Trump did a deal yesterday with Russia to supposedly release 3 million tonnes of diesel from Russia's reserves over the next few months. I do not know the price, but the sum is significant because this is a refined product, not crude oil.
The issue, however, is not the price. It is its significance and consequences.
The significance is threefold.
First, despite all Trump's claims, it is clear that oil is not flowing through the Strait of Hormuz as a result.
The second is that Trump does not expect it to do so. Iran and the Houthis have created a stranglehold.
The third, and most obvious, is that Trump is consequently willing, to save his own skin, to do a deal with Putin, the benefit of which will be that Putin has the funding he needs to continue the war in Ukraine.
The consequence is a massive rift in the relationship between the EU, Britain, Ukraine and the USA.
Russia is also being empowered at the same time, which can only increase world tensions at a time when they are already being artificially inflated by politicians' hype.
The world did, then, become a considerably more dangerous place last night, and all because Israel did, earlier this year, persuade Donald Trump to go to war on Iran, and there is no prospect of either of those countries coming out of the resulting debacle with any hint of a victory. Instead of conceding, however, Trump is willing to do a deal with a fellow fascist. That is the world we live in now.
Let's be clear, this deal covers only a few months. The crisis will continue thereafter.
From April this year, I forecast that we would face shortages of fuel, gas, food, and other raw materials from late summer onward, with issues becoming critical in October. It seems that I got my timing absolutely right.
Trump is now panicking. No other explanation explains this deal, which trashes most aspects of normal international relations the way the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact between Germany and Russia did in 1939. That ended badly, and I suspect this one will, too.
The signs that we are heading for a crash grow almost by the day. The AI share price market saw a major disruption this week when OpenAI admitted its revenues were $20 billion a year less than markets had thought. They also admitted they will burn through $250 billion in cash over the next few years, which is the equivalent of five times their current annual revenue. If ever there was an economic model waiting to collapse, that is it.
And the Financial Times is this morning forecasting a major meltdown in the airline industry because of the crisis created by the cost of jet fuel. Even Ryanair is saying things are getting desperate. Failures in that sector were among the other forecasts I made.
And the impacts of food shortages have not hit as yet.
I said in a video yesterday that politicians would reach for MMT when they were desperate, and they have no choice but to change. I think that the moment of desperation might be approaching very fast.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
It’s appalling…. but can Russia actually deliver?
I doubt it
There are 3 & only three export possibilities. Leningrad/Baltic, Black sea, Pacific Coast. The last one is out of range of Uk’ drones but can only be supply via rail cars. Baltic and Black Sea both targeted by Uk’ . tRump has also said that targeting data will be withheld from Uk’ . Obvs, the locations are well known, what the US supplies is the locations of air defense that can shoot down Uk’ drones. This is useful for Leningrad, makes no diff for Black Sea since the approach is erm… via the sea. The announcement provides some political help to Putler. It will make no difference to diesel prices in tRumpland but it is clear from commentary that tRump is attempting to fix the mid-terms (well he will not be able to fix diesel prices). Evil times. I see the Russians murdered some more Ukrainian children yesterday.
The EU answer to tRumpland is to get out of gas asap & deliver more support to Uk’. Sadly this seems to be unlikely given the results in France next year, RN or Putler-lover Melenchon. AfD in Germany, & soon assorted right-whinge retards in Spain.
@ Mike Parr
I think many of us in France fighting against neoliberalism would take your reference to Melenchon as “Putler-lover” as offensive if my English is good enough to understand what you meant. I found it offensive and ignorant of the movement which is grafting so hard to try to make headway on the treacherous road to a better future. That was preposterous. So if you wish to comment on French politics, just follow the details of what is being said by the proponents of La France Insoumise a little better won’t you! otherwise abstain.
I did hesitate before posting that one, I admit.
Your challenge is fair.
This is a response to Michele.
