On Thursday, October 8, a new border crossing, “Bila Tserkva–Sighetu Marmatiei,” began operations on the border between Ukraine and Romania, according to Mykola Kalashnyk, Ukraine’s Minister of Recovery, Infrastructure, and Transport.
“This is the first new road crossing between our countries in Zakarpattia in nearly 20 years,” Kalashnik emphasized in a post on his Telegram channel.
He noted that this is the region’s third road border crossing with Romania. An additional route for people and businesses, an opportunity to redistribute traffic flows and reduce the burden on existing crossings.
“It is of particular importance for residents of the Solotvyno community, where Bila Tserkva is located. A large community of ethnic Romanians lives here, and many families have relatives on the other side of the border. The new crossing will make these trips—to parents, children, and loved ones—easier. It is precisely these daily needs of people that should determine how we develop our infrastructure,” the minister noted.
Currently, the border crossing can process up to 400 passenger cars per day. To launch it, an access road was built on the Ukrainian side, and modular infrastructure for border and customs control was installed. Romanian partners built the border crossing and a new bridge over the Tisa River.
“We’re opening traffic on the temporary infrastructure so that people can use the crossing right now. This is the first phase of the project. Next, we plan to build a full-scale complex for processing trucks and buses. Once the work is completed, it will be able to process up to 360 trucks and 50 buses per day,” Kalashnik concluded.
In September 2026, Ukrainians purchased 21,500 used passenger cars imported from abroad, which is 8% less than in the same month of 2025, according to a report by Ukravtoprom on its Telegram channel.
Compared to August of this year, demand for such cars rose by 4.4%.
Gasoline-powered cars accounted for the largest share of this segment of the auto market in September, increasing their share by 7 percentage points compared to September 2025—to 52%.
Next came electric vehicles, whose share fell to 18% from 29% last year, while the share of diesel cars decreased by 2 percentage points to 16%. They outpaced hybrids, which accounted for 11% (5%). The share of cars with LPG systems remained unchanged at 3%.
The average age of imported used cars was 8.7 years.
The Volkswagen Golf confidently tops the list of the ten most popular imported used models with 954 units. Next are the VW Tiguan with 807 units, the Audi Q5 with 658 units, the Skoda Octavia with 655 units, the Nissan Rogue—626 units, the Renault Megane—559 units, the Tesla Model Y—512 units, the Nissan Leaf—484 units, the Tesla Model 3—468 units, and the Volkswagen Passat—409 units.
As reported with reference to “Ukravtoprom,” in 2025, Ukrainians purchased 274,300 used passenger cars imported from abroad, which is 24% more than in 2024. Following the Volkswagen Golf, the top three most popular models included two Tesla electric vehicles—the Model Y and the Model 3.
According to Interfax-Ukraine, most Ukrainians are open to territorial concessions to achieve long-term peace, provided there are security guarantees from the U.S. and European partners, and 57% support a ceasefire and seeking a compromise through negotiations, according to the results of a poll by the Rating Group conducted October 3–5.
“Most Ukrainians are ready for a ceasefire and support negotiations as a way to achieve peace. However, this does not mean peace under any conditions. The overwhelming majority believes that neither Ukraine nor Russia is winning the war at this time (62%). A quarter indicate that Ukraine has the upper hand (26%), while 6% say Russia does,” the report states.
Half of the respondents (50%) believe that peace is more important than any victory, while 41% hold the opposite view. Another 9% were undecided. The survey notes that, against the backdrop of intensified shelling in recent months, the proportion of those who consider victory more important has increased.
At the same time, 57% of those surveyed support a ceasefire and seeking a compromise through negotiations. Thirteen percent advocate continuing hostilities until a return to the line of control as of February 23, 2022, while another 21% believe it is necessary to continue hostilities until the territories of Donbas and Crimea are recovered.
The majority of respondents support negotiations as a path to ending the war: 57% view reaching a compromise with the involvement of other countries as the way forward, while another 26% favor direct negotiations.
