If further proof were needed of the Kremlin’s cynicism, it came this weekend. Barely had the ink dried on a deal a day earlier to allow grain exports to resume from blockaded Ukrainian ports, when Russia hit the port of Odesa with two cruise missiles; two more were shot down. The grain agreement, brokered by the UN and Turkey, aimed to avert a global food crisis that the World Food Programme has warned could push an additional 47mn people into acute hunger. If the hard-won deal now fails, the responsibility will be Moscow’s.
Russia’s Black Sea blockade has taken a dangerous toll on a global food supply chain already strained by coronavirus disruptions and poor harvests. Before Moscow’s invasion in February, Ukraine was the world’s fifth-largest exporter of wheat, a vital supplier to countries in the Middle East and Africa. Curbs on Ukrainian exports have left 22mn tonnes of wheat, corn and other grains stuck in silos. Food shortages and price rises are already hitting economies across the developing world.
The missile strike is especially damaging since Friday’s agreement relied largely on faith that Russia would stick to commitments not to attack commercial ships carrying grain from Ukrainian ports. Officials warned it was unclear how it would be enforced in case of violations. Trust between Kyiv and Moscow is so lacking that the two signed no agreement between each other, but parallel accords with the UN and Ankara.
Ukraine will not undertake large-scale demining of its ports — which could leave them vulnerable to Russian assault — but its pilots will guide merchant grain ships through safe channels. In return for pledges to allow that to happen, Russia won UN and EU assurances to shipowners and insurance companies that they could export Russian grain and fertilisers without falling foul of western sanctions.
Russia, in truth, gave no assurances that it would not attack areas of Ukrainian ports not directly involved in grain exports, so Saturday’s strike on what Moscow claims were military targets did not technically break the agreement. Yet traders were already sceptical about how many shipowners would be prepared to risk sailing into Ukrainian ports or pay the hefty risk premiums insurers will demand. Though Kyiv has rightly committed to continue preparing to export grain, even while condemning Moscow’s attack, and called for commercial ships to join “caravans”, there are questions over how significant quantities of grains can safely be loaded if Russian bombardment continues nearby.
Moscow may be quietly satisfied. It has complicated life for Kyiv in restarting exports. It has also pushed up wheat futures prices that fell after Friday’s deal, so it will earn more from exports of its own grain that may be made easier by that agreement — or of produce being smuggled out of Ukraine and rebadged as “Russian”. Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov has meanwhile been dispatched to several African capitals to insist that Ukraine and western sanctions on Russia, not Moscow’s invasion, are the cause of the food crisis.
Western countries need to continue to do all they can to facilitate alternative export routes, including by truck and train, for Ukrainian grain and be ready to provide large-scale assistance to countries hit by shortages. They should also engage in more vigorous diplomacy with developing countries that have been notably more sympathetic to the Kremlin’s version of what is happening in Ukraine. President Vladimir Putin’s unprovoked conflict continues to threaten starvation for millions. If that fate comes to pass, Moscow should not be allowed to wriggle out of the consequences.
Source: Economy - ft.com