The voting record of Melenchon’s party LFI with respect to Ukraine is shameful. Nov 2022, LFI deputies abstain on Nat Assembly resolution supporting Ukraine and condemning Russia, March 2024 LFI oppose a French bilateral security agreement with Ukraine. March 2025, LFI oppose resolution calling for stronger support for Ukraine. Feb 2026, LFI abstain on €90 billion Ukraine assistance package because of finance for long range weapons.
This pattern which reflects Melenchon’s utopian outlook: limit weapons for Ukraine & support negotiations. LFI & Melenchon wring their hands about people dying in Ukraine, they want the war to end (me to) but have completely forgotten Machievelli: there is no equality between the armed and the unarmed. It takes two to negotiate, Putin thinks he can win & does not want to negotiate. That is a reality which Melenchon ignores. I withdraw the “Putin-lover” phrase. However, Melenchon repeats Putin/Russia talking points and arguments without considering realities. This is often the case with what passes for “the left”. & as for NATO etc, Ukraine abandoned membership in 2009, that did NOT stop Putin in 2014 or 2022, neither did it stop Melenchon spouting the nonsense that he does.
Given that Russia seems to be desperately trying to import diesel due to the damage the Ukrainians have done to its refining capacity I do wonder about its capacity to deliver
So do I
I think this is much more gesture than real
But the gesture is dire
The objective of the Trump/Putin diesel deal is to save Trump from a thrashing in the November mid-term elections. However the qiuanaty of diesel, even if it is shipped over in time is only half a day’s supply off the US consumption. This is not sufficient to have a significant price lowering effect.
Agreed
Thank you for bringing this to our attention.
So what does this mean?
MMT being used to bring down the cost of jet fuel so people can still go on their holidays and other market palliatives/bailouts? That’s my nightmare right there. MMT power being used in superficial ways.
Surely – and I know there needs to be a plan (long term) behind MMT as well as a relief element (short term issues) – the critical thing to do is for this country to look at how reliant it has become on external factors running smoothly and build in some robust endogenous resilience in its economy, long term? Is this not also ‘defence spending’? It’s all very well stockpiling missiles – they are just a deferred benefit with our fingers crossed behind backs.
As for Trump, he is a nightmare, but maybe this is what the world needed in order to grow up and deal with matters themselves rather then genuflecting towards a country which has been a on a long trajectory to where it is now. What we need now is solidarity with other countries and make it clear that the U.S. ‘shining city on the hill’ is just a crap town after all.
MMT is a description of monetary plumbing. Nothing more.
https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2026/10/09/when-will-politicians-turn-to-mmt/
The political choices still have to be made. The only thing is, more are possible. That’s what MMT makes possible.
MMT enables better politics.
It does not guarantee it.
‘MMT enables better politics.
It does not guarantee it.’
That’s precisely my concern, and the ‘desperation’ angle means this might be more likely.
So, we need to work on that issue next.
Very troubling. Let’s say that the “household finances” analogy collapses (again) and we re-engage MMT/QE. Is there a model of MMT, a template or framework, to guide how it should be used? How much, directed to which sectors etc. Surely, policymakers are considering this..?
MMT is what happens now.
What changes is the understanding of who can manage the economy. Why not watch yesterday’s video? https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2026/10/09/when-will-politicians-turn-to-mmt/
Trump is desperate. He’s worried about the midterms. He doesn’t care whether any particular Representative or Senator is elected but he is worried about losing control of Congress overall. He’s worried that the price of diesel will lose him seats, as indeed is likely.
His fuel deal with Putin will not change the price of diesel in the US or elsewhere. It’s purely performative, to make it look like he’s doing something. Firstly, it seems unlikely that Putin can actually supply anything, given the shortage of refined diesel in Russia. Secondly, no supplies can reach the US before the midterms given shipping lags. Thirdly, and most significantly, the quantities are too small to make a difference.
The first tranche is 2.25 million barrels for October. I’ve converted from tons, a measurement seemingly chosen to confuse. US diesel production is 5.6 million barrels per day, of which 3.6 million barrels is used in the US and the rest exported. 2.25 million barrels for the whole of October is such a tiny percentage that it will make no difference. Even if it was enough to matter the price in the US is governed by the international price not by availability.
