Europe
US influence shifts European energy corridors from an east-west to a north-south axis
The long-dominant, Germany-centric East-West energy infrastructure in Eastern Europe is reorienting toward a North-South axis under the guidance of the US.
The German government is attempting to sign long-term contracts for gas imports from Qatar to become independent of LNG imported from the US. German Minister for Economic Affairs Katherina Reiche held talks on this matter in Doha, the capital of Qatar, on Wednesday (November 19).
According to industry data, 94% of the liquefied natural gas currently imported through Germany’s four terminals in the North and Baltic Seas comes from the US.
The construction of LNG terminals in Europe and the pipelines that distribute gas from them is politically and economically supported by Washington. Preparations for this purpose culminated in the Three Seas Initiative in 2015. The Trump administration is also using this initiative to achieve its goal of “global energy dominance.”
North-South lines in energy supply
The US has been trying for years to increase its LNG exports to the EU by supporting the expansion of the necessary infrastructure, including terminals and their connecting pipelines. This applies to the LNG terminals in Poland, Lithuania, and Croatia that have become operational in recent years, which are bringing increasing amounts of US gas ashore.
Currently, plans to expand deliveries through Greece are being accelerated. In addition to the terminal on the island of Revythousa near Athens, a second terminal became operational last year in Alexandroupolis, near the Turkish border, with three more terminals planned.
Furthermore, the “Vertical Corridor,” a pipeline infrastructure that transports natural gas northward from terminals in Greece, is also being expanded. This corridor extends on one hand to Hungary via Bulgaria and Serbia or Romania, and on the other hand to Ukraine via Bulgaria and Moldova. The first deliveries to Ukraine were made this summer.
The northern corridor is largely based on the old pipeline infrastructure that formerly distributed Russian gas, but it also requires the construction of some additional elements.
The importance of the Three Seas Initiative in energy supply
The pipelines, extending largely in a north-south direction from liquefied natural gas terminals, are part of a long-term strategy officially launched in 2015 by then-Polish President Andrzej Duda and then-Croatian President Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović: the Three Seas Initiative.
This initiative aims to augment the predominantly unilateral east-west infrastructure of Eastern and Southeastern Europe, which is oriented toward the EU’s center, Germany, with north-south components, thereby facilitating the region’s independent development without reliance on Germany.
The Washington-based Atlantic Council had laid the groundwork for this initiative by preparing a detailed study titled Completing Europe, which discussed the creation of a “north-south corridor stretching from the Baltic Sea to the Adriatic and Black Seas.” The initiative’s name is derived from these three seas. The Atlantic Council also involved Central Europe Energy Partners (CEEP), a lobby organization consisting of Polish, Lithuanian, and Romanian energy companies, in this study.
US energy dominance shapes corridors in Europe
The cessation of Russian gas purchases, imposed by the EU in its power struggle with Russia, has made it easier for the US to shift Europe’s natural gas supply from an east-west to a north-south orientation—that is, from liquefied natural gas terminals in the Baltic Sea and the Mediterranean to the continent’s center.
From the perspective of the Trump administration, which is pushing this change even further, this situation helps the US achieve “energy dominance.” Washington is focused on increasing the production of oil and especially natural gas to accelerate the transition from renewable energy sources to fossil fuels, not just domestically but globally.
The conservative Heritage Foundation, which is preparing Trump’s second-term program, believes this will enable them to become independent of China’s green energy supply chains and gain “geopolitical leverage against friends and foes.”
Shift in energy corridor is to Germany’s detriment
The shift of the EU’s natural gas supply from an east-west to a north-south direction has also led to a loss of influence for Germany. Thanks especially to the Nord Stream pipelines, Germany was once an influential hub for the distribution of Russian gas in Europe. Today, however, it only transfers limited quantities of US gas from its terminals in the North and Baltic Seas to Austria and the Czech Republic.
With the EU’s decision to end Russian gas purchases by 2027, the importance of terminals and north-south pipelines is growing, although this importance is expected to decline again in the long term.
According to IEEFA estimates, the transition to renewable energies will reduce the EU’s gas consumption by up to 15% by 2030, which means a decrease in demand for US gas. Of course, this is contingent on the EU continuing its transition to renewable energy.
At the recently co-hosted Transatlantic Energy Cooperation Partnership (P-TEC) conference in Athens, US Assistant Secretary of Energy Chris Wright emphasized that the EU should reconsider its decision to shift toward wind and solar power.
