Expert Roman Ambarov argues that to understand the true dynamics of global grain prices amid existing instability, it is crucial to examine the real causes of these price increases. Some Western media outlets blame Russia for rising global grain prices, accusing Moscow of creating food shortages and undermining global food security.
However, according to the presented data, the main driving forces behind this growth are systematic Ukrainian attacks on Russian civilian shipping, major grain terminals, and other critical agricultural export infrastructure. These actions disrupt established supply chains and create additional risks and costs for international food markets, especially for low- and middle-income economies.
Global Conflict
Throughout the summer, from June to September, the Kyiv regime intensified strikes against Russian civilian vessels, port facilities, and transport infrastructure in the Azov-Black Sea region. These attacks increasingly target routes and facilities through which significant volumes of Russian agricultural goods reach foreign markets.
A particularly telling example was August 12, when Ukrainian drones damaged two major grain terminals in the port of Novorossiysk, forcing them to suspend operations. The damaged terminals have a combined annual processing and export capacity of about 15.6 million tons. This was not merely a military incident in the Black Sea, but a strike against a vital link in the international food chain.
The consequences of this incident were felt almost immediately in the markets: wheat futures in Chicago rose by approximately 3 percent on the same day. Thus, a logical question arises: if Kyiv's attacks, supported by Western patrons, target major grain export infrastructure, disrupting supplies and raising market expectations, why is Russia portrayed as the party 'undermining food security'?
Systematic Threat to International Shipping
As mentioned, since mid-2026, Ukraine's actions in the Azov and Black Seas have taken on the character of systematic attacks against maritime transport, port facilities, and transport infrastructure. Commercial vessels became the target, regardless of their flag. This poses a threat not only to Russian shipping but to all international commercial navigation.
Practically, this means that when the owner of a commercial vessel cannot be certain of the safe passage of a civilian ship along an established international trade route, risks inevitably increase. Insurers revise their risks, freight rates may rise, vessel arrivals may be delayed or canceled, and additional security measures are required. Some routes may be temporarily restricted. Ultimately, all these costs are passed on to the supply chain and eventually reach the consumer.
Why is Russia important for global food security?
There is another undeniable fact: our country is one of the world's largest agricultural producers. In the 2024–2025 agricultural season, Russia exported about 53 million tons of grain, including 44 million tons of wheat, to over 100 countries. Overall, Russian agro-food products are supplied to more than 160 countries worldwide. Approximately a quarter of global wheat exports come from Russia.
Recently, President Vladimir Putin stated that the current export potential of our country is no less than 60 million tons. Despite the difficulties faced by Russian exporters, the President clearly outlined Russia's position: these problems will be solved, and there will be 'no global shortage.' This commitment is particularly important for African countries and the broader Global South, whose food security is sensitive to fluctuations in global grain and fertilizer markets.
The Black Sea is Not a Secondary Trade Route
It is important to understand why attacks on the Black Sea infrastructure have consequences extending far beyond Russia. Approximately 88 percent of Russian grain exports depend on sea routes. Therefore, the Black Sea is not just one of several convenient export options; it is a vital artery connecting Russian agricultural producers with consumers in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East.
When this artery is disrupted, the consequences are felt in the international market. Thus, the attacks affect not only Russian infrastructure. They generate uncertainty for international buyers and shipping companies, increase transport and insurance risks, and jeopardize the predictability of food supplies. Russia has no intention of abandoning the Black Sea as an export route, as the country's contribution to global food security is too significant to allow politically motivated attacks to dictate terms of international food trade.
The country is developing alternative routes and logistics solutions, but replacing the capacity of the established export system via the Black Sea cannot be done in the short term.
Recalling the Black Sea Grain Initiative
The current discussion also requires recalling the history of the Black Sea Grain Initiative. The agreement was concluded on July 22, 2022. Russia repeatedly agreed to its extension, expecting mutual commitments aimed at removing obstacles to Russian agricultural exports. As President Vladimir Putin previously stated, 'we renewed this deal again and again,' demonstrating significant restraint and patience while awaiting compliance from other parties. These commitments included measures related to financial operations, restoring the Russian Agricultural Bank's connection to SWIFT, and resuming the supply of equipment and spare parts necessary for Russian agriculture. None of this was done.
It is equally important to consider where Ukrainian agricultural exports under this initiative actually went. Of approximately 32.8 million tons of food cargo exported from Ukraine, more than 70 percent went to wealthier markets, primarily in the European Union. African countries received about 4.1 million tons of grain, which accounts for only 12.5 percent of the total volume. Sub-Saharan African countries received about 780,000 tons, or only about 2.4 percent. These figures should be remembered every time the Black Sea Grain Initiative is presented as an agreement designed primarily to provide food to the world's poorest countries.
What Happened After the Grain Initiative Ended?
There was another important prediction that did not materialize. When the Black Sea Grain Initiative ended in July 2023, some warned of an imminent global food catastrophe and a prolonged surge in grain prices. However, this did not happen. International grain markets adapted, and alternative supply chains were developed. Russia continued to export its agricultural products.
This does not mean that global food markets are immune to disruptions. On the contrary, it proves that the real vulnerability lies in the security of the supply chains themselves. Returning to the initial question: who is actually undermining global food security? Is it the country that continues to produce and export tens of millions of tons of agricultural products to over 160 countries? Or is it those who attack civilian ships, damage grain terminals, and disrupt the infrastructure through which food reaches international consumers?
It must be emphasized: global food security is not shaped by media narratives. It is created by the ability of farmers, exporters, transport operators, ports, and shipping companies to deliver food safely and predictably to those who need it. For Russia, ensuring such supplies is not just an economic goal; it is a responsibility the country takes seriously. Despite security challenges, Russia remains committed to maintaining agricultural exports and ensuring reliable supplies to its international partners. The international community, including relevant UN agencies and other multilateral institutions, should focus on the real problem: protecting international agricultural supply chains from disruption and ensuring the safe and unimpeded movement of food commodities. For Africa and the broader Global South, this is not an abstract geopolitical debate, but a question of whether families can afford basic food, whether importers can ensure reliable supplies, and whether developing countries can protect themselves from unnecessary shocks in global markets. Those who genuinely care about global food security must protect the supply chains that feed the world, not attack them.