Trump slaps ‘tremendous’ sanctions on Russian oil for Ukraine war Azad News HD
Introducing
On Wednesday, October 22–23 2025, the United States took a decisive step in its policy toward Russia’s energy sector and the ongoing war in Ukraine: President Donald Trump announced sanctions on Russia’s two largest oil companies, Rosneft and Lukoil, signalling a sharp escalation in Washington’s economic pressure on Moscow. The move came amid growing frustration with Russia’s unwillingness to engage seriously in peace talks over its invasion of Ukraine, and followed the cancellation of a proposed summit between Trump and Putin that the U.S. president said “just didn’t feel right.”
In his remarks, Trump acknowledged that he had “good conversations” with Putin, but lamented they “just don’t go anywhere. They just don’t go anywhere.” The sanctions represent a marked shift in the U.S. approach—where earlier diplomatic efforts appeared to favour direct engagement with Moscow, this decision underscores a readiness to leverage Russia’s economic vulnerabilities, especially in the energy sector, to drive the Kremlin toward negotiation.
Background: War in Ukraine and Energy as Leverage
To understand the significance of the sanctions, one must place them in the context of the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine. Since Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in early 2022, the conflict has drawn in multiple dimensions: military, humanitarian, economic, diplomatic. Western governments, including the U.S. and the European Union, have imposed multiple rounds of sanctions targeting Russia’s finance, defence and energy sectors.
Energy—especially oil and gas—has long been central to Russia’s economy and to its ability to fund military operations. By reducing Russia’s ability to export oil or access global capital and payment systems, Western states hope to reduce Moscow’s war-fighting capacity, impose costs, and force a return to the negotiating table. The newly announced U.S. sanctions on Rosneft and Lukoil thus strike at the heart of Russia’s energy export powerhouse.
According to the U.S. Treasury Department, the sanctions designate these companies and many of their subsidiaries, freeze their U.S.-based assets and bar U.S. persons and companies from doing business with them. The Treasury characterised the move as targeting the Kremlin’s war-machine: “Given President Putin’s refusal to end this senseless war, Treasury is sanctioning Russia’s two largest oil companies that fund the Kremlin’s war machine.”
On the day of the announcement, Trump said the sanctions were “tremendous” and added: “We hope that they won’t be on for long. We hope that the war will be settled.”
Why Now? The Diplomatic Frustration and the Summit Cancellation
One key driver behind the timing of the sanctions is President Trump’s expressed frustration with the progress (or lack thereof) in talks with Putin. As reported, Trump said: “Every time I speak with Vladimir [Putin], I have good conversations, and then they don’t go anywhere. They just don’t go anywhere.”
Earlier in the week, a proposed summit between Trump and Putin—expected to be held in Budapest, Hungary—was cancelled. Trump explained the cancellation this way: “We cancelled the meeting with President Putin. It just didn’t feel right to me. It didn’t feel like we were going to get to the place we have to get. So I cancelled it.”
The cancellation, and then the announcement of sanctions, suggest a shift from a purely diplomatic track toward a more hard-line economic-coercion strategy, at least in this instance. Rather than meeting simply for the sake of meeting, Trump signalled that unless meaningful steps toward peace were made, economic pressure would be applied. The statement from the Treasury echoed this sentiment: it emphasised Moscow’s “lack of serious commitment to a peace process” and declared that “now is the time to stop the killing and for an immediate cease-fire.”
The Targeted Companies: Rosneft and Lukoil
The sanctions focus on two major Russian oil firms:
-
Rosneft: Russia’s largest oil company in terms of production and revenue. It is closely linked to the Kremlin—its head, Igor Sechin, is a long-standing Putin ally. According to Reuters, in 2024 Rosneft produced 184 million metric tons of oil and gas condensate (equivalent to about 3.7 million barrels per day) and accounted for roughly 3.3 % of global oil output.