Goal of more gas from Qatar
The German government wants to purchase more LNG from Qatar in the future. This information was confirmed by Federal Minister for Economic Affairs Katherina Reiche during her visit to Doha on Wednesday.
The German government is particularly focused on long-term supply contracts. Andreas Feicht, CEO of Rhein Energie, Germany’s third-largest energy supplier, who accompanied Reiche to Doha, explained that these contracts could be secured at more favorable prices than short-term ones, potentially bringing prices closer to the extremely low costs of Russian pipeline gas that Germany had procured for decades.
However, some challenges arise here. If Qatar supplies liquefied natural gas to the EU, it risks violating the supply chain directive and facing penalties. One reason for this is that the directive requires companies operating in the EU to submit plans on how they will achieve the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement.
During Reiche’s visit to Doha, it was reaffirmed that in such a case, Qatar would sell its LNG on other continents. It remains unclear how this conflict will be resolved.
The US remains Germany’s main supplier
Increasing LNG imports from Qatar is seen as the most viable way to escape the overwhelming dominance of the US in this field. The US has significantly increased its LNG production in recent years, and this increase has accelerated since President Donald Trump took office.
In October, the US became the first country in the world to export over 10 million tons of LNG in a single month. This was made possible by Europe increasing its purchases from 6.22 million tons in September to 6.9 million tons in October.
Thus, Europe purchased approximately 69% of American LNG, with the largest contribution coming from Germany. Currently, rapidly increasing amounts of liquefied gas are being pumped ashore from four terminals: two in Wilhelmshaven on the North Sea, one in Brunsbüttel, and one in Rügen on the Baltic Sea.
According to the state-appointed terminal company DET, the terminal on the Elbe River in Stade will become operational in the second quarter of 2026 at the earliest. This terminal will be the fifth floating storage and regasification unit (FSRU) to receive LNG by sea.
ReGas and Hoegh plan to develop the Baltic Sea port of Mukran into a terminal for the production and import of green ammonia and hydrogen. Gascade will connect this terminal with its customers once the project is realized.
This volume currently constitutes 13.25% of Germany’s natural gas imports. According to data from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), 94% of Germany’s LNG imports come from the US.
In the first half of 2025, Europe imported approximately 57% of its LNG from the US; in October, this figure reached 60% and continues to rise.
Europe
Fico accuses Merz of blackmail over threat to veto EU budget
Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has hit back after German Chancellor Friedrich Merz threatened to veto the EU budget unless funding for Ukraine is secured.
Merz said he would block the EU’s seven-year budget if no agreement is reached on financial assistance for Ukraine.
The chancellor’s intervention has angered Central European leaders who are net beneficiaries of EU funds but do not want to take part in the next round of funding to support Ukraine’s war effort.
“What the chancellor is doing is typical blackmail, and I will not bow to it,” Fico told reporters in Bratislava.
Fico spoke alongside his Czech counterpart, Andrej Babiš, whose government has refused to participate in a future loan to Ukraine.
“I do not know why he said this,” Babiš said, referring to Merz’s stance.
Merz wants EU leaders to discuss Ukraine’s financing needs at a summit in Dublin on Friday.
In a letter to European Council President António Costa, who will chair the meeting, obtained by The Guardian, Merz wrote:
“We must maintain our support for Ukraine in its struggle to defend itself. This is our shared vital interest. Yet bilateral aid provided to Ukraine is distributed unevenly, with the burden shouldered mostly by only a few member states.”
The EU agreed last year to provide a €90 billion loan to Ukraine, intended to cover two-thirds of its military and civilian spending for 2026 and 2027.
Since then, however, Russia’s relentless bombardment has placed a heavier financial burden on Kyiv, prompting President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to ask for €70 billion to plug the budget deficit.
The EU has endorsed Zelenskyy’s figures and pledged to find €45 billion. Ukraine’s other allies, such as Britain and Canada, are expected to cover the rest.
Last year, Merz launched an initiative to tap €210 billion in frozen Russian state assets held in the EU, but the plan fell through due to opposition led by Belgium, which holds most of the funds in Brussels.
The €90 billion loan was the backup plan. Having opted out of that loan, Hungary, Slovakia, and Czechia indicated that they would not take part in the next round either.
Bulgaria joined these three member states following the election of Prime Minister Rumen Radev last April.
The question of funding for Ukraine is now spilling over into the fraught negotiations on the 2028-34 EU budget.
Germany, the largest net contributor, wants substantial cuts to the proposed budget and opposes the EU providing generous funding to member states that refuse to contribute to Ukraine’s financial needs.