“Territorial concessions are acceptable, but only with security guarantees, and the decision must be made in a nationwide referendum.” One-third of those surveyed support territorial concessions as a step toward long-term peace. At the same time, 56% believe that territorial concessions can be made for the sake of long-term peace, but only on the condition of security guarantees from the U.S. and European partners, which would include funding for the Armed Forces and military equipment. Only 3% support concessions without preconditions, while 6% answered “difficult to say,” according to the survey results.
If territorial concessions are considered a condition for peace, 68% of respondents believe that the final decision on this issue should be made by the people in a nationwide referendum. Meanwhile, 17% believe the decision should be made by the President of Ukraine, and 9% by the Verkhovna Rada. According to the study, this position has remained virtually unchanged over the past year.
As noted, the “Rating” Sociological Group conducted the survey October 3–5, 2026, using the CATI method among 1,000 respondents aged 18 and older in all regions of Ukraine, except for the ATO zone, as well as in areas where Ukrainian mobile service was unavailable at the time of the survey. The sample was formed by randomly selecting mobile phone numbers, and the results were weighted according to current data from the State Statistics Service. The sample is representative in terms of age, gender, and type of settlement; the statistical margin of error does not exceed 3.1 percentage points with a confidence level of 0.95.
The mining and steel company Metinvest continues to hope for support from its global partners amid the war, but recently, the European Union and the European Commission have taken numerous measures that cast doubt on whether it is worth investing in the Ukrainian steel industry at all.
The company’s CEO, Yuriy Ryzhenkov, expressed this view in an interview with the Financial Times.
As an example, he cited the quotas imposed on Ukrainian steel in the EU, even though Ukraine’s agreements with the EU—in particular the Association Agreement and other agreements signed in recent years—effectively provided for free access to the European market. Despite the fact that Ukraine has exported significantly less steel to the EU over the past few years than before, the corresponding Ukrainian quotas have been reduced by more than 50%.
“In my view, this is a very strange move. If you want to support the country, it’s better to allow its industry to operate and pay taxes. These funds will strengthen the country’s defense capabilities and economy. This is more effective than grants or preferential loans. I hope our officials, together with their European colleagues, will be able to review this situation and rectify it,” said Ryzhenkov.
According to him, a much better approach would be to consider how the Ukrainian economy—particularly the metallurgical sector—can become part of the broader European market and the European economy, thereby making it stronger rather than weaker. “I also believe that it is very important right now for people in Brussels to understand the conditions under which we are working. We are forced to operate amid constant disruptions in logistics and staff shortages. Many people have left the country. More than 8,500 of our employees have been drafted into the army. We have an unstable energy supply and very high energy costs,” the CEO noted.
He emphasized that it is, to some extent, unfair and incorrect to treat the Ukrainian steel industry on par with that of other countries supplying products to the EU. The situation in Ukraine requires a special approach, greater understanding, and, perhaps, certain tools that will allow us to survive now and return to investment and growth in the future.
When asked whether the company had assessed the total amount of losses, the CEO noted that a comprehensive assessment has not yet been conducted. “As I’ve already said, we are currently clearing debris and assessing damage to infrastructure and production facilities. And this is not the first time since the Russian invasion that our facilities have come under attack, so we will be able to provide a more accurate assessment once the war is over. Only then will it be possible to discuss the cost of recovery from the damage.”
Ryzhenkov noted that all of the company’s international projects are linked to Ukrainian production and Ukrainian resources, and there is hope that this will continue to be the case. “Currently, our rolling mills in Europe and the United Kingdom are operating autonomously. At the same time, we already have plans in place and are taking steps to restore vertical integration with Ukrainian enterprises and return to our previous model. In short, we remain very active. We consider Europe, as well as the Mediterranean and Black Sea regions, to be our main markets. We want to continue to be present in these markets and remain open to new opportunities,” Ryzhenkov concluded.
Metinvest is a vertically integrated group consisting of mining and metallurgical enterprises. Its enterprises are located in Ukraine—in the Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Dnipropetrovsk regions—as well as in European countries. The holding’s main shareholders are the SCM Group (71.24%) and Smart Holding (23.76%). Metinvest Holding LLC is the management company of the Metinvest Group.
