President Donald Trump’s administration is increasing direct contact with Moscow, pairing a renewed diplomatic push over the Ukraine war with efforts to manage Russia’s role in the conflict with Iran and the economic pressures created by two simultaneous geopolitical crises.

The latest signal came at the U.S.-hosted meeting of Group of 20 finance ministers and central bank governors in Asheville, North Carolina, where Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov appeared in person and held bilateral talks with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. It was Siluanov’s first in-person participation at such a G20 gathering since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

The meeting followed CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s rare visit to Moscow in late August. Ratcliffe met senior Russian intelligence officials, and U.S. reporting indicated that the trip covered possible renewed negotiations over Ukraine as well as security concerns involving NATO and Russia’s relationship with Iran. Trump later described the discussions as productive while emphasizing his continued interest in reaching a settlement to the Ukraine conflict.

Taken together, the contacts suggest that Washington sees value in keeping a channel to Moscow open even while sanctions remain in place and Russia’s military campaign in Ukraine continues. Three overlapping considerations help explain the administration’s approach.

First, Trump is still seeking a diplomatic opening on Ukraine. The president has repeatedly presented ending the Russia-Ukraine war as a major foreign-policy objective, but attempts to broker a settlement have struggled over territorial demands, security guarantees and the sequencing of any ceasefire.

Ratcliffe’s Moscow mission offered Washington another route for testing whether the Kremlin is prepared to return to substantive negotiations. Axios reported that the CIA director raised the possibility of a summit involving Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. No such meeting has been announced, and major disagreements between Moscow and Kyiv remain unresolved.

The G20 encounter provided a second channel. U.S. officials said Bessent’s meeting with Siluanov focused on Trump’s Ukraine peace effort. At the same time, Washington sought to signal that engagement would not automatically produce economic benefits for Moscow. Reuters reported that Bessent told Siluanov there could be no economic relief or agreements on other areas of cooperation while the war continued.

That distinction — contact without immediate normalization — appears central to the administration’s strategy. Trump has often argued that direct communication with adversaries can produce agreements that isolation cannot. European governments, however, fear that repeatedly welcoming Russian officials into senior international forums could weaken the diplomatic pressure built around Moscow since 2022.

German Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil publicly objected to Siluanov’s presence and said relations with Russia should not be normalized while the Ukraine war continues. Other European officials expressed similar concerns, and the traditional G20 group photograph was taken without the Russian delegation after objections from European participants.

Second, Washington has reasons to separate Russia from Iran as much as possible. Russia and Iran have developed significant political and security ties, giving Moscow potential influence over Tehran at a time when the United States is heavily engaged in the Middle East.

The U.S.-Iran conflict has extended well beyond the short confrontation once anticipated in Washington, putting additional pressure on American military resources, regional alliances and global energy markets. The Strait of Hormuz has become particularly important because disruptions there can quickly affect oil supplies and consumer fuel prices worldwide.

Earlier in the conflict, Trump and Putin discussed both Iran and Ukraine by telephone. U.S. officials have also communicated concerns about Russian assistance to Tehran. That gives Washington a practical reason to preserve communication with Moscow even when cooperation on Ukraine remains difficult: Russia is one of the few major powers capable of maintaining direct ties with Iranian leaders while also talking to the United States.

The objective does not necessarily require Russia to become a U.S. partner against Iran. Even limiting additional Russian intelligence, military or economic assistance to Tehran could have strategic value for Washington. Conversely, deteriorating U.S.-Russia relations could give Moscow a stronger incentive to help Iran frustrate American pressure.

Third, energy security and the broader global economy have made Russia harder for Washington to treat in isolation. The Iran war has affected energy flows and intensified concerns about the availability and price of oil. Russia remains one of the world’s largest energy producers, meaning decisions involving Russian exports can influence markets far beyond Europe.

The Trump administration has maintained significant sanctions on the Russian economy while making limited adjustments intended to prevent the Middle East conflict from producing even greater supply disruptions. Reuters reported that U.S. authorities had permitted sales of certain Russian oil already held aboard ships after the Iran conflict disrupted supplies through the Strait of Hormuz.

That illustrates the difficult balance facing Washington. Sanctions are designed to reduce Russia’s ability to finance its war in Ukraine, but an abrupt reduction in Russian supply during a Middle East energy shock could increase oil and gasoline prices, complicating U.S. economic policy and adding pressure on allies.

The Asheville G20 meeting also highlighted how closely these geopolitical issues now intersect with international finance. The gathering addressed global debt, trade imbalances and economic growth while ministers simultaneously confronted disagreements over Russia, China and the Iran conflict. Bessent defended maintaining dialogue with Moscow while rejecting the idea that talks amounted to immediate economic rehabilitation.

For now, the administration’s Russia outreach is better understood as selective engagement than as a full reset. Sanctions remain, U.S. officials continue to say the Ukraine war must end before broader economic cooperation can resume, and European governments remain deeply skeptical of Moscow.

But the sequence of Ratcliffe’s Moscow visit, Siluanov’s return to a U.S.-hosted G20 meeting and direct U.S.-Russian discussions shows that Trump is again testing whether personal diplomacy and high-level contacts can create leverage across several conflicts at once. Whether that approach produces progress will depend on decisions in Moscow, Kyiv and Tehran — and on whether Washington can convince its European allies that dialogue with Russia is a means to an agreement rather than the beginning of normalization without one.