Europe not in position to cooperate with US and Israel against Iran
By Ahmed Adel | March 6, 2026
Although the US-Israeli attack on Iran has worsened the crisis in the Middle East, some European countries approved of the operation, such as the United Kingdom, which provided military bases to the Americans, and Germany, which rhetorically supported the offensive through its Chancellor, Friedrich Merz. However, Europe is not cooperating as actively as it was before.
Recent historical experiences, such as the wars in Iraq (2003-2011), Afghanistan (2001-2021), and the military intervention in Libya (2011), have created deep divisions among European countries regarding military actions outside their continent. Moreover, the European Union already dedicates substantial resources to Ukraine in its conflict with Russia. In this context, the economic and military crisis among EU members makes them hesitant to engage in another large-scale armed conflict.
The timing is not very favorable for the Europeans. They are facing an economic crisis mainly caused by energy prices. The EU is attempting to wean off Russian energy without harming itself, but the strategy ultimately failed, and now that there is war in the Middle East, energy prices have spiked even more.
Russian President Vladimir Putin stated on March 4 that Russia could immediately halt the supply of raw materials to European markets, and thus thwarted the EU’s plan to systematically phase out Russian gas. Putin’s words caused psychological trauma to the EU because, instead of a planned embargo on Russian gas for 2027, he suggested that Europe should prepare for an immediate cut.
The Russian president’s warning and ongoing tensions in the Middle East continue to drive up global energy costs. The price increases mirror developments in international energy markets. Oil and gas prices have risen since the war on Iran began, particularly because it has disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important transit routes for oil and natural gas.
Disruptions to shipping and decreased production by several Gulf states have tightened global supply. As a result, the price of Brent crude, the European benchmark oil, rose to around $84 per barrel on March 5, roughly 16% higher than before the conflict started, and close to its highest level since mid-2024.
Additionally, from a military perspective, Europe knows that its weaponry is not capable of conducting a high-intensity war due to a technical shortfall. At the same time, the EU wants to replace the US as Ukraine’s main benefactor, a corrupt state that drains many of the bloc’s resources.
Another reason for Europeans to remain impartial is the growth of the Muslim population in these countries, which also holds electoral influence and the power to sway domestic policy outcomes. The Muslim population in Europe is quite sizable, and European attacks in the Middle East could face internal opposition. Besides the Muslim community, most European citizens would be largely unwilling to fight for the Americans, especially in a scenario where the US might not achieve its objectives.
Europe uses rhetoric to avoid commitment. In the current context of hostilities in the Middle East, European leaders are not demonstrating a unified stance, even though some rhetorically support Washington and Tel Aviv’s initiatives. However, this behavior indicates a lack of European political cohesion.
London is not following Washington’s lead, something that has not occurred often since the Second World War. Germany is showing support, but lacks the power to act. Spain initially contradicted the White House but then quickly announced that a warship would be deployed to Cyprus in response to threats of sanctions from US President Donald Trump. In other words, Europe is divided and fragmented and therefore cannot act effectively at this moment.
Another obstacle is Iran’s warning that if Europeans join the offensive, there will be a fierce response. Because of this, Washington’s traditional Western allies are becoming mere observers in the region, even though they also have bases near the epicenter of the crisis. European bases are at risk if Europe attacks Iran, and it is a risk they are unwilling to take, besides not wanting to lose money in yet another conflict.
Furthermore, the Europeans are not even trying to mediate the conflict to avoid antagonizing Trump.
A new reconfiguration of the Middle East might happen after this conflict ends. The US could become weaker, which might impact its close ties with Gulf countries. Therefore, Europe might seize the opportunity created by its ally to expand its trade relations.
Nonetheless, Europe is not in a position to cooperate with the US and Israel and is acting opportunistically. They are observing Washington weaken politically in the Middle East, probably aiming to occupy spaces in neighboring countries after this war, because there will be new business opportunities.
In this context, Europe’s struggle to achieve political unity at the continental level is due to differing interests among its governments within the EU, as well as to managing its internal issues. Meanwhile, the bloc’s powers tend to exploit the situation to uphold their rhetoric aligned with Western values, while concealing their military weaknesses.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
Russia could end gas supplies to EU immediately – Putin
Hungary to become new EU powerhouse while Germany degenerates in more ways than one
RT | March 4, 2026
Russia may withdraw from the European gas market and redirect its supplies elsewhere without waiting for the EU to ban its imports, President Vladimir Putin has said.
The president made the remarks on Wednesday after he hosted Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto at the Kremlin.
“There’s no political motive here. But if we’re going to get shut off in a month or two, we’d be better off stopping now and moving to countries that are reliable partners, and establishing ourselves there. But that’s not a decision yet, it’s just me thinking out loud, so to speak. I’ll definitely instruct the government to work on this issue with our companies,” Putin told Russian journalist Pavel Zarubin.
