Hanna Notte, director of the Eurasia Nonproliferation Program at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies and a non-resident senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the latest developments were creating new tensions between Washington and Kyiv and further straining transatlantic relations.

　　"Politically, Russia is really the beneficiary here," Notte said.

　　She said the diesel agreement set a precedent allowing Moscow to conclude bilateral economic deals with Washington without first reaching a settlement on the Ukraine conflict. It could also undermine the credibility of Western sanctions, particularly after years of efforts to discourage other countries from purchasing Russian energy, she argued.

　　Felix Klauser, head of German public broadcaster ZDF"s Moscow bureau, said the diesel agreement represented a political gain for the Kremlin, which could portray the easing of sanctions as a symbolic breakthrough at home and abroad.

　　He said the agreement meanwhile increased pressure on Ukraine to halt attacks on Russian oil infrastructure. Its political symbolism appeared to matter more to Trump than the actual volume of Russian diesel reaching global markets before the U.S. midterm elections, Klauser said.

　　QUESTIONS OVER CEASEFIRE TERMS

　　Finnish national broadcaster Yle also raised questions about whether the proposed energy ceasefire would impose equal obligations on Russia and Ukraine.

　　Markku Kangaspuro, a professor at the University of Helsinki, told Yle that Russia could benefit from the arrangement without even agreeing to a ceasefire.

　　Tyyne Karjalainen, a researcher at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, said that Ukraine could face more severe consequences if the ceasefire broke down, including the risk of Washington withdrawing security support.