-
Lukoil: Russia’s second-largest producer (and largest private oil firm). It produced around 80.4 million tons in 2024, and refining volumes of 54.3 million tons domestically.
By sanctioning these two firms, the U.S. is attacking a significant share of Russia’s oil-sector capacity—companies that in combination account for roughly half of Russia’s oil output according to Reuters.
The san tions freeze U.S.-based assets of these companies and prohibit U.S. persons from engaging in transactions with them; foreign financial institutions dealing with them may also face penalties if they do business with the sanctioned firms.
Strategic Significance and Potential Impact
The strategic rationale behind targeting Rosneft and Lukoil is relatively clear: reduce Russia’s ability to fund its war effort via oil exports, degrade its capacity to sustain military operations, and thereby increase the incentives for Moscow to negotiate.
Revenue stream cut-off: Oil exports provide Moscow with significant foreign-currency revenue and funds for its military budget. By restricting access of these major companies to U.S. financial systems, and discouraging international partners from doing business with them, the U.S. aims to disrupt a key revenue channel.
Signalling to Russia and the world: The sanctions also serve as a political signal—to Moscow that continued refusal to engage seriously in peace talks will carry escalating costs, and to allies and partners that the U.S. is prepared to apply pressure on the energy front.
Encouraging allied coordination: The U.S. Treasury’s announcement explicitly calls on allies to adopt the measures: “We encourage our allies to join us in and adhere to these sanctions.” Indeed, on the same day, the European Union announced its 19th package of sanctions on Russia, including a ban on Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports.
Potential leverage for negotiations: If successful, pressure on Russia’s energy-sector could give the U.S. and its partners more leverage at the bargaining table, potentially compelling Moscow toward a cease-fire or peace terms more favourable to Ukraine. President Trump indicated as much, saying he hoped the sanctions would be temporary and that the war “will be settled.”
However, the actual impact depends heavily on enforcement, global oil‐market responses, and the extent to which other countries continue to buy Russian oil.
Challenges and Limitations
While the sanctions are severe, there are important caveats and potential limits to their effectiveness.
Global buyers and alternate markets: Russia continues to sell oil to major buyers outside the U.S. and EU, particularly in Asia (e.g., China and India). Even with sanctions on Rosneft and Lukoil, the existence of alternative buyers and routes means that Moscow may be able to mitigate the impact. Reports note that Chinese and Indian importers of Russian oil were not directly targeted by these U.S. sanctions.
Oil‐market dynamics: If Russian exports fall sharply, global oil prices may rise, which could blunt the financial pain for Moscow by increasing unit revenues per barrel, or prompt other producers to ramp up production. Moreover, companies and countries with interests in uninterrupted oil flow may resist stricter enforcement. For example, some European countries that depend on Russian oil or gas may be hesitant to adopt sweeping measures.
Duration and willingness to sacrifice: Russia may be willing to absorb short-term pain to pursue its strategic objectives (territorial, military) in Ukraine. If Kremlin leadership regards the war as vital, even a degraded energy sector may not compel a favourable settlement. Also, the Russian economy has been under sanctions since 2022 and has adjusted accordingly.
Risk of retaliation or escalation: Sanctions on major energy firms carry risk of escalation. Moscow might retaliate by restricting exports, undertaking weaponised energy measures (e.g., supply cuts), or escalating the war in Ukraine to counter Western pressure. The success of such sanctions depends in part on broader geopolitical responses, including from allies, non-aligned states, and energy markets.
Diplomatic paradox: President Trump’s cancellation of the summit with President Putin highlights the diplomatic frustration behind the decision. But the U.S. must still balance between coercive pressure and the possibility of future engagement. If Russia perceives the U.S. as shifting too far away from diplomacy, Moscow may dig in rather than negotiate. Trump himself acknowledged the possibility of resuming talks in the future.
