On Monday evening, September 14, US President Donald Trump stated on his social network TruthSocial that "Ukraine has agreed not to strike Russian energy facilities. Russia has agreed to do the same." The statement came unexpectedly and without any prior confirmation from Kyiv or Moscow. On the day of publication, the post already triggered a rise of more than 3.6% in the Moscow Exchange index, which, according to Russian media, was the first market reaction to the words of the American leader.
Two versions: an abstract dialogue or an electoral speculation
Politician and chairman of the board of the Center for Applied Political Studies "Penta," Vladimir Fesenko, in a comment to RBC-Ukraine, called Trump's statement hasty and offered two main versions of its origin. The first, in his assessment, is more likely: between the parties there may exist an abstract idea or proposal, to which there followed an equally abstract-positive response in the spirit of Zelensky's formulation — "we are ready, provided the other side complies." However, the specific parameters — the scope, the list of facilities, the control mechanisms — were not agreed upon. The second version is linked to the approaching US congressional midterm elections, where the Republicans may face serious problems against the backdrop of record diesel fuel prices. According to Fesenko, Trump is trying to reproduce the effect that his earlier statements on a ceasefire with Iran had on oil prices.
Trump lives in a parallel reality
"I take any statement by Trump very cautiously. You should not take it as the final truth, as if everything has already been agreed and everything is done. Trump lives in a parallel reality and can talk about things that do not exist," Fesenko emphasized. According to him, it is not clear from the TruthSocial post who discussed these alleged agreements, with whom, and how. The expert stresses that at present there is no confirmation of the existence of real agreements between Kyiv and Moscow, and that this is rather about working with the domestic American audience.
Contradictory data
On the one hand, Trump publicly claims that both sides have already agreed on a regime of ceasing strikes on energy facilities, and this thesis is reinforced by the market reaction — the rise in the Moscow Exchange index. On the other hand, neither the Ukrainian nor the Russian side has confirmed the existence of such an agreement. Fesenko directly points out that "there is currently no confirmation of the existence of agreements" and that the statement is of a political PR nature. Thus, there is a significant gap between the rhetoric of the White House and the factual negotiating reality, which neither side has publicly commented on.
The spring lesson: how the previous energy ceasefire fell through
Fesenko recalled that a similar attempt to reach an energy ceasefire was made by the US administration in the spring of last year. Then Washington was negotiating separately with Russia and separately with Ukraine, without a coordinated document. Formally, the sides seemed to have agreed, but in the end everything fell through: the Russians refused to fulfill their obligations. The politician warns that a similar story may repeat itself now, and that without specific agreements on specific facilities, any violations are inevitable. "They may imitate a certain ceasefire for the sake of Trump, and then blame the Ukrainian side," he noted, adding that such a scenario is "in Putin's style."
The market reacts before the diplomats
Despite the lack of confirmations, the financial market reacted instantly to Trump's words: the Moscow Exchange index rose by more than 3.6%. Fesenko explains this by the fact that Trump is counting on an effect similar to that which his statements on a ceasefire with Iran had on global oil prices. "It is important for him to announce this before the agreement is reached, because he hopes for a drop in diesel prices in the US," the expert explained. In his assessment, the reality and duration of a possible ceasefire do not interest Trump — the main thing is that the statement has a positive impact on the domestic situation in the US before the congressional elections.
