KYIV, UKRAINE ­— The Black Sea is becoming a battlefield for grain.

As Russia and Ukraine escalate attacks on each other’s ports, terminals and commercial vessels, these major grain exporters are finding it increasingly difficult to move their crops to global markets. Market analysts warned that with the new harvest underway, the disruption could soon become much harder for the global grain trade to absorb.

All three grain terminals in the Port of Novorossiysk, the key export gateway for Russian grain, suspended operations following a series of Ukrainian kamikaze drone attacks during the first weeks of August, according to multiple reports from local traders and analysts.

The scale of the damage remains unclear, but the impact on grain exports is already visible to the naked eye.

What began in July as a campaign against Russian shipping has now moved to the docks. Ukraine’s attacks on vessels in the Azov-Black Sea basin already were squeezing Russian grain exports, but the Aug. 12 assault on Novorossiysk showed the escalation could go much further — directly knocking out the infrastructure through which millions of tonnes of Russian grain reach global markets.

Prior to Aug. 12, Vladimir Petrichenko, general director of ProZerno, a Moscow-based think tank, said he expected Russia to export 2.5 million tonnes of grain in August 2026, 2.3 times less than in August 2025. However, he has since revised his outlook.

“If exports through the Novorossiysk seaport remain blocked, exports will be 1.5 million tonnes at best,” the analyst said.

The export situation looks equally dramatic in Ukraine.

Ukraine’s grain exports fell by 75% in the first two weeks of August compared with the same period last year, according to local authorities. Russian strikes have brought shipments through the country’s Black Sea ports close to a standstill just as the harvest gets into full swing.

The scale of the damage is staggering. Strikes hit 67 Ukrainian seaport facilities and 35 civilian vessels in July alone, while another 22 ships came under attack in the country’s maritime corridor, according to the calculations of the Ukrainian Ministry for Development of Communities and Territories.

Ukraine’s farmers’ union estimated that as of early August these attacks wiped out roughly one-third of the country’s grain export capacity.

Agriculture Minister Taras Vysotskyi said Ukraine exported 590,000 tonnes of grain between Aug. 1-12 — roughly 30% of the minimum volume needed for the grain industry to maintain normal operations.

The Danube River route also has been constrained by drought, further complicating efforts to move grain out of the country. Vysotskyi said Ukraine could potentially ramp up shipments via the Danube to around 1.5 million tonnes per month by the end of the year. However, if Black Sea ports fail to resume normal operations, total grain exports could reach no more than 50% of the required level.

Pain reaches the farmgate

Problems at Novorossiysk, which accounts for roughly 40% of the Russian grain exports, already are sending shockwaves along the Russian grain industry’s supply chain.

According to ProZerno, as of Aug. 11, Black Sea FOB prices had fallen to $224 per tonne for wheat, $196 per tonne for barley and $222 per tonne for corn. The Aug. 12 attack has pushed the prices even further downward.

“A continued decline in exports could put further downward pressure on domestic grain prices, potentially triggering a wave of bankruptcies among farmers,” Petrichenko warned.

Russian grain farmers also are sounding the alarm, warning of unprecedented losses.

“Grain prices (on the Russian market) are falling by 100 to 200 rubles ($1.5 to $3 per tonne) every day,” said Arkady Zlochevskiy, president of the Russian Grain Union. “We don’t know where the bottom is.”

At the same time, in some regions feed wheat prices already have fallen to “catastrophically low levels” of below 6,000 rubles ($70.5) per tonne.

“Meanwhile, the average cost of producing wheat of any class is around 10,000 rubles per tonne, meaning that selling at current prices is resulting in colossal losses,” Zlochevskiy said, speaking during a press conference in Moscow, Russia.

The Russian government is urgently discussing allocating 10 billion rubles ($117 million) to subsidize railway delivery of grain to ports in the Northern basin and the Far East, which are beyond the reach of Ukrainian drones.

However, Zlochevskiy warned that such a move would only have a minor impact. He estimated that it will barely cover 10% of the additional costs and will not help with the tremendous losses Russian grain farmers currently are suffering.

Business representatives warn that the pressure could soon spill over into the next planting campaign, with many farmers already operating on razor-thin margins after years of rising taxes, higher input costs and tightening access to credit.

