Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

Strike on Sheskharis: Why the attack on the oil terminal in Novorossiysk affected Chevron and drew a diplomatic protest from the US

The SBU, together with the GUR and other forces, struck an oil terminal in Novorossiysk — the same facility for which the United States had previously sent Kyiv an official diplomatic warning. The terminal services not only Russian oil, but also Kazakh exports through a consortium that includes stakes held by Chevron and ExxonMobil.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

April 6, 2026 · 2 min read

Strike on Sheskharis: Why the attack on the oil terminal in Novorossiysk affected Chevron and drew a diplomatic protest from the US
боєць сбу

Specialists from the SBU's Alpha Center, together with fighters from the GUR, Unmanned Systems Forces, Special Operations Forces, and the State Border Guard Service, struck the oil terminal of Novorossiysk port. An SBU source reported this to LIGA.net. There has been no official confirmation from the Russian side.

What is Sheskharis and why it matters

Novorossiysk is Russia's largest oil export hub on the Black Sea: approximately 20% of all Russian oil exports pass through it. The heart of the port is the Sheskharis terminal: two platforms connected by an underground tunnel through the Markotkh ridge, 10 berths, with a capacity of 75 million tons per year. According to Reuters, in October 2025 alone, 3.22 million tons of oil passed through the port — approximately 760,000 barrels per day.

However, Sheskharis is not purely Russian infrastructure. The terminal also serves Kazakhstani exports through the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC), which provides approximately 80% of Kazakhstan's oil supplies. Among CPC shareholders are American companies Chevron and ExxonMobil.

A diplomatic signal from Washington

"We heard from the State Department that we should refrain from attacks on American interests"

— Olha Stefanishyna, Ukraine's ambassador to the USA, in a comment to CNN following the November strikes on Sheskharis

Following the November 2025 strikes, the U.S. State Department sent Kyiv a demarche — an official diplomatic protest. According to Stefanishyna, the strike "affected American investments made through Kazakhstan." Kazakhstan, in turn, called the attack "an act of aggression" against its economy: in December, the country's oil production fell by 6%, partly due to forced cutbacks at the Chevron-operated Tengiz field.

The current strike came after this warning. Ukraine's General Staff previously noted that Sheskharis facilities provide logistics for Russian troops fighting against Ukraine — this is Kyiv's key argument against American objections.

A coalition of executors

The involvement of five structures at once — Alpha, GUR, Unmanned Systems Forces, Special Operations Forces, and the State Border Guard Service — indicates a coordinated multi-level attack rather than a one-time operation. A similar configuration was used in December 2025, when the SBU struck a submarine in the same port with an underwater drone of previously unknown design.

Novorossiysk became a key Black Sea Fleet base after Ukrainian attacks made Crimean bases too vulnerable. Now it is the very port where Russian military logistics, Kazakhstani oil production, and American corporate interests intersect — and this is precisely the node that Kyiv continues to attack.

If the next strike on Sheskharis again affects the Kazakhstani or American oil flow — Washington will face a concrete choice: is protecting Chevron from an ally sufficient grounds for public pressure on Kyiv?

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026