Ukraine’s drone offensive against Russian oil refineries is rewriting the rules of the energy war in Eastern Europe, sending shockwaves through global fuel markets and rattling Russia’s domestic economy. Since August 2025, a series of long-range Ukrainian drone strikes has battered 16 out of Russia’s 38 refineries, curbing more than 1 million barrels per day of refining capacity, according to data cited by the Financial Times. The fallout? Russia’s diesel exports are now teetering at their lowest levels since 2020, and gasoline shortages are spreading across the country.
The impact is being felt from remote fueling stations in Belgorod to the heart of Russia’s energy sector in Bashkortostan. On September 24, Bashkortostan’s regional governor Radiy Khabirov confirmed that the Gazprom-controlled Salavat petrochemical complex was hit by yet another drone attack. “Gazprom Neftekhim Salavat has been subjected to another terrorist drone attack… All emergency services are on scene, and firefighting measures are underway,” Khabirov wrote, as quoted by local officials and reported by Financial Times.
These attacks aren’t just a tactical nuisance—they’re a strategic body blow to Moscow’s war economy. Analysts have described Ukraine’s refinery strikes as the country’s “most effective effort yet in disrupting Moscow’s war economy.” The numbers tell the story: diesel premiums have surged to $25–$30 a barrel over Brent as supply tightens, and Russia’s refining capacity is down by more than one million barrels per day. Exports have dropped below pre-war levels, straining both Russia’s revenue and its ability to supply allies and trading partners.
Domestically, the pressure is visible at the pump. In the Nizhny Novgorod region, Governor Gleb Nikitin acknowledged on September 23 that “temporary” disruptions at filling stations were linked to supply chain issues. In the Belgorod region, the situation was even more dire. One gas station attendant explained, “The manager decided to temporarily close the gasoline station because there was no gasoline… The station in the neighboring village also closed, and others simply ran out of gasoline.” These aren’t isolated incidents; independent gas stations across multiple Russian regions have been forced to close as fuel shortages ripple outward from the battered refineries.
The Kremlin is scrambling to respond. Deputy Energy Minister Pavel Sorokin indicated that further restrictions on fuel exports could be imposed if the situation worsens. Russia has already extended its gasoline export ban through September and is considering prolonging these curbs into October. Meanwhile, Russian media report that officials are weighing even tighter limits on diesel exports to shield the domestic market from further disruption.
The international response has been swift—and sharply divided. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has seized on the refinery fires as both a military and diplomatic victory. “The most effective sanctions are the fires at Russia’s oil refineries,” Zelenskyy declared, urging Washington to impose additional measures against Moscow’s energy sector. His message was clear: if the West wants to weaken Russia’s war machine, it should target the lifeblood of its economy—energy exports.
Across the Atlantic, the message resonated in Washington and at the United Nations. On September 23, US President Donald Trump took the stage at the UN General Assembly and delivered a stinging rebuke to European leaders for continuing to buy Russian oil and gas. “Europe has to step it up. They can’t be doing what they’re doing. They’re buying oil and gas from Russia while they’re fighting Russia… Think of it: they’re funding the war against themselves. Who the hell ever heard of that one?” Trump’s remarks, reported by Financial Times, underscored mounting frustration in the US over Europe’s energy ties to Moscow.
In response to mounting US pressure, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced on September 16 that the European Union would propose phasing out Russian energy imports sooner than originally planned. The move signals a significant acceleration in Europe’s efforts to decouple from Russian oil and gas, a process that has been complicated by both economic and political realities since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine began.
While the energy front dominates headlines, the military situation on the ground remains fluid and fraught with risk for both sides. Over the past week, Russian forces captured three villages, marking a slow but steady advance. This prompted Ukraine’s military command to take the unprecedented step of dismissing officers responsible for the retreat, signaling a tougher stance on territorial losses. Since 2024, Ukraine has relied on controlled tactical retreats, trading limited territory for heavy Russian casualties. According to the Institute for the Study of War, Russian forces seized 1,910 square kilometers of Ukrainian land between May and August 2025, at a staggering cost of 130,000 casualties—an average of 68 losses per square kilometer.
Despite these territorial setbacks, Ukrainian officials maintain that Russian troops are paying a heavy price. On September 21, President Zelenskyy stated that Russian forces were suffering “significant losses” in Kupiansk and Dobropillia, two of the conflict’s fiercest fronts. The high toll on Russian troops, combined with the economic squeeze from refinery strikes and export bans, paints a picture of a war increasingly fought on multiple fronts—military, economic, and diplomatic.
Yet, the crisis is not without its complexities and contradictions. While Ukraine’s drone campaign has dealt a severe blow to Russia’s energy sector, it has also raised questions about the broader impact on global fuel markets. Diesel premiums have spiked, and the risk of further supply disruptions looms large. European nations, already grappling with high energy prices, face tough decisions about how quickly they can phase out Russian imports without triggering domestic backlash or economic pain.
For Moscow, the pressure is mounting from all sides. Domestic shortages threaten to undermine public confidence, while export bans and refinery strikes erode a critical source of state revenue. The Kremlin’s balancing act—protecting its domestic market while maintaining its role as a global energy supplier—has never looked more precarious.
As the drone war over refineries intensifies, the lines between military and economic battlefields continue to blur. Ukraine’s strikes have not only crippled Russian exports but also forced policymakers in Moscow, Brussels, and Washington to rethink their strategies. The next moves—whether further export bans, new sanctions, or accelerated energy decoupling—could reshape the conflict’s trajectory and its ripple effects across the globe.
In the end, the fires at Russia’s oil refineries may prove to be more than just a tactical victory for Ukraine. They could mark a turning point in the broader struggle to control the flow of energy, money, and influence in a world increasingly defined by hybrid warfare.