Breaking news · Russia–Ukraine war · U.S. foreign policy · Energy security · Civilian protection · DINA analysis
WASHINGTON — October 16, 2026, 5:23 a.m. ET: President Donald Trump condemned Ukraine's renewed attacks on Russian oil refineries as a “disgrace,” arguing that the strikes raise global energy prices and intensifying public pressure on Kyiv after Ukraine ended a brief energy-infrastructure truce.
In an interview aired Thursday by Newsmax, Trump said Ukraine could choose other targets and should not strike diesel refineries needed by the global market. He also said he was “not a big fan” of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and described him as more difficult to negotiate with than Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The remarks are a material development following DINA's earlier report that Ukraine had resumed strikes on Russian refinery infrastructure. They put the American president publicly at odds with Kyiv's argument that Russia failed to honor the energy truce and that Russian oil revenue sustains the invasion.
Confirmed: Trump made the remarks in the Newsmax interview; Ukraine struck a Rosneft refinery in Russia's Ryazan region; and Russian missile and drone attacks continued against Ukrainian energy and civilian infrastructure. Reported but not independently resolved: Ukrainian officials say Russia violated the truce, while the Kremlin says Ukraine never stopped striking refineries. Public reporting does not independently verify every strike claimed by either side.
What changed
Trump moved beyond calling for both countries to stop attacks on energy targets. His new comments singled out Ukraine for criticism, connected its refinery strikes to worldwide fuel prices and openly questioned Zelenskyy's usefulness as a negotiating partner.
Reuters reported that Ukraine struck the Ryazan refinery after Zelenskyy said Kyiv would abandon the energy-site ceasefire because Russian attacks continued. The same report said Russia had targeted Ukrainian power facilities and knocked out supply to hundreds of thousands of people.
The Associated Press reported that three civilians were killed and six injured during a Russian drone attack on Ukraine's Kirovohrad region. Zelenskyy said Russia launched more than 850 drones and hit 15 regions; those totals were attributed to the Ukrainian government.
A growing U.S.–Ukraine rupture
The refinery dispute is part of a broader breakdown in relations. Zelenskyy said he felt betrayed after Trump reached a deal to import Russian diesel, announced an energy ceasefire Ukraine says Moscow did not observe and restricted military use of Starlink communications.
Reuters reported that two U.S. officials and one Western official said the Starlink restriction originated inside the White House, without identifying who ordered or implemented it. The Pentagon had not publicly explained the slowdown in the reporting reviewed by DINA.
Trump also suggested Ukraine should hold an election to replace Zelenskyy. That political demand is distinct from the immediate military dispute and raises additional questions about whether Washington is acting as a neutral mediator or applying disproportionate pressure to the country resisting Russia's invasion.
Why it matters
Russian refineries are military-economic targets because they supply fuel and revenue, but strikes can also affect civilian energy markets and global prices. Ukrainian power stations and substations likewise sustain civilian life, hospitals, communications and public safety.
The accountability question is therefore not whether energy infrastructure matters on only one side. It is whether the United States will apply a consistent rule to both countries, disclose the factual basis for its restrictions and explain how its policy advances a lawful and durable peace.
DINA editorial analysis
This section is DINA's progressive editorial analysis, not a statement of government policy. Trump's concern about global fuel prices is legitimate, but publicly condemning Ukraine while Russia continues attacking Ukrainian energy infrastructure creates a troubling double standard.
A credible peace policy must distinguish the aggressor from the invaded state while still requiring every military operation to comply with international humanitarian law. It should also protect civilians on both sides rather than treating Russian refinery capacity as economically indispensable while Ukrainian electricity is negotiable.
Congress should demand transparency about Starlink and intelligence restrictions, the Russian diesel arrangement, the legal framework for U.S. pressure on Kyiv and the administration's evidence that constraining Ukraine will produce negotiations rather than greater Russian leverage.
Strongest accountability questions
- What evidence supports Trump's claim that Ukraine's refinery strikes materially raised global oil prices?
- Did the administration determine that Russia violated the energy truce, and will it release that assessment?
- Who ordered the reported Starlink restrictions, under what authority and with what civilian-protection analysis?
- Does the United States apply the same standard to Russian attacks on Ukrainian power generation and distribution?
- What sanctions or monitoring conditions accompany the reported U.S. purchase of Russian diesel?
- What specific diplomatic concession is Washington seeking from Moscow in exchange for pressure on Kyiv?
Urgent records and follow-up requests
- Request the White House and Pentagon directives governing Starlink and intelligence support to Ukraine.
- Seek the administration's assessment of Russian and Ukrainian compliance with the energy truce.
- Obtain the terms, waivers and sanctions analysis connected to Russian diesel purchases.
- Request civilian-harm and energy-market assessments used in U.S. policy decisions.
- Track whether the administration applies comparable public pressure to Moscow over attacks on Ukraine's electrical system.