Tillis says Trump’s Russia deal undermines Senate sanctions

Sen. Thom Tillis (R‑NC) blasted President Trump’s Sunday diesel deal with Russia, saying the agreement hurts the sanctions bill the Senate sent to the White House and undermines Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R‑SC) efforts to pressure Moscow. Tillis called for the administration to move forward with the bipartisan sanctions package that would target Russian energy exports.

The criticism comes amid a sharp rise in U.S. gasoline and diesel prices and a shortage of domestic fuel supplies. The Biden‑era administration has faced criticism for failing to secure enough oil and gas to keep pumps open during winter storms and the summer heat wave. Trump’s deal, which would allow U.S. companies to buy Russian diesel, was seen by many as a compromise that could weaken the U.S. leverage over Russia’s energy sector. The sanctions bill, drafted by a Senate committee, would bar U.S. firms from buying Russian crude and would impose penalties on companies that continue to do business with Moscow.

The bill includes a 15‑year ban on U.S. companies purchasing Russian oil, a requirement that U.S. airlines stop flying over Russian airspace, and a new export control regime for oil‑related technology. Lindsey Graham has been a leading advocate for tougher sanctions, arguing that Russia’s war in Ukraine demands a stronger economic response. The diesel deal, which allows a limited number of U.S. companies to buy Russian fuel for a short period, was praised by some as a way to keep the economy running but criticized by others as a betrayal of the sanctions strategy. The Senate’s bill would also create a new “Russian Energy Accountability Act” that would require companies to report any Russian energy transactions.

If the bill passes, it could shift U.S. policy toward a more hardline stance on Russian energy. The administration may respond with a revised proposal, but the debate is likely to intensify in the coming weeks as lawmakers weigh the need for domestic fuel security against the political cost of weakening sanctions. The outcome will signal how the United States balances its economic interests with its foreign‑policy goals amid a volatile global energy market.