Donald Trump’s decision to waive major new sanctions on Russia has put a recently enacted bipartisan measure on hold just before it was due to take effect, intensifying disagreement over whether lower fuel prices can be pursued without strengthening Moscow’s position.

In his executive order, Trump said he had certified that suspending the measures in the Graham Act was “in the national interests of the United States.”¹ The law had authorized extensive sanctions and tariffs targeting Russian officials, banks, oil trade and countries purchasing Russian energy.

The administration’s approach is tied to Trump’s agreement for Russia to supply diesel to the United States and global market. Trump cast the arrangement as an effort to reduce costs, saying: “Lower prices for Americans, especially our Great Farmers, Ranchers, and Truckers, is my Greatest Priority.”² Supporters of presidential discretion, including Senator Darline Graham, have argued that the legislation provides tools rather than a fixed course, saying it is up to the president whether to use sanctions or “something else” to end the war.³

Critics see the pause and diesel agreement differently. A bipartisan group of lawmakers urged Trump to implement the law fully and without delay, arguing the sanctions could be “decisive in forcing Putin to take peace talks seriously.”⁴ Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has likewise warned that allowing Russian petroleum sales would send money back to Russia, calling the arrangement an investment in a war that should be ended rather than prolonged.

Both sides describe their aim as ending the conflict and easing economic pressure. Their dispute is over leverage: Trump’s move favors room for energy diplomacy, while critics contend that sustained economic pressure is essential to negotiations and Ukraine’s security.