Reactions and Implications
Ukraine and its allies: The sanctions were welcomed by Ukrainian government officials. For instance, Ukraine’s ambassador to the U.S., Olha Stefanishyna, said the decision “fully aligns with Ukraine’s consistent position that peace can only be achieved through strength and by exerting maximum pressure on the aggressor using all available international instruments. For Kyiv, cutting Russia’s energy revenue remains a key objective in forcing Moscow to the negotiating table.
Russia’s response: At the time of the announcement, the Kremlin had not formally responded in detail to the U.S. measures, but previous behaviour suggests that Moscow may attempt to deflect the impact via alternative markets, domestic adjustments, and heightened rhetoric of resistance. The sanctions may deepen Russia’s economic isolation in Western markets, but the immediate blow will depend on how Russia adapts.
Allied coordination: U.S. coordination with the European Union and NATO remains critical. The EU’s announcement of a new sanctions package—including an LNG ban—on the same day underscores the alignment of Western partners in using energy sanctions as a tool. The U.S. Treasury’s call for allied participation is aimed at closing loopholes and preventing Russia from circumventing Western financial systems via third-party actors.
Oil market consequences: Immediately following the sanctions announcement, oil markets reacted. Some reports noted upward pressure on oil prices as traders weighed the possibility of reduced Russian crude flows. While price effects can be volatile, the effect underscores that energy markets are sensitive to large policy shifts. In turn, higher global prices could cushion Russia’s pain or complicate the impact of sanctions on Western economies.
What It Says About U.S. Policy Under Trump
This sanctions decision reveals a few noteworthy features of President Trump’s approach:
Willingness to shift course: Though Trump had in his early term been more focused on direct diplomacy with Russia—announcing intentions of high-level summits and negotiating deals—the sanctioning of Russia’s leading oil firms marks a willingness to use coercive economic measures when diplomatic outreach fails to deliver results.
Transactional diplomacy: Trump’s comments suggest a transactional worldview: he emphasised that meetings must “get to the place we have to get,” otherwise “they don’t go anywhere.” That indicates a readiness to withdraw from negotiations if they are not productive and shift to other tools.
Short-term hope, long-term uncertainty: Trump expressed hope the sanctions would not last indefinitely: “We hope that the war will be settled.” But he also flagged that further action may follow if Russia persists. The tension between an exit strategy and sustained pressure is evident.
Energy and geopolitics: By targeting oil companies, the U.S. is explicitly leveraging energy markets as a foreign-policy instrument. This underscores how intertwined geopolitics and energy supply have become, especially in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Risks Ahead and What to Watch
Several key questions will shape how the situation develops:
-
Will other major buyers reduce or cease imports of Russian oil? If India, China or other significant purchasers continue or expand purchases from Russia, the effectiveness of the sanctions could be undermined. The U.S. statement acknowledged that Chinese and Indian buyers were not directly targeted, but indicated they would be part of the broader pressure strategy.
-
Will the EU and other allies fully implement and enforce sanctions? Partial compliance or carve-outs by certain states (for example those still heavily reliant on Russian energy) could weaken the impact.
-
How will Russia respond? Will Moscow escalate militarily, reduce exports unilaterally, or shift its energy relationships more aggressively toward non-Western buyers? Such responses could reshape the energy landscape.
-
Could oil prices spiral? If Russian exports are significantly curtailed, global oil supply could tighten, leading to higher prices. If that happens, it may benefit Russia financially (higher per‐barrel revenues) or impose costs on the West (higher energy prices) which could reduce political appetite for sustained sanctions.
-
Will diplomacy resume? Despite the sanctions and cancellation of the summit, Trump and others have not ruled out returning to talks. Whether Russia believes serious negotiation is possible will affect how the pressure dynamic evolves.
-
Are further rounds of sanctions likely? The Treasury’s language suggests that what was announced is not necessarily the limit: “Treasury is prepared to take further action if necessary.” Monitoring whether the U.S. moves to secondary sanctions (targeting third-party intermediaries) or expands to other sectors will be crucial.
