Over the past few months, Ukraine has intensified its drone strikes on Russian oil refineries, delivering a devastating blow to the country’s energy infrastructure.
While Ukraine carried out such attacks throughout 2024—sometimes to the dismay of the Biden administration—its latest operations, much like its incursion into Russia’s Kursk region, serve as a clear demonstration of strength. With these strikes, Ukraine not only exposes Russia’s vulnerabilities, but it also sends a message to U.S. President Donald Trump that Russia is weaker than it appears.
However, while Trump’s team previously signaled a willingness to take a more hawkish stance by suggesting stronger sanctions against Russia, recent events suggest the opposite. Instead of increasing pressure, Trump appears to be rewarding Putin for his aggression. Ultimately, Trump’s decisions on how the West should negotiate may depend on his mood. He might tend to sideline more hawkish advisors when it matters most.
Trump’s Contradictory Approach to Russia
The Trump administration’s diplomatic approach has left the Western world scratching its head. The administration has seemingly kneecapped the Western negotiating position in several ways.
First, Trump’s secretary of defense signaled that Ukraine must compromise on its territorial integrity and its aspirations to join NATO, seemingly giving in to Russian demands and downplaying Ukraine’s ability to reclaim its occupied land. Trump then prioritized talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
In a move that raised eyebrows in Kyiv, Trump’s first call was to Putin—an extensive 90-minute conversation—before finally he reached out to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. This sequence reinforced concerns that Ukraine was being sidelined in Washington’s diplomatic calculus. The Ukrainian leader reiterated that Ukraine would not accept any negotiations about its future unless it was directly involved, while European governments also insisted on a seat at the table.
The Trump administration’s approach raises questions about its negotiating strategy: conceding key points before talks even begin, showcasing what seems to be the art of making bad deals. Now, top Trump officials are in Saudi Arabia for peace talks. However, Zelenskyy stated that he had not been invited and warned that Ukraine “will never accept deals made behind our backs.”
The message to Putin is clear: Wait it out, and Ukraine will be abandoned, even if Russia walks away from peace talks.
However, U.S. Vice President JD Vance then attempted to reverse course and signal a tougher stance on Russia if Putin refuses to negotiate a peace deal that guarantees Ukraine’s sovereignty. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Vance emphasized that all options remain “on the table,” including economic and military measures to give Trump flexibility in negotiations.
Treston Wheat, chief geopolitical officer at Insight Forward and an adjunct professor at Georgetown, highlighted that Ukraine has great reason to worry about Trump’s approach. Despite his occasional tough talk on Russia, he has little affinity for Ukraine or Zelenskyy. Sustained U.S. support is unlikely, and it certainly won’t come at the level former U.S. President Joe Biden offered.
Europe is Wavering
Furthermore, even before negotiations took shape, Europe was already showing signs of wavering. According to the Financial Times, EU officials were considering resuming purchases of gas from Russian pipelines as part of a potential peace deal in the Russia-Ukraine war—despite strong opposition from Ukraine’s key allies and some Eastern European states.
Advocates, including officials from Hungary and Germany, argue that reopening the pipeline could stabilize Europe’s energy market and serve as an incentive for peace. The Economist wrote that, “Some European officials are eyeing Russian gas with greed. Lower energy bills could revive moribund European industry and reassure households.”
This debate comes in the wake of Ukraine’s decision to halt Russian gas transit to the EU—a move that triggered protests from Slovakia and Hungary. While most Russian pipeline gas to Europe has been cut off, some nations continue to import Russian liquefied natural gas. The EU has pledged to eliminate Russian fossil-fuel imports by 2027, but cracks in that resolve are beginning to show.
Ukraine’s Strategy and Russian Struggles
Despite mounting international pressure, Ukraine remains resolute in its approach. Oleksandr Syrskyi, commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, made it clear: “Military units, arsenals, storage warehouses, workshops of military-industrial complex enterprises, oil refineries, and other facilities will be attacked.”
The Ukrainians continue to expand their kinetic sanctions against Russian oil infrastructure, systematically targeting refineries and storage facilities throughout January and into February to disrupt the Kremlin’s war economy. The Ryazan Refinery—the third-largest in Russia—was knocked out of commission recently in two nights of Ukrainian drone strikes.
Another recent target was the Kstovo refinery in Nizhny Novgorod, Russia’s fourth-largest. Together, the two facilities mentioned above account for over 11% of the country’s refining capacity, producing essential diesel, jet fuel, gasoline, and other petroleum derivatives that keep the Russian economy running.
Ukrainian drones also struck a Lukoil-owned oil refinery in Russia’s Volgograd Oblast overnight on Jan. 31. The refinery is one of the country’s largest. Explosions were reported, though the extent of the damage is still being assessed. The refinery produces gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuel, making it a key target in Ukraine’s strategy to disrupt Russian military logistics. Ukraine followed up on Feb 3, with drones again striking the Lukoil refinery, which is located 500 kilometers (300 miles) from the frontline.
