Ukraine hits Russian energy infrastructure to blunt oil revenue surge

Ukraine has doubled its strikes on Russian oil infrastructure and is keeping up that pace into May, targeting refineries, export terminals, Baltic Sea ports, and sanctioned tankers in what analysts at ACLED now describe as a sustained campaign rather than a temporary escalation — one calculated to drain the revenue Russia is drawing from a global energy market disrupted by the war in Iran.

Ukrainian drones struck the Tuapse oil refinery and terminal in Russia’s Krasnodar region on April 28 and 30, causing fires, severe environmental contamination, and evacuations, according to ACLED’s Ukraine war situation update. The same facility had been hit on April 16 and 20. Tuapse is a primary hub for Russian oil export infrastructure, and Ukraine has returned to it repeatedly because it is a pillar of the Russian war economy. Over the course of April, Ukraine struck oil refineries in four Russian regions, hit an oil depot in occupied Crimea, and targeted a sanctioned Cameroon-flagged tanker in the Black Sea. The number of Ukrainian attacks on Russian oil infrastructure doubled in April compared to the monthly average over the previous three months, according to ACLED’s data.

“In the first week of May, Ukrainian long-range drone operations have continued to hit energy facilities deep inside Russia, including a Baltic Sea port, an oil refinery, and sanctioned oil tankers, reinforcing what now appears to be a sustained campaign rather than a temporary escalation,” said Olha Polishchuk, Eastern Europe Research Manager at ACLED. “These strikes come alongside ongoing Russian missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities, highlighting an entrenched phase of reciprocal deep-strike warfare — one that is unfolding despite continued talk of ceasefires,” Polishchuk said.

The economic logic behind the campaign is directly connected to events in Iran. Since the war in Iran began at the end of February, Russia’s oil revenue surged as oil shortages caused a spike in global energy prices, according to ACLED’s analysis. The United States compounded that windfall by easing sanctions on Russia between March 20 and April 19, a window during which Russian oil exports faced reduced external pressure. Ukraine’s response has been to go after the infrastructure underpinning that revenue, seeking physical disruption of export capacity while simultaneously eroding the financial flows that are cushioning Russia’s war effort. “The timing is critical: as global energy markets tighten amid the Iran war, Russia benefits from rising oil prices and a temporary easing of US sanctions in March and April. Kyiv’s response has been to go after the infrastructure underpinning that windfall — seeking not just physical disruption, but to erode the very revenue streams cushioning Russia’s war effort,” Polishchuk told ACLED.

The speed with which Ukrainian strikes translate into Russian financial losses has been demonstrated concretely. According to analysts cited in ACLED’s update, the initial increase of Ukrainian strikes on Russian Baltic ports in late March alone erased two-thirds of Russia’s weekly oil revenue. That figure explains why Ukraine has sustained and intensified the campaign even as Russian forces continue their own deep-strike operations against Ukrainian cities. Earlier strikes on export routes showed how quickly this can translate into losses, and as Polishchuk noted, the continued tempo into May suggests Ukraine is deliberately trying to offset Russia’s external economic gains.

ACLED data shows that Ukrainian attacks in Russia and Russian-occupied regions have been rising since February more broadly. Strikes on occupied Crimea more than quadrupled in April compared to the monthly average across 2025, covering not just oil infrastructure but Russian military plants, airfields, navy ships, and military training facilities. The geographic scope of Ukrainian deep strikes has expanded alongside the frequency, reflecting both growing Ukrainian long-range drone capability and a deliberate strategic choice to impose costs across multiple dimensions of Russian military and economic capacity simultaneously.

Russian forces meanwhile continued their own offensive operations during the same period. Russian forces occupied a settlement east of Kostiantynivka in the Donetsk region and four villages near the international border in the Sumy and Kharkiv regions, advancing near Kupiansk and Borova in the Kharkiv region, according to ACLED’s situation update. Russian forces launched at least 50 long-range missile and drone attacks during the week of April 25 through May 1, including strikes on Kyiv and the western regions of Rivne and Ternopil. Russian strikes killed at least 36 civilians across the Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk, Sumy, Kherson, Kharkiv, Chernihiv, and Zaporizhia regions during the period. A Russian drone strike on Dnipro on April 25 killed eight civilians and injured more than 50. Russian drones hit a Nauru-flagged vessel heading to Odesa port on April 27, and a Russian drone strike on Odesa city on April 30 injured 24 civilians.

ACLED notes that Ukraine’s strikes on Russian oil infrastructure are likely to continue regardless of further developments in the Strait of Hormuz, because they deepen Russia’s budget deficit and may affect military spending decisions. The analysis also records a similar number of attacks on Russian oil infrastructure in November and December of last year, before the Iran war began, suggesting the campaign has strategic roots that predate the current energy market disruption. What the Iran war has done is raise the stakes considerably — and give Ukraine a stronger incentive to keep hitting the same targets harder.

Two wars, one energy market, and a Ukrainian drone campaign designed to make sure Russia can’t profit from the collision of both.