“We are being forced to make these sales at catastrophic losses,” Zlochevskiy said. “The key point is that farmers are facing an acute shortage of cash. There is simply nowhere to get the money — credit is unavailable, and no one is providing advance payments. If we cannot secure sufficient financing for the winter sowing campaign, it will fail.”

In addition, the developing fuel crisis and other consequences of the Ukrainian strikes have started to affect Russian grain producers. For example, in the Rostov region, a key agricultural region in southern Russia, farmers estimated that limited availability and higher fuel prices could force them to cut planting area by up to 15%.

The picture on the Ukrainian side is expected to be strikingly similar. With export routes under pressure and the new harvest coming to market, analysts warn that farmers face the same combination of falling prices, mounting stocks and a growing cash crunch.

“For crop farming enterprises, the consequences will be predominantly negative: lower purchase prices, accumulating inventories, a shortage of storage capacity and insufficient funds for the autumn sowing campaign,” said Max Hopka, an analyst with the Ukrainian Club of Agricultural Businesses, a think tank. “If the escalation continues, farmers may be forced to cut spending on fertilizers, crop protection products and agricultural technologies, which could ultimately affect next season’s harvest.”

Unclear future for grain prices

The world has seen this movie before. When Russia’s blockade choked off Ukraine’s Black Sea grain exports in 2022, wheat prices shot up 34% in the months following the start of the conflict.

The global grain market has so far absorbed the Black Sea escalation with surprising calm.

“If traders had been asked six months ago what wheat should be worth if more than 90% of Russia’s grain export capacity in the Azov-Black Sea basin were taken offline, I think most would have put the Chicago price in double digits — comfortably above $10 a bushel,” Andrey Sizov, senior analyst with SovEcon, a Moscow-based consultancy, wrote on his social media channels. “In reality, the market is still trading below $7 a bushel, at around $257 per tonne.”

Sizov said the relatively muted market reaction largely is driven by a bearish narrative: global grain supplies remain ample, demand is weak, and everyone expects the current disruption to eventually ease, allowing cheap Russian grain to resume flowing into export markets.

“The problem is that it is completely unclear when the disruption will ease and exports will resume,” Sizov said. “The assumption that all the grain that cannot be shipped now will simply be exported later also looks overly optimistic. You cannot squeeze additional volumes into an export pipeline that is already operating at the limits of its capacity.”

Due to the lack of Ukrainian grain on the global market alone, a repeat of the 2022 price shock is not looking like the baseline scenario yet, Hopka said.

“A portion of Ukrainian volumes could be substituted by the US, Argentina, Brazil and other exporters,” he said.

However, the analysts warned that the current situation is particularly dangerous because Russia and Ukraine are being hit at the same time. Together they account for roughly 30% of global wheat exports, so disruptions on both sides of the Black Sea could amplify each other.

The stakes could ultimately be measured not just in tonnes and prices, but in food security. Ukrainian analysts warn that a prolonged disruption could leave import-dependent countries, particularly in Africa and the Middle East, facing severe consequences, including hunger.

“The populations of some countries will suffer enormous losses, particularly in Africa, where we have supplied grain either directly or through intermediaries,” said Leoniv Kazachenko, chief of the Ukrainian Agrarian Confederation. “Other countries, too, could unfortunately face such terrible consequences as starvation.”

The Russian side, however, believes it is premature to warn about the looming global food crisis.

“This is not a case of the resource disappearing from the global balance; it is a disruption to shipments,” Zlochevskiy said. “If exports resume, the balance will be restored. Russian shipments, for example, have not stopped completely — grain is still moving via land routes and alternative maritime routes.”

What’s next?

The latest escalation came somewhat out of the blue. The war is now in its fifth year, and although Russia blockaded Ukraine’s ports at the very outset of the conflict, commercial shipping gradually carved out a fragile space. Both sides relied on established maritime export corridors, with grain continuing to move. That tacit status quo has now been shattered.

Turkey and other regional players already are calling for a new maritime ceasefire, but the prospects for reviving the kind of arrangement that once kept commercial shipping moving appear uncertain. Practice shows that the old rules of engagement at sea may be much harder to restore than they were to maintain.

Grain industry analysts increasingly fear that the Black Sea war could now last as long as the wider conflict itself. If so, the global grain trade may have to contend with a new reality that could persist for years rather than weeks.