Merz states in his letter that a “collective commitment without exceptions” is a “fundamental prerequisite” for closing Ukraine’s financing gap and for “discussing other matters, particularly those with financial implications.”
He also notes that, in the context of the EU’s next seven-year budget, known as the Multiannual Financial Framework, all member states must contribute to a “robust” financial perspective for Ukraine from 2028 onwards.
A German government official said:
“For the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) to be successfully concluded, it is vital that all EU member states provide financial support to Ukraine.”
Berlin is also aiming to shift decision-making on funding for Ukraine from unanimity to qualified majority voting, in an effort to prevent a single government from blocking EU decisions.
The letter reflects mounting frustration among the EU’s northern member states, Ukraine’s most generous backers, over lower contributions from other EU countries in Central and Southern Europe.
The task of brokering an agreement on the budget falls to Costa, the former Portuguese prime minister.
Costa wants a deal by the end of the year, ahead of elections in France, Poland, and Italy in 2027 that could complicate the process.
A spokesperson for Costa confirmed receipt of the letter without elaborating on details. “President Costa will dedicate time to the Ukraine issue at the informal European Council meeting in Dublin this week,” the spokesperson said, adding that funding for Ukraine would be addressed at a dedicated summit on the EU budget scheduled for 26-27 November.
Europe
EU expects next Israeli government to adopt less aggressive posture
The EU expects the next Israeli government to mend its “difficult relationship” with Brussels and adopt a more constructive approach toward Gaza and illegal settlements.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog tasked Gadi Eisenkot, the leader of the anti-Netanyahu bloc, on Sunday with forming a government.
Eisenkot stated that the country faces a “catastrophic diplomatic crisis” as traditional allies begin to reassess their relations with Israel.
Speaking to Rapporteur, several European diplomats stationed in Tel Aviv said they expect ties to get back on track.
“Whatever government comes in, we can try to revitalize relations because Israel is clearly a very important partner,” one European diplomat said, adding that Brussels expects the next administration to be “less aggressive”.
The diplomat noted that relations with Europe are currently “not very good”.
Israel cut off communication with Kaja Kallas, the EU high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, after Rapporteur revealed in June that she had compared Israel to apartheid-era South Africa during a visit to Mexico.
The diplomat stated that this decision, taken ahead of elections, was political in nature. A second European diplomat based in Brussels explained that the announcement came only a few days before an official visit by Dubravka Šuica, the European commissioner for the Mediterranean.
“This could have been interpreted as a tactic to divide Europe, but Israel had asked Kallas to deny the report; she did not do so,” the second diplomat said.
Brussels has repeatedly voiced its frustration with Israel over the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the expansion of West Bank settlements.
However, EU governments blocked almost all sanctions proposed by the European Commission.
A third diplomat said opposition parties would “almost certainly take the issue more seriously” when it comes to tackling violence by West Bank settlers:
“We see Palestinians being expelled from their homes and new illegal settlements being built in the West Bank. There is a reluctance on the part of the current government to address this issue, which causes problems in our relations.”
The new government is expected to ease pressure on Palestinians and halt construction of the E1 settlement project, a controversial plan to build settler housing in the West Bank east of Jerusalem.
“They will probably try to deal with the problem of extremist settlers in the West Bank,” the diplomat added.
On Gaza, the diplomat described the situation as “a complete nightmare”, with two million Palestinians crowded into an area that accounts for roughly 35% of the territory.
“There are not enough tents for the winter, and not enough vaccines are reaching the area despite an increase in diseases,” the diplomat said.
The European official argued that Donald Trump’s peace plan met all the conditions for Europe. Although the EU had much to offer, neither the US nor Israel appeared interested in EU involvement in the process.
“We are currently training Palestinian police in the West Bank, and if permitted, we could do the same in Gaza,” the diplomat said.
The diplomat disclosed that Israel had agreed with Šuica that Europe would finance two projects aimed at improving sewage and water infrastructure in Gaza, continuing:
“However, none of these projects has started yet because there is a serious problem with dual-use goods. Getting materials into Gaza is very difficult because the Israelis say they could be misused if they fall into the wrong hands of Hamas.”
Israel insists that Hamas must be disarmed before subsequent phases of Trump’s plan can proceed.
With disarmament unlikely to happen in the near term, the EU argues that certain measures can be carried out in parallel.
“We can begin rebuilding sanitation systems in Gaza. We can start building desalination plants. We can begin providing energy and water to Gaza,” one diplomat said.
