• Kirill Dmitriev, President Vladimir Putin's envoy, on Thursday dismissed reports that U.S.-bound Russian diesel tankers had changed course as "fake," insisting the vessels remain on their intended routes.
  • Maritime tracking data, however, shows two of three initially tracked tankers have altered their destinations or signaled "for orders," casting doubt on the deliveries.
  • The shipments stem from an October 9 Trump-Putin arrangement to ease diesel prices, but legal challenges from New Jersey's governor and uncertain buyer demand cloud the outlook.

Dmitriev Denies Diversions

Kirill Dmitriev, President Vladimir Putin's envoy, has dismissed reports that U.S.-bound Russian diesel tankers have changed course, calling them "fake" and asserting the vessels are continuing on their original routes. His statement, made Thursday, directly contradicts maritime tracking data from November 4 that indicated two of the three tankers initially bound for the U.S. had altered their destinations or signaled "for orders," a status indicating they are awaiting further instructions.

The vessels in question—the Talisman, Leruo, and Agioi Fanendes—were part of an October 9 arrangement between President Donald Trump and Putin aimed at easing elevated diesel prices. Trump announced an initial 300,000 metric tons for the U.S. and global markets, followed by 500,000 tons in November and 1 million tons thereafter. Those figures represent announced supply commitments, not verified U.S. imports.

Vessel Tracking Shows Divergence

According to maritime reporting, the Talisman passed through Gibraltar into the Mediterranean and changed its destination signal from "Atlantic Coast FO" to "For Order." The Leruo switched its signal to "Brazil for order," while the Agioi Fanendes continued toward the northeastern U.S. but was signaling "for orders" rather than a confirmed port. "For orders" indicates that further instructions are awaited; it is not confirmation of a U.S. delivery—or necessarily proof that one has been abandoned. The same reporting said no Russian diesel cargo had yet been delivered to the U.S. under the new authorization.

Reuters (NASDAQ:TRI) identified the Agioi Fanendes cargo as approximately 40,000 metric tons of ultra-low-sulfur diesel, loaded at Primorsk on October 22, with an initially expected November 7 U.S. arrival. Its buyer and seller were not publicly identified. Neither the headline nor those tracking reports establish where every cargo will ultimately unload.

Legal and Political Hurdles

The main obstacle appears to be legal and commercial uncertainty rather than simply navigation. On October 9, the U.S. Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control issued General License 135, authorizing transactions covered by specified Russian sanctions regulations relating to Russian-origin diesel sales, delivery, unloading and importation—including into the United States—through 12:01 a.m. EDT on April 7, 2027. The license retains a restriction on debiting certain Russian sovereign accounts at U.S. financial institutions.

However, New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill challenged that authorization in a November 2 letter to port and terminal operators, arguing that the 2022 Ending Importation of Russian Oil Act independently prohibits these imports and that Treasury cannot override that statutory ban through this license. She also cited a congressional review process and warned that participants in an unlawful importation could face substantial civil and criminal exposure. Those are the governor's legal arguments, not a judicial determination. The important distinction is that an OFAC authorization exists, while officials dispute whether it supplies sufficient legal authority for the imports.

Internationally, the arrangement tests whether Washington and Moscow can carry out a limited energy transaction despite the broader sanctions confrontation over Russia's war in Ukraine. Reuters also reported disagreement over Dmitriev's earlier claim that Treasury had asked Russia's sovereign wealth fund to help resolve payment issues: a source familiar with the matter disputed that account.

Market Implications and Outlook

The economic implications depend on actual unloading. U.S. fuel users could see additional supply that might help ease diesel-market pressure, but a tanker sailing toward the U.S. does not add usable domestic inventory until its cargo is accepted and discharged. Traders, shipowners and terminals face execution risk and potentially longer voyages or delays due to uncertain buyers, destinations and legal permissions. Cargoes redirected to Brazil or other established customers could still increase supply outside the U.S.; diversion would not necessarily mean the fuel disappears from the global market. Reuters already reported Russian diesel exports resuming to Turkey and Brazil after Moscow lifted its own export ban.

Kpler analyst Matt Smith told the Financial Times, as reported by The Moscow Times, that two of the three initially U.S.-bound cargoes had diverted. He suggested the remaining cargo could also change destination because of regulatory, legislative and sanctions issues. This is an analyst assessment, not a confirmed outcome.

In the short term, the decisive evidence will be confirmed discharge activity, identified buyers and terminals, and any further legal or regulatory action—not competing statements about a vessel's intended course. Longer term, successful unloading could demonstrate that the bilateral arrangement is commercially workable. Continued diversions or refusals to unload would instead show that formal sanctions relief alone is insufficient when buyers and ports remain concerned about legal exposure. The temporary license's April 2027 expiry also limits the certainty available for sustained trade.

For now, Dmitriev's denial should be treated as Moscow's position; the reported route changes should be treated as evidence about particular vessels. Neither establishes that the entire diesel arrangement has succeeded or collapsed.

Correction: An earlier version of this article misstated the date of the maritime tracking reports. They were from November 4, not November 5.