A Larger Geopolitical Landscape
Beyond the immediate U.S.–Russia–Ukraine triangle, the sanctions must be seen in the broader geopolitical frame:
Russia’s pivot to Asia: As Western sanctions increase, Russia has deepened its energy ties with Asian buyers, including China and India. Diversification toward non-Western markets is a strategic priority for Moscow.
Energy security concerns in Europe: The EU’s reliance on Russian oil and gas has long been a vulnerability. The sanctions add pressure to accelerate decarbonisation, alternative supply routes, and energy diversification. The EU’s simultaneous move to ban Russian LNG imports underscores this urgency.
Global sanction regimes and unintended consequences: Energy sanctions carry risk of broad economic ripple-effects. Higher energy prices impact consumers, producers, and economies globally. They may also incentivise deeper cooperation among sanctioned states (e.g., Russia, China, Iran) or push energy trade toward non-Western payment systems and financial architectures.
The strategic calculus of war termination: For Ukraine and its allies, energy sanctions are part of a toolkit to push Moscow toward settlement. But war termination remains complex—territorial disputes, national security concerns, internal politics in Ukraine and Russia, and the costs of reconstruction all influence the prospects for peace. Economic pressure is only one factor among many.
Domestic political implications: For the U.S., imposing major sanctions is also a domestic-political act. It signals to constituencies (including Ukraine diaspora, defence hawks, allied governments) that the administration is taking strong action. It may also carry risks if the economic consequences (e.g., higher oil prices) turn unpopular.
A Narrative Chronology of the Decision
To chronicle the decision in sequence:
-
The war in Ukraine continues into its fourth year (2022–25), with heavy Russian military operations, periodic Ukrainian counter-attacks, and significant civilian casualties.
-
The U.S. and other Western countries have applied sanctions on Russia’s finance, defence, and energy sectors, but until now, Russia’s oil-giant firms have been less bluntly targeted by the U.S.
-
President Trump engages with the idea of a summit with Putin, seeking a negotiated settlement. Diplomatic outreach is emphasised publicly.
-
However, as talks fail to produce traction, Trump expresses frustration: “Every time I speak with Vladimir … they don’t go anywhere.”
-
The planned summit in Budapest is cancelled because Trump says it “didn’t feel right” to proceed without progress.
-
On October 22–23, 2025, the U.S. Treasury announces sweeping sanctions on Rosneft and Lukoil—freezing assets, banning U.S. business, and designating dozens of subsidiaries.
-
President Trump frames the move as necessary because of Putin’s “refusal to end this senseless war,” but expresses hope for peace and that sanctions will not be permanent: “We hope that the war will be settled.”
-
The European Union announces its 19th sanctions package on Russia on the same day, including a ban on Russian LNG imports—reflecting parallel efforts among Western allies.
-
Attention shifts to implementation: whether other countries follow suit, how Russia adapts, and how oil markets respond.
Concluding Reflections
In sum, the sanctions represent a clear inflection point in U.S. policy toward Russia’s energy sector and its war in Ukraine under President Trump. The message from Washington is that diplomatic overtures alone have not yielded results—and that economic leverage, particularly in energy, must now be employed.
Yet the real test lies ahead: Will these sanctions meaningfully degrade Russia’s war-fighting capacity? Will they coax Moscow back to the negotiating table under terms acceptable to Ukraine? Or will Russia absorb the hit, shift its partnerships, and continue the conflict with diminished but still viable capabilities? The answers will depend on a range of factors: allied solidarity, global energy markets, Russian resilience, and the broader geopolitics of Asia and Europe.
For President Trump, the decision demonstrates a willingness to move from talk to action—but also underscores the challenge of achieving peace via economic pressure alone. As he put it in the Oval Office: “We hope that the war will be settled.” The hope is real—so too is the uncertainty.