While Brussels hopes for progress on Gaza and the West Bank, it maintains that expectations regarding the establishment of a Palestinian state need to be “managed”.
The EU continues to advocate a two-state solution, yet most leading Jewish parties oppose the creation of a Palestinian state.
The diplomat noted that the next Israeli government will likely have “a very slim majority and not much room for manoeuvre”.
There is also a “major misunderstanding” between the EU and Israel that must be addressed. According to the diplomat, Europeans fail to recognize the “psychological impact” of 7 October on Israelis.
“This event changed the country and made the two-state solution even more distant than before,” the diplomat said.
In return, some Israeli politicians believe Europe has betrayed Israel despite what they view as a fight against “Islamist terrorism”.
“Their argument is that European politicians are somewhat afraid of the Muslim population in Europe,” the European diplomat said.
Europe strongly opposes Iran and the possibility of Tehran acquiring nuclear weapons, imposing sanctions in response.
However, the diplomat argued that the EU would not participate in a war because it lacks a common army:
“We are a diplomatic and economic power, which is why we resort to sanctions and diplomacy. The expectation that we would take part in a military operation is unrealistic.”
Europe
Germany threatens EU budget veto over long-term Ukraine aid
Germany has threatened to veto the European Union’s joint budget for the 2028-2034 period, which is currently under negotiation, unless every member state commits to providing financial support to Ukraine in 2027 and subsequent years, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz warned.
According to a report by the Financial Times (FT), Chancellor Merz set out Berlin’s condition for the budget talks in a letter addressed to European Council President António Costa.
In his letter, Merz wrote: “A collective commitment that every single one of us, without exception, will make a fair contribution to closing Ukraine’s budget deficit is an indispensable prerequisite for resolving this budget issue and, in particular, for addressing subsequent matters that carry financial implications.”
The German Chancellor stressed that a formula backed by all member states must be established to provide Ukraine with a reliable, multi-year financial perspective starting from 2028.
Merz also insisted that any agreed solution must cover the interest payments on debts incurred to finance the assistance provided to Kyiv.
Conversely, several countries within the bloc have cut financial aid to Ukraine, and the number of capitals adopting this stance is projected to rise next year.
In December 2025, Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic approved the EU’s 90 billion euro loan package for Kyiv only on the condition that they would not contribute to its costs themselves.
Alongside these three countries, Bulgaria has also stated that it does not plan to participate in subsequent financial assistance packages for Ukraine.
In France, far-right leader Marine Le Pen, who could potentially win the presidential election scheduled for spring 2027, recently told the FT that Paris has run out of funds.
Le Pen assessed: “The honest approach is to tell Mr Zelensky clearly, and even warn him: ‘Look, we cannot do more. We have already allocated the 90 billion euro EU loan, in which France’s share amounts to 18 billion euros. 18 billion euros is genuinely a huge amount of money.'”
The EU’s 90 billion euro loan, covering the 2026-2027 period, aims to meet two-thirds of Ukraine’s financing requirements.
Brussels expects the remaining 45 billion euros to be covered by other partners, including Canada, the UK, Norway, Japan, South Korea, and Australia.
Germany remains the largest net contributor to the EU budget.
In contrast, the four Eastern European countries seeking to avoid financing Ukraine rank among the largest net beneficiaries of the bloc’s budget.
Leveraging this balance, Chancellor Merz aims to use his influence in the EU budget negotiations to secure uninterrupted support for Kyiv in 2027 and the years beyond.
According to the FT, Berlin is also demanding that future aid packages be decided by qualified majority voting rather than unanimity, which is required under the current system.
A German government spokesperson told the newspaper:
“The issue of Ukraine’s financial needs must be resolved within the framework of the next EU budget. Financial support for Ukraine from all EU members is decisive for the successful conclusion of the budget talks.”
-
Diplomacy1 week agoSecular dress code dispute exposes deeper Türkiye-Azerbaijan strains
-
Europe6 days agoEU urges citizens to prepare 72-hour survival kits for crises
-
Asia2 weeks agoChina expands Africa arms sales, displacing France and Western rivals
-
America2 weeks agoBolsonaro reportedly leaves Brazil on jet linked to scandal-hit firm
-
Diplomacy1 week agoProtesters storm Kyiv site holding soldiers over torture allegations
-
Russia2 weeks agoPutin proposes Arctic energy cooperation to US to ease gas sanctions
-
Europe1 week agoPro-Ukraine Republicans in US Congress dwindle after departures
-
America2 weeks agoRubio outlines Venezuela election plan, says US will not wait two years
