The US warned Ukraine that its attacks on Russian oil facilities affected American investments in Kazakhstan. Ukraine's Ambassador to the US, Oksana Stefanyshyna, confirmed receipt of the official diplomatic note.
We heard that Ukrainian attacks on Novorossiysk affected some American investments that are being made through Kazakhstan. And we heard from the State Department that we should refrain from, you know, attacking American interests.
The United States' position regarding the undesirability of strikes on Novorossiysk's oil infrastructure is not political, but primarily economic and corporate. It concerns the protection of the interests of international shareholders of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium, among whom are American companies. Viktor Halchynskyi, former spokesman for NJSC "Naftogaz of Ukraine" in Lviv region, told UNN about this in a comment.
The US position is not new and does not depend on the administration
According to the expert, Washington's cautious position was not formed now and is not exclusively the position of the current administration.
"It is important to note that the previous administration in the States also held such a position. Biden was also against it," the expert noted.
Halchynskyi emphasizes that the reasons for this position lie much deeper than public diplomacy or military-political considerations.
American interest in the Caspian Pipeline Consortium
The key factor, according to the expert, is the ownership structure of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium.
"An American company is a shareholder of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium. This is "Chevron Caspian Pipeline Consortium Company", a subsidiary of the American energy giant "Chevron". It owns 15% of the shares of this consortium," he said.
At the same time, as Halchynskyi clarifies, a significant share in the consortium also remains with the Russian state.
"Similarly, the Russian state owns 24% there through the company "Transneft". The structure of the consortium's shareholders has not changed today," Halchynskyi noted.
International status of the object and Kazakhstan's reaction
The expert emphasizes that the Caspian Pipeline Consortium is an international object, not exclusively Russian infrastructure. That is why, according to him, the first strikes on the port and oil infrastructure of Novorossiysk at the end of 2025 caused a sharp reaction not only from the US, but also from Kazakhstan.
"When there were the first strikes on the port infrastructure, the oil infrastructure of Novorossiysk at the end of 2025, then Kazakhstan very cautiously, but sharply made a statement," the expert recalled.
80% of Kazakh oil and lack of alternatives
Halchynskyi explains that a critically important volume of oil for Kazakhstan is transported through the Caspian Pipeline.
"Indeed, 80% of the oil produced in Kazakhstan is transported through it," he said.
According to him, this oil is produced by both Kazakh and international shareholders of the consortium.
"Oil in Kazakhstan is produced by KTK shareholders - Kazakh and international, including American "Chevron"", - Halchynskyi noted.
At the same time, there are practically no alternative routes for exporting such volumes.
"There are no alternative routes there, in fact, there are none," he noted.
Strikes on Novorossiysk limit throughput capacity
The expert emphasizes that strikes on Novorossiysk's infrastructure have a direct technical effect.
"In fact, our strikes limit the throughput capacity of the export terminal in Novorossiysk, including through the Caspian Pipeline Consortium," he explained.
This means that not only Russia feels the consequences. The strike is not only on Russia, but also on international interests. According to Halchynskyi, this factor is key to the US position.
"This is an impact not only on Russia, not only on Russia's interests, but also on the interests of KTK shareholders, such as Kazakhstan and international shareholders, including "Chevron"", - he noted.
The expert clarified that it is about a specially created structure for managing the pipeline and investing in its development.
"The company "Chevron" was created, obviously, to manage the pipeline and to invest in pipelines," Halchynskyi said.
Diplomatic gesture, not a ban
According to Halchynskyi, the US reaction to the strikes on Novorossiysk's infrastructure does not mean a demand to stop such actions, but rather an attempt to outline the limits of its own interests.
"I understand that it did not look like a strict prohibition, but no one said: you must or you are obliged not to hit this infrastructure. It was rather an appeal: pay attention, there are certain international interests here," he said.
He emphasized that from a legal point of view, KTK does not lose its status as a potential military target.
"In essence, KTK can also be a military target, because 24% of the consortium's shares belong to the Russian Federation. This means that the Russian state directly benefits from its operation," the expert noted.
Halchynskyi believes that it is at this point of interest that Ukraine gains diplomatic room for maneuver.
"There is no betrayal here. This is rather a diplomatic gesture from the States. They had to react somehow: we support you, we help, but our companies and our interests are here," he said.
How Ukraine can use the situation to its advantage
Viktor Halchynskyi believes that this situation gives Ukraine not only a military, but also a political and economic tool.
"We must understand that this is a point of pressure. This is a lever that can and should be used in negotiations," he said.
The expert explained that it is not necessarily about constant strikes, but about the risk factor itself.
"Even the very possibility of influencing KTK creates questions for partners about supply stability, insurance, and reputational risks. And this is what can be built into the negotiation logic," Halchynskyi noted.
According to him, such a position opens up the possibility for negotiations.
"This is a trump card for us in diplomacy. We can say: well, then let's discuss either tougher sanctions, or additional aid, or other pressure mechanisms," Halchynskyi explained.
He stressed that this does not mean weakening pressure on Russia.
"This does not mean that someone supports Russia. This means that we can use this factor to obtain more favorable solutions for Ukraine. For example, on the issue of the shadow fleet," the expert noted.
According to him, in such a configuration, Ukraine finds itself not only in the role of a defending party, but also in the role of a player influencing global energy processes.
"This is not a way out of the situation in itself, but it is a factor that cannot be ignored. And partners certainly do not ignore it," the expert says.
Gulf of Finland and natural export restrictions
Separately, Halchynskyi drew attention to the situation in the Baltic region, which further complicates the export of Russian oil.
"KTK is a critical and largest hub for Russian oil exports. Russia's second option is the Baltic, but everything is very difficult there now," he said.
According to the expert, exports through Baltic ports have significantly decreased not only due to sanctions, but also due to natural factors.
"Due to the ice cover in the Gulf of Finland, exports through Baltic ports are now practically cut to a minimum. Tanker traffic is difficult, especially for old shadow fleet vessels," Halchynskyi noted.
He added that this situation creates additional pressure on Russian logistics.
"Such tankers simply cannot work normally. Part of the fleet is actually standing even on its own territory," the expert noted.
In conclusion, according to Halchynskyi, the combination of sanctions, natural restrictions in the Gulf of Finland, and KTK's sensitivity to security risks forms a unique diplomatic position for Ukraine.
"This is not a military argument, it is an argument for negotiations. And all parties will certainly take it into account," he concluded.