Photo: Nenad Stojković, via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 2.0). File photo of a gas pipe system, not a photo of the pipelines discussed in this article.
The United States is backing a rapid return of Russian natural gas sales to Europe through pipelines crossing Ukraine, as part of talks aimed at securing an energy ceasefire before winter, the Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday. Reuters, which reported the Journal's account, said it could not immediately verify the report — an important caveat, since the plan itself has not been confirmed by Washington, Kyiv, Moscow or Brussels.
If the idea advances, it would mark a striking turn in a war-era energy policy that has spent years moving in the opposite direction. Russian gas transit through Ukraine stopped at the end of 2024, when Kyiv did not renew the transit contract, and the European Union has since legislated a phase-out of Russian gas purchases by the end of 2027. The Journal's report suggests the Trump administration is now weighing a route back — not as a settled deal, but as a bargaining chip in a wider push for a ceasefire on energy targets.
What the Journal reported
According to the Journal, citing US, European and Ukrainian officials, the idea was raised by US envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff during trips to Moscow and Kyiv in September. Under the proposal, Russian gas would be sold to Europe via a US intermediary, a structure intended to circumvent European sanctions. People who attended the discussions told the Journal the arrangement could also create a lucrative opportunity for American investors.
The gas would move through the Soviet-era pipeline network that runs from the Urengoi gas fields in Siberia to Europe via Ukraine — the same corridor that once carried the bulk of Russia's pipeline gas westward. That route would also give Kyiv something it has lacked since transit stopped: badly needed revenue from transit fees.
To address the obvious objection — that gas revenue could fund Russia's war — White House officials proposed that Russia deposit the proceeds from these sales into an escrow account in a third-party jurisdiction, a senior US official told the Journal. The money, under that proposal, would not flow directly to the Kremlin to finance its military.
Why the plan stalled — and why it is back
The Journal reports that the plan was put on the back burner last month, after Ukraine unilaterally stopped striking Russian refineries under pressure from President Donald Trump, and Washington shifted its focus to the possibility of a more substantial peace agreement. That pause did not last.
Kyiv resumed its air campaign on Friday, launching three attacks on three major Russian refineries in the past three days, according to the Journal. That resumption, the report says, has brought new urgency to the pursuit of a more comprehensive energy ceasefire ahead of three-way peace negotiations planned between the US, Russia and Ukraine for mid-November in Abu Dhabi.
Russia, however, has so far rebuffed American attempts to strike such a deal, the Journal reported. That makes the gas proposal less a finished agreement than an incentive on the table: an energy ceasefire, sweetened by a commercial arrangement, offered in the run-up to talks that have not yet produced one.
Why Europe is likely to object
The obstacles in Europe are formidable. Under current EU legislation, all purchases of Russian natural gas must be phased out by the end of 2027. The Journal reports that the current official European position is that the EU will not resume purchases of Russian gas even after a full peace agreement — let alone as part of a tenuous energy ceasefire that allows Russia's president to continue the war while receiving funding for his military.
EU Energy Commissioner Dan Jorgensen has said the ban on Russian gas imports should be permanent, in an interview with a Hungarian newspaper in October that his office has confirmed, according to the Journal. That stance leaves little room for a US-brokered exception, even one routed through an American intermediary and an escrow account.
There is also the question of trust. An energy ceasefire that restarts commercial flows while fighting continues elsewhere would test whether European governments are willing to treat gas as a separate track from the wider war — a distinction many have explicitly rejected since 2022.
What happens next
Three things will decide whether this report becomes anything more. First, the mid-November talks in Abu Dhabi: if Russia engages on an energy ceasefire there, the gas proposal gains a negotiating forum. Second, the refinery campaign: continued Ukrainian strikes, and Russian retaliation against Ukraine's power grid, would keep the pressure for a ceasefire high — but also make any commercial deal harder to sell politically. Third, Europe's response: without at least tacit EU cooperation, a US intermediary structure would run straight into the bloc's sanctions and phase-out law.
For now, the story stands as a reported proposal, not a confirmed policy. The Journal's sourcing — US, European and Ukrainian officials, and people who attended the discussions — gives it weight, but Reuters' note that it could not immediately verify the report is a reminder that no government involved has publicly confirmed the plan. Until one does, the gas route through Ukraine remains what it has been since the end of 2024: closed, contested, and now, apparently, back on the negotiating table.
Sources: The Wall Street Journal, November 2, 2026, as reported by Reuters, November 2, 2026; Reuters, November 2, 2026 (noting it could not immediately verify the Journal's report). The details of the proposal, the escrow idea and the European position are as reported by the Journal; no government involved has publicly confirmed the plan.