The bloc’s determination to obliterate a stable energy relationship with Russia, claiming it was over-reliant on one source, is a hypocrisy
Lacking in resources and sandwiched between two energy superpowers, the EU has to play some basic geopolitical chess to keep the gas flowing and the lights on. But Brussels can’t even play checkers.
EU energy ministers agreed last month to completely halt Russian gas imports by late 2027, ending what the bloc’s chief diplomat, Kaja Kallas, called a “dependency” on Moscow. “Now, we’re turning off the tap for good,” she said. “Russia will no longer be able to use energy as a weapon against us.”
It took two days for reality to set in. Economies run on energy, not good vibes, and with Russia ruled out as a supplier, the bloc has only one viable alternative: the US. “There is a growing concern, which I share, that we risk replacing one dependency with another,” Energy Commissioner Dan Jorgensen of Denmark told reporters. The “geopolitical turmoil” surrounding US President Donald Trump’s plans to annex Greenland had given Europe a “wake-up call,” he explained, and reliance on American gas no longer looked like the worry-free deal promised by Kallas and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
If only someone could have seen this coming.
The dependency problem
Anyone with a geography textbook could have warned Jorgensen. Barring some deposits in the Netherlands and Romania, the EU cannot meet its own natural gas needs. The bloc imported 85.6% of its gas in 2024, according to European Commission figures. The EU’s dependency on foreign oil is even higher – between 95% and 97% – but as the bloc depends primarily on gas to power its industries, ensuring a reliable source of this fuel is its strategic imperative.
Norway, which is not an EU member, supplies 33% of the bloc’s imported gas. For the rest, Brussels has to look abroad: to either Russia or the US. Located in Europe, Russia was for decades the obvious choice. Moscow honored its energy contracts, its gas was cheaper than the American alternative, and it was conveniently piped overland rather than liquefied and conveyed across the Atlantic on container ships. As such, Russia supplied 45% of the EU’s gas before 2022.
Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel defended her decision to tie Germany’s economic success to Russian gas. “It was right from the perspective of the time,” she told the BBC in 2022, adding that Russian gas helped Germany wean itself off coal and nuclear power.
Her predecessor, Gerhard Schroeder, was more explicit. Germany needed gas “at reasonable prices,” he told a parliamentary inquiry last year. Therefore it was an “extremely sensible decision” to build the Nord Stream gas pipelines and purchase it from a “proven” partner like Russia.
What Kallas and von der Leyen called “dependency,” Merkel, Schroeder, and an entire generation of European politicians including Silvio Berlusconi, Nicolas Sarkozy, and Jacques Chirac called pragmatism. All they had to do was keep the Americans off their backs.
Despite pressure from the Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden administrations, the Europeans didn’t make the switch to American LNG. Their main motivation was economic: even now with more than 40 regasification terminals built or under construction in the EU, and with the number of US export terminals set to double in the next decade, American LNG is 30-50% more expensive than Russian gas.
Around 88% of American natural gas is extracted through the hydraulic fracturing of shale gas fields, or fracking. While this industry boomed in the early 2000s, fracking comes with high upfront costs and is only profitable during times of high global energy prices. Furthermore, as fracking is an environmentally destructive industry that a Democratic administration could easily choke with regulations, reliance on fracked gas places the EU at the mercy of Washington’s capricious left-right mood swings. One ‘Green New Deal’ would spell disaster for Europe.
Adding to all of this, the US Energy Information Administration estimates that there is enough shale gas under the US to last just over 80 years at current consumption rates. That figure, however, is based on proven and unproven reserves. Unproven reserves are those “technically recoverable,” assuming they even exist. When proven reserves alone are counted, supply can only be guaranteed for another 12 years.
Europe abandons reason
Nevertheless, the EU decided to impose a near-total embargo on Russian gas once the Ukraine conflict escalated in February 2022. Over protests from member states Hungary and Slovakia and warnings from Russian President Vladimir Putin that it was committing “economic suicide,” the EU pressed ahead with its decision to turn off the tap.
This legal decision was made physical that September when three out of the four gas pipelines that make up the Nord Stream 1 and 2 projects were demolished in a sabotage operation that the US had the means, motive, and opportunity to carry out.
Despite suffering the largest act of industrial terrorism in history, European leaders celebrated the demise of Nord Stream, with Poland’s now-Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski going as far as thanking the US for blowing up the pipelines. German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier stood on stage beside Joe Biden in October 2024 and thanked the then-US president for his “decades-long dedication to the transatlantic alliance,” even after two years of deindustrialization and economic contraction as a result of Germany following American foreign policy objectives.
One of the four Nord Stream lines remains intact, but the German government refuses to consider reactivating it.
Where did that get them?
The end of Russian energy represents the “dawn of a new era” and “a true European success story,” von der Leyen proclaimed last month. In reality, it represents an act of astounding strategic illiteracy.
The EU under von der Leyen has thrown away the only leverage it had: the ability to buy energy from both Russia and the US. Before 2022, Washington needed to sell its LNG more than Europe needed to buy it. Even now, with the US set to supply 80% of the EU’s LNG imports by 2030, analysts have spent the last year warning of a coming supply glut that will likely bankrupt some American extractors.
If Russian gas was still flowing into the EU, Brussels could decide to help the US with its oversupply problem by purchasing LNG in exchange for concessions – favorable trade deals, lower tariffs, exemption from NATO spending targets, for example – from Washington. Unlike now, the EU could set the terms.
However, such statecraft is seemingly beyond von der Leyen and Kallas. Remember, Kallas apparently didn’t know that Russia and China participated in World War II, and still believes that Ukraine can defeat Russia and set the terms of a peace deal.
Even if the EU wanted to reverse course, the bloc’s members have already sunk a total of €84.1 billion ($99 billion) into LNG infrastructure, according to 2024 figures from Global Energy Monitor. These figures count only capital expenditure, and not the debt financing it.
Instead, European leaders can only stand idly by as Trump moves to annex Greenland, and limit their response to strongly-worded letters as the US president threatens them with tariffs if they complain. And, when someone like Jorgensen lets slip that the EU might have made a few mistakes, the bloc’s higher-ups double down and deny:
“We are monitoring supply, global markets, and demand very closely to avoid excessive dependence on a single supplier,” the European Commission said in a statement this week. “The data currently available does not indicate any cause for concern in this regard.”