“While it is difficult to precisely assess the full impact of these strikes—since Russia is actively concealing information—their consequences are clearly significant and damaging,” Serhii Kuzan, chair of the think tank Ukrainian Security and Cooperation Center and former adviser to Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense, said in an interview.
“Each strike on a refinery results in financial losses in the tens of millions of dollars. For instance, the shutdown of the Yaroslavl refinery for just one day on January 24, 2025, caused an estimated loss of $8.6 million,” Kuzan noted. Ukraine has already struck the majority of Russia’s biggest oil refineries.
Russian bloggers, meanwhile, are in full meltdown mode. One panicked channel lamented:
“The war was in its third year. The enemy continued to successfully destroy the Russian oil refining and fuel storage system with moped planes that flew at a maximum speed of 120 km/h and were assembled from sh*t and sticks in Kharkov and Dnepropetrovsk garages. The oil refineries were not protected by air defense and are not protected. There are not even mobile groups with small arms. Or if they are, their work is not noticeable at all.”
As Ukraine’s drone campaign intensifies, Russian frustration is growing. Meanwhile, the Kremlin scrambles to patch vulnerabilities in an air-defense system that appears increasingly overwhelmed.
Russian media reported recently that Russia’s oil industry is under sustained pressure, highlighting that primary oil refining fell by 3.1%, while gasoline and diesel production dropped by 6.2% and 7.3% respectively in 2024. Drone attacks and sanctions have driven Russia’s oil-refining volumes in 2024 to their lowest levels in 12 years.
“The political, economic, and military costs for the Kremlin are rising as these strikes continue. Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian oil refineries are achieving what sanctions alone have not,” Kuzan explained.
Talks of a Settlement
The Trump administration appears to be pushing for a rapid peace deal, whether it is a good deal, or not.
Ukraine is determined to avoid repeating the mistakes of the Minsk agreements, which ultimately failed to secure lasting peace and in fact emboldened Russia’s future aggression. Kyiv understands that any settlement favoring Moscow without real security guarantees would merely set the stage for another, potentially larger Russian invasion.
With U.S. aid being reduced and current signals pointing toward a settlement that would be disastrous for Kyiv, Ukraine has both greater incentive to inflict maximum damage on Russia, and less reason to align with U.S. interests. Trump is already treating Ukraine as a junior partner in his discussions with Russia.
Energy prices have always been top of mind for U.S. administrations during this conflict. They are one of the reasons Biden waited until after the elections to start targeting Russia’s shadow oil-tanker fleet with sanctions—in order to not hurt his re-election bid. Biden also pressured Ukraine to halt attacks on Russian oil refineries to avoid spikes in the price of fuel ahead of the election.
The Trump administration, meanwhile, has framed lowering oil prices as a key tool to pressure Russia into ending the war, as part of its “sticks” approach. Ruth Deyermond, a senior lecturer in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London, notes, “Pushing for lower oil prices and claiming that this is related to the need to force Russia to the negotiating table gives the Trump admin the appearance of being tough on Putin while not actually doing anything that they wouldn’t want to do anyway.”
Ukrainian strikes decimating Russian oil refineries risk provoking frustration in Washington, yet they also lay bare a critical weakness: Moscow’s inability to shield its vital energy revenues, the lifeline of its war effort. Ukrainian drone strikes have reportedly knocked out 10% of Russia’s oil-refining capacity.
Old Russian T-62 Tank Fighting in Ukraine. Image Credit: Twitter.
A Defining Moment for U.S.-Ukraine Relations
If the U.S. halts aid, Ukraine will have no choice but to intensify attacks designed to inflict maximum damage on Russia and escalate the costs of war through kinetic sanctions.
President Trump also expressed his desire for Russia to be readmitted to the Group of Seven (G7) major economies, stating that it was a mistake to exclude them. But as Trump moves to strengthen ties with Putin, Russia is ramping up its provocations. A Russian drone recently struck Chernobyl, damaging the New Safe Confinement and sparking a fire at the site of one of history’s worst nuclear disasters. Perhaps Trump is simply oblivious to Putin’s overt blackmail of the West.
Yaroslav Trofimov, Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, commented on X: “Russia’s response to Trump’s peace overtures is to bomb the Chornobyl nuclear reactor sarcophagus that protects Europe from the spread of radioactive waste.”
Trump now faces a choice: Recognize Ukraine’s battlefield successes as leverage to tighten pressure on Putin, or continue appeasing the Kremlin. For now, Ukraine’s drones are delivering a clear message: Peace will be dictated by Ukrainian strength, not by weak deals.
About the Author: David Kirichenko
David Kirichenko is a freelance journalist and an Associate Research Fellow at the Henry Jackson Society, a London-based think tank. He can be found on X @DVKirichenko.