And for this performative action Trump has sacrificed, still further, his relationship with former western friends and allies. Add to this the announcement of sanctions on the International Criminal Court, vigorously opposed by UK, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands. Sadly the US under Trump has gone rogue and is continuing to destroy the rules based international order. 🙁
Translated like that those numbers are so insignificant.
European politicians must finally wake up to the fact that they cannot trust the USA and especially Trump. More often than not, like any nation, they act in their own self-interest.
Unfortunately Europe for many years has relied on the Americans in military and economic terms. The chickens are coming home to roost.
The American declaration yesterday to impose more sanctions on the International criminal Court marks a real divergence between almost all the democratic states and the USA. This is not an issue on which we – Most of Europe, Canada, Australia and Japan- can or should compromise
Agreed
It has been clear for years that Putin controls Trump – and that both are fascistic mafia bosses – but now both are in trouble. The brazenness reeks of desperation and failure but that is why this is now so terrifying. Indebted, deeply criminal, absolutely corrupt ending this regimen (PutinRussa/TrumpUSA) is going inflict a terrible cost.
Just read this and my first response is to go to kitchen cupboards and check supply of porridge oats ( the real stuff not the instant ) to get me through the winter.
Aye Hazel, I do wonder how many of our fellow Scots will be able to afford to cook our porridge oats?
Hard to disagree with any of your conclusions, Richard.
I struggled to believe what I was hearing on just a single news channel last night. First the Putin deal – it seems like only 5 minutes ago that I was watching the US military boarding a sanctioned Russian tanker. I wonder if any of Ukraine’s NATO allies will be prepared to police Russian tankers now!
Then there was Narco Rubio trying to bury the ICC. I think we can safely assume that both NATO and the ICC are toast now. Hey, let’s chuck the UN onto the same pile.
But wait, there’s more: that knuckle-dragger, Pete Hogsbreath wants to live stream an execution! Maybe they’ll force primary schools to watch it. That’ll toughen em up for military service.
What a feral administration.
If they’re our allies, god help us.
Much to agree with
Another confirmation that Trump’s America has been on Putin’s side all the time. Phillips O’Brien of the University of St Andrews has been saying this since January 2025 and been predicting many of the economic consequences of this policy.
Agreed
I follow occasionally
Surely Putin has very cleverly played Trump.
Any dubious shipping movements can be put down to diesel requirements in the West and financial Russian dollar movements can be similarly justified.
That Trump has lifted American sanctions on Russia doesn’t sound so good, but that is the effect – and I very much doubt any extra diesel will result…
Until Washington really relents in it’s attempt to dominate and subsume the Russian Federation , or at least to keep them apart from us in Europe, there’ll be no prospect of peace. Ukraine has already been pretty much sacrificed to that end and other Europeans can follow. This little manoeuvre by DT is not in that vein at all. It’s a cover for Washington continuing to make it possible for Kyiv to savage Russian oil infrastructure which they could easily control if they so wished. And another bald attempt to pretend he’s a man of peace. And if Zelensky is pushed around again it’s what he’s paid for.
There are several significant problems with your argument, Tim.
The most obvious is that Russia’s responsibility for invading Ukraine is absent. You treat the conflict almost exclusively as a consequence of American foreign policy, rather than acknowledging Russia’s decision to invade its neighbour. That is unbalanced.
The second is that you assume Ukraine has no meaningful agency. Ukrainians apparently have no independent reason to resist Russian occupation, and their government is assumed to act on American instructions. I am not convinced.
The third is that you make claims about American intentions without providing evidence. In particular, the suggestion that Washington seeks to “subsume” the Russian Federation is ill-defined. It is unclear whether you mean political control, economic domination or something else. I am nt sure this is true, in any case.
The fourth is an apparent contradiction. You claim Washington wants to prevent Russia from becoming integrated with Europe, but also suggest that Washington wants to dominate Russia itself. These objectives are not necessarily incompatible, but why is unexplained.
I think your argument falls short as a result.