of the five points previously outlined, with a clear understanding that the memorandum of understanding between Russia and the United Nations must remain functional. Despite sustained efforts by the UN Secretariat and the Secretary-General, Moscow is firm in its position that an extension is not viable so long as those key provisions remain unmet.
The diplomat attributed the obstacles to unilateral sanctions imposed by Western nations, arguing that the actions taken by the United States and the European Union have created a perception of restrictions around food and fertilizers, even though these products themselves are not the target of sanctions. The point, as presented by Nebenzya, is that the related activities—such as shipping, insurance, and financial transfers—are entangled with sanctions regimes, effectively interfering with the entire export chain linked to agricultural inputs and foodstuffs.
He emphasized that the problem, in his view, is not simply about isolated measures but about a broader system that labels normal trade operations as risky or restricted. Moscow has observed what it calls a pattern of one-off arrangements that fail to provide a sustainable, structural solution to the longer-term issues affecting grain shipments from the region. According to Nebenzya, such episodic fixes do not address the underlying frictions that hinder consistent, predictable exports and the smooth functioning of the memorandum’s framework.
Further commentary from Russian officials has underscored a parallel line of concern regarding ammonia supplies. Sergey Vershinin, a former Deputy Foreign Minister, remarked that the continuation of the Black Sea grain initiative cannot be meaningfully discussed without resolving the ammonia-related impediments facing Russia. The ammonia component, he suggests, is integral to the broader export mechanism and its disruption complicates negotiations and operational feasibility. This stance reflects a broader theme in Moscow’s diplomacy: interlinked export interests require parallel, mutually reinforcing agreements to sustain any expanded pathway for grain movements in the region. [attribution: TASS]
In summary, the Russian side maintains that any future extension of the grain initiative is conditional upon the comprehensive fulfillment of the five-point plan, the removal or reframing of restrictive measures affecting related export activities, and a reliable resolution to ammonia supply issues. Diplomats argue that only through a holistic approach—one that aligns sanctions, logistics, and cross-border trade with the agreed framework—can the memorandum remain viable and functional for all parties involved. The conversation, as framed by Moscow, continues to stress that piecemeal or temporary arrangements do not substitute for a stable, lasting mechanism capable of supporting regional food security and international market stability. [attribution: TASS]