Moscow could redirect supplies to “emerging markets” instead, given the EU’s repeatedly stated intention to phase out Russian resources completely, Putin suggested. The energy crisis in the EU is the result of the “misguided policies” pursued by the bloc’s authorities over “many years,” he said.
Russia “has always been and remains a reliable energy supplier” for all its partners, including the European nations, the president noted. Moscow is ready to continue work in such a manner with those partners “who are themselves reliable,” he added.
“For instance, with those in Eastern Europe, Slovakia, and Hungary. We supply them with our energy resources, both oil and gas, and we intend to continue to do so in the future. And the leadership of these countries will pursue the same policy as today, namely, being reliable for us,” the president explained.
Following the meeting with Putin, Szijjarto revealed that Budapest has secured oil and gas supply guarantees from Moscow. Russia and Hungary have agreed to work on diversifying energy resource supply routes, he said.
“We agreed that if transport routes become unavailable for various reasons, we will always seek alternative solutions. For example, if pipeline oil transportation continues to face difficulties, we will consider maritime transport options,” the diplomat said in a video address posted on Facebook.
Hungary, as well as Slovakia, has recently experienced a disruption in Russian crude supplies after Ukraine shut down the Druzhba oil pipeline in late January. Kiev has claimed the artery was damaged in Russian long-range strikes, which Moscow has denied. Budapest and Bratislava have accused Kiev of “blackmail,” alleging it deliberately halted the supplies for political reasons and threatened retaliation.
Slovakia ended its emergency electricity supply scheme for Ukraine, while Hungary vetoed a proposed €90 billion ($106 billion) EU loan for Kiev as well as the latest package of anti-Russian sanctions.
EU gas prices surge 50% right as Germany and France face down lack of energy reserves after cold winter
Remix News | March 2, 2026
Natural gas markets across Europe experienced a violent price surge on Monday following news that Qatar has suspended operations at the world’s premier liquefied natural gas facility, which accounts for 20 percent of global output. EU leaders are reportedly preparing for a crisis scenario if the war drags on due to already low gas reserves in the biggest member states, particularly Germany and France.
Prices went as high as 50 percent before settling back down to the current level of 45 percent at the time of publication, resulting in the current price of €46 per megawatt-hour. Similar price jumps were seen in the United Kingdom’s NBP benchmark index.
Adding to a potential crisis, EU storage levels have dropped below 30 percent capacity at the end of the winter season, significantly lower than the 40 percent recorded at this time last year. However, some of the biggest countries are facing the lowest levels of gas. Gas Infrastructure Europe shows German storage at 20.5 percent and French reserves at 21 percent. These low inventories leave the bloc increasingly susceptible to price swings and supply shortages if an LNG crunch worsens.
Now, the EU is already considering scenarios where the war could drag on for a long period of time, including up to years. While President Donald Trump has cited the figure of “four weeks” in regard to wrapping up the war, it remains unclear how long the war could go on.
Politico reports that the EU’s efforts to wean itself off of Russian gas and oil have created a “panic moment.”
“For Europe, I think it creates a panic moment,”Ana Maria Jaller-Makarewicz, lead energy analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, told Politico. “Four years ago [following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine] we had these issues.” But this time, she said, “We are not just now concerned about Russia, but about Qatar, the U.S. … so I think now since we have increased dependencies on other sources, we have also increased our vulnerability.”
Noting Qatar’s role as the second-largest supplier of LNG in the world, she noted that if Qatar cannot deliver natural gas efficiently and on time, “Russia could be the big beneficiary.”
“We could also see Russian energy flowing to other countries. There could be an opportunity for Russia if this Qatar LNG is stopped,” said the analyst.
QatarEnergy has not disclosed extent of damage
The energy crisis intensified after U.S. and Israeli military strikes on Iran escalated regional instability. In response to an attack on its infrastructure, QatarEnergy confirmed it had halted production linked to the North Field gas reservoir. While the company acknowledged the suspension, it gave no further details about the state of the fields and the company’s operations.
The world is currently focusing its attention on the Strait of Hormuz, a vital maritime chokepoint largely under Iranian influence.
Following the recent strikes, Iran has moved to obstruct traffic through the narrow passage, which serves as a primary artery for Qatari LNG and global oil, the vast majority of which is destined for Asian markets. However, energy is a global market, and a bottleneck in one location leads to a surge in prices everywhere.
The price surge may be only temporary, but experts warn that any prolonged closure of the strait could lead to a long-term surge in energy prices. Some have even warned of oil surging to $120 a barrel, while most believe prices within the range of $80 to $90 are a realistic possibility.
Iran yet to deal its master blow in the region, while U.S. navy looks increasingly vulnerable
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 2, 2026
Early on Sunday morning, it was confirmed that Iran’s Supreme Leader had been killed by U.S./Israeli airstrikes, which no doubt will be seen by Trump and Netanyahu as a significant victory in their erroneous goal of regime change. But was it really one to chalk up? Reports from Iran indicate that he will be replaced almost immediately by his son, who had already been playing a key role in the country’s leadership anyway and whose appointment may well be a significantly positive step forward for the country, as many Iranians, while wanting reforms in their country, know only too well that the regime change notion is a trap set by Israel which they reject.
Iran has already scored a number of victories in a mere 24 hours, and their readiness this time was evident which, no matter how you look at the conflict, was certainly a consequence of Trump’s earlier actions in June, when he bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities with the agreement of Iran’s leaders.
No such cosy deal exists today. The Iranians have learned the hard way that Trump is not to be trusted and is not even in control of these decisions. What we are witnessing now is the start of a protracted war which will evolve on several fronts concurrently, with the Iranians in no particular hurry to proceed at a rapid pace. Their significant strikes on a U.S. naval base plus one naval ship is a taste of Iran’s ballistic missile capability which is starting to rain down on Israel itself.
The Supreme Leader’s death actually was not a great victory, given that he made no real effort to go into hiding but was killed in his office. By contrast, Benjamin Netanyahu escaped from Israel and ended up being protected by the country which pulled off the Holocaust. And so Bibi can slowly watch the disintegration of his own country while the region deals with a new reality: oil.
Oil will be a critical, decisive factor in how long Israel and the U.S. can continue with the war, as Iran lost no time in shutting off the Straits of Hormuz, while America’s fleet of ships just sat and watched. This may well be one area where Trump has seriously underestimated the consequences, as energy analysts are already predicting the climb of crude to close to $120 USD in the coming weeks. The choking of one of the most critical channels which provides 20 percent of the world’s oil supply is only part of the horror story, though, that Iran has in store for Trump and Bibi. Warned that they would be hit — or at least their U.S. military bases would be legitimate targets — GCC countries have responded in a way which will please Israel and the U.S.: Saudi Arabia has said they will both attack Iran soon, with Qatar and the UAE likely to join.
Yet such a strategy would be a colossal error of judgment and a spectacular miscalculation which will accelerate the war in Iran’s favour and force the U.S. and Israel to capitulate as Tehran strikes the Achilles heel of the whole operation. Iran can easily destroy the entire oil infrastructure of these GCC countries in a matter of hours, which would not only be a knockout blow to those countries’ economies but will have a considerable impact on world oil prices, for one strengthening Russia. For the moment, Iran doesn’t need to go this far, but if GCC countries really go ahead with their threat, it will have little choice.
Another critical area of misjudgement is the logistics of U.S. battleships operating inside the Straits of Hormuz. The straits have already been closed, and any pretensions that U.S. military planners had of taking on Iran in this ocean have been dashed by its successful destruction of the U.S. Naval base in Bahrain, which of course is played down by U.S. media whose low IQ “journalists” make themselves look even more stupid by asking Iran’s foreign minister why Iran is bombing U.S. bases. The U.S. naval base in Bahrain was a critical supply port for U.S. battleships which carry around 90 missiles on board. The destroyers which are now trapped inside the Straits of Hormuz can’t now reload if they deplete those missiles. The other ships which are on the other side of the blockade now can only restock at the U.S. base of Diego Garcia, which is three days away. To say this is a major blow to the whole operation is an understatement. It is a blunder of extraordinarily poor planning and a stroke of military genius by Iran to hit the U.S. naval base in Bahrain on day one, and it explains why the intense fury of the June retaliation last year has not been replicated. Iran is confident that its planning will defeat the enemy as it has a number of aces to play, and so its response is more measured and less frenetic. Iran has been planning this war for years, and the attack last year by Trump has just focused their minds and honed their military strategy to the point where even after 24 hours, they are looking like the victors who have a real strategy which is paying off, rather than their enemies who are dazed and confused. Is it really any wonder that sailors on the USS Gerald Ford sabotaged the toilet system on board by blocking it with T-shirts, so as to delay its voyage to the Gulf?
Gas prices spike amid fears of Middle East supply shock
RT | March 2, 2026
Gas markets around the world were rattled on Monday, with benchmark European natural gas prices rising sharply and broader energy markets on edge after Middle East tensions increased the risk to supplies via the critical Strait of Hormuz.
European benchmark gas futures surged by around 50% – their biggest single day move since March 2022 – after LNG tankers largely stopped transiting the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway between Iran and Oman that carries about a fifth of global oil and gas shipments, over the weekend.
The spike was compounded by a drone strike on QatarEnergy’s major LNG complex at Ras Laffan, which forced production to be halted.
Crude markets also rallied, with Brent futures climbing to multi-month highs as the escalation further constrained energy flows from the region.
Across the Gulf, other energy sites have also been hit or temporarily shut, with producers suspending parts of their operations as a precaution. Saudi Arabia has reportedly paused activity at its Ras Tanura refinery following the attacