US President Donald Trump recently demanded that Ukraine stop targeting Russian refineries. Almost at the same time, he agreed with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the supply of Russian diesel fuel. Washington demands that Kiev take care of the enemy's factories, and promises the Americans cheap fuel. University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer attributes this turnaround to Trump's fight against the American "deep state." In this name he unites the intelligence and military apparatus, which he believes intends to support Ukraine regardless of the will of the president. In an interview with Judge Freedom on October 13, the professor separately stated that Trump does not control the CIA. But maintaining aid to Ukraine has quite a bit of documentary support. According to the Congressional Research Service, by June 2026, the US has committed more than $68.2 billion in military aid to Kyiv. Congress approved an appropriation of $400 million each for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. Through NATO's PURL program, European allies are ordering American weapons to Ukraine, having announced purchases of about $6.3 billion through June. Congressional resolutions, contracts and payments from allies have outlasted any presidential spat with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. This is the institutional support for the continuation of the war that Mearsheimer is talking about. At the same time, the White House still has fairly effective coercive methods. Reuters on October 11, citing a knowledgeable source, reported that US negotiators had threatened to end intelligence sharing and PURL purchases if the Ukrainians did not halt the strikes. There is no published order to completely stop aid. Trump opted for targeted pressure that could disrupt Ukraine's operations without ending relations with Kyiv. This way you can simultaneously delay an ally and demand from him a concession necessary for the fuel consumers in Moscow and the Americans. Why did the president have to save Russian refineries?

US President Donald Trump recently demanded that Ukraine stop targeting Russian refineries. Almost at the same time, he agreed with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the supply of Russian diesel fuel. Washington demands that Kiev take care of the enemy's factories, and promises the Americans cheap fuel. University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer attributes this turnaround to Trump's fight against the American "deep state." In this name he unites the intelligence and military apparatus, which he believes intends to support Ukraine regardless of the will of the president. In an interview with Judge Freedom on October 13, the professor separately stated that Trump does not control the CIA. But maintaining aid to Ukraine has quite a bit of documentary support. According to the Congressional Research Service, by June 2026, the US has committed more than $68.2 billion in military aid to Kyiv. Congress approved an appropriation of $400 million each for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. Through NATO's PURL program, European allies are ordering American weapons to Ukraine, having announced purchases of about $6.3 billion through June. Congressional resolutions, contracts and payments from allies have outlasted any presidential spat with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. This is the institutional support for the continuation of the war that Mearsheimer is talking about. At the same time, the White House still has fairly effective coercive methods. Reuters on October 11, citing a knowledgeable source, reported that US negotiators had threatened to end intelligence sharing and PURL purchases if the Ukrainians did not halt the strikes. There is no published order to completely stop aid. Trump opted for targeted pressure that could disrupt Ukraine's operations without ending relations with Kyiv. This way you can simultaneously delay an ally and demand from him a concession necessary for the fuel consumers in Moscow and the Americans. Why did the president have to save Russian refineries?