Source: https://metinvestholding.com
India has proposed a three-part ceasefire plan to Ukraine and Russia that calls for an end to attacks on energy and other infrastructure, the assurance of uninterrupted exports of grain and energy resources through the Black Sea, and a halt to attacks on commercial vessels.
This was reported on October 7 by the Hindustan Times, citing sources familiar with the proposal. The full text of the Indian initiative has not yet been made public.
According to the publication, the first point calls for a halt to attacks on energy facilities and other critical infrastructure.
The second concerns ensuring the unimpeded passage of grain and energy resources through Black Sea ports.
The third calls for a halt to attacks on commercial shipping in the Black Sea.
According to the Hindustan Times, the proposal was presented to Ukrainian leaders during a visit by Indian Foreign Minister Subramanyam Jaishankar to Kyiv on September 3. He discussed the initiative in separate meetings with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiga.
The Indian initiative combines elements of several other proposals for a partial ceasefire. According to the publication, Egypt and Turkey proposed focusing on the safety of commercial shipping and grain exports through the Black Sea, while the U.S. proposal primarily concerned a halt to attacks on energy infrastructure.
On October 2, Sybiga confirmed that Ukraine had received ceasefire proposals from India, Turkey, Egypt, and the U.S., and described the Indian proposal as the most comprehensive. He noted that Kyiv is ready to consider various formats of a ceasefire, including an energy and Black Sea ceasefire, provided it also extends to port infrastructure.
On October 4, Indian Foreign Minister Jaishankar also publicly confirmed that New Delhi had shifted in recent months from general calls for peace to direct consultations with Moscow and Kyiv. According to him, the Indian side is discussing the safety of shipping in the Black Sea, the export of grain and energy resources, as well as the possibility of a mutual renunciation of certain types of attacks.
One of the motivations behind the Indian initiative is New Delhi’s interest in the stability of energy supplies and the security of maritime transport. According to the Hindustan Times, nearly 30% of Russian energy supplies to India pass through Black Sea ports. In recent weeks, attacks on commercial vessels have led to supply disruptions and rising freight costs.
In addition, five Indian sailors have been killed in attacks on merchant ships in the region over the past few weeks, prompting Indian authorities to repeatedly call for an end to attacks on civilian shipping.
Russia and Ukraine have not yet officially announced their direct responses to all three points of the Indian plan. The Hindustan Times reports on ongoing contacts between the parties, though details of these talks have not been disclosed.
The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry previously stated that Kyiv is ready for a complete and unconditional ceasefire, as well as for separate agreements to halt attacks on energy and food infrastructure.
In January–September 2026, Poland increased its diesel fuel shipments to Ukraine by 44% compared to the same period last year—to over 2 million metric tons, according to data from the A-95 Consulting Group and its analysis by the Experts Club think tank.
In September, 202,600 metric tons of diesel fuel were supplied from Poland, which is virtually the same as the September 2025 level of 202,000 metric tons.
Romania remained the second-largest supplier in September, with 156,700 metric tons, compared to 158,600 metric tons a year earlier. Supplies from Lithuania increased by 7% to 65.9 thousand metric tons.
At the same time, imports from Southern Europe fell significantly. Supplies from Greece dropped by 70% to 40.8 thousand metric tons, and from Turkey by 88% to 6.1 thousand metric tons.
Overall, the volume of imports from southern Europe in September fell by 38%—to 220,000 metric tons—and its share of total imports decreased from 52% to 41%.
“Due to the war in Iran, southern European supplies are significantly more expensive this year than northern ones, and this is the main reason for the decline in volumes,” notes “A-95”.
Over the first nine months, diesel fuel imports from Lithuania rose by 33%—to over 560,000 metric tons. At the same time, shipments from Hungary fell by 49%—to 266,000 metric tons.
According to Serhiy Kuyun, director of the “A-95” Consulting Group, this shift in the geography of supplies indicates the Ukrainian fuel market’s continued adaptation to changes in price conditions and logistical risks.
The “A-95” Consulting Group conducts research on the motor fuel market, monitors prices and logistics, and analyzes the supply of resources to the Ukrainian market.
