Russia's Kremlin spokesperson says the Kremlin has nothing to say yet about an energy ceasefire, adding that contacts are continuing, TASS reports; Russia wants a long-term peace rather than a 60-day ceasefire proposed by Ukrainian President Zelensky

Kremlin 'nothing to say yet' formulations have been a standard holding pattern in past negotiation cycles of this conflict, and the qualifier that contacts continue is the part that carries signal; prior rounds have tended to move from denial to confirmation over days rather than hours. The distinction drawn between a short-dated ceasefire and a long-term settlement is the recurring Russian negotiating posture and matters for pricing: a time-limited truce defers supply risk rather than removing it, while a durable settlement is what compresses the war premium embedded in European gas, diesel cracks and regional risk assets. The unanswered refinery question is the operative detail for energy desks, since a truce covering only refining infrastructure versus one covering strikes on export and pipeline assets implies very different paths for product markets versus crude. Historically, headline-driven de-escalation in this conflict has faded where follow-through statements from Washington and Kyiv did not align, and the pattern has been initial risk-on in European assets and softness in crude that reverses on any contradictory briefing. What resolves the read is whether the US side characterises the contacts the same way and whether any draft terms surface on scope, duration and verification.