The paradox Ukraine faces has a direct precedent. During the Iran-Iraq tanker war (1984 to 1988), both belligerents attacked each other's oil export infrastructure and neutral shipping in the Persian Gulf. The attacks reduced volumes for both sides, but supply anxiety pushed global prices upward, partially offsetting the damage.
The difference in 2026 is that Ukraine is not attacking its own exports. It is a third party striking Russian terminals while a separate conflict drives the price surge. The combination produces a perverse outcome: Ukraine's most effective strikes coincide with Russia's largest revenue windfall.
Historically, oil infrastructure campaigns succeed only when sustained long enough to force production cuts, not just export disruption. Iraq's attacks on Kharg Island required repeated strikes over years before Iran was forced to develop alternative terminals at Larak and Sirri. The question for Ukraine is identical: can it maintain Baltic strike tempo through the repair cycle, or will Russia restore capacity before storage saturation forces shutdowns?