Bipartisan Senators Urge Trump to Reverse Russian Diesel Purchase

On Sunday a small but vocal bipartisan coalition of six senators pressed President Donald Trump to "immediately reverse course" on his newly announced plan to buy diesel from Russia. The senators – Susan Collins (R‑ME), Lisa Murkowski (R‑AK), Thom Tillis (R‑NC), John Curtis (R‑UT), Jeanne Shaheen (D‑NH) and Richard Blumenthal (D‑CT) – released a joint statement decrying the move as a "financial lifeline" for Vladimir Putin while his forces continue to shell Ukrainian civilians.

Trump revealed the deal in a Friday social‑media post, saying a phone call with Putin had resulted in Russia agreeing to ship more than 300,000 tons of diesel right away, followed by 500,000 tons in November and a further million tons “immediately thereafter.” He added that, in total, “3 million tons will be delivered within a short period of time” after those initial shipments.

The senators argue the administration skipped a basic procedural step: it never consulted Congress nor provided any statutory justification for the purchase. Federal law, they note, expressly bars the United States from importing Russian energy until Moscow ends its aggression against Ukraine and ceases threats to NATO allies.

In a televised interview on NBC’s "Meet the Press," Sen. Tillis warned that proceeding with the diesel deal could be a clear violation of that law. “We were very clear that Russia is the aggressor,” he said, adding that the president’s actions run counter to the congressional ban enacted in 2022.

Lawmakers also pointed out that the timing is odd. Just weeks earlier, Congress passed a sweeping sanctions package that imposes steep tariffs on the biggest importers of Russian oil and gas, with limited exceptions for countries that import less than 15 % of Russia’s natural‑gas exports and have taken concrete steps to curb those imports. The aim of that legislation was to choke off the cash flow funding Moscow’s war.

Sen. John Barrasso (R‑WY) offered a more measured response, suggesting the president must balance “tough decisions” about energy costs. Still, he urged Trump to enforce the sanctions law already on the books, calling the diesel import “another point of leverage” that could be used against Putin.

Energy analysts are skeptical that the deal will meaningfully lower pump prices. Richard Nephew, a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy, noted that the volume of diesel being discussed is tiny compared to daily U.S. consumption. He warned the real winners could be Iran and Russia, who may see the move as a crack in the sanctions regime.

Meanwhile, the White House maintains that the arrangement is part of a broader “energy ceasefire” between Russia and Ukraine – a claim Kyiv rejects, citing ongoing attacks on its territory.

As the debate unfolds, the six senators remain firm: the United States should not be funding a war it has condemned, and any policy that does so must be scrapped, no matter how loudly it promises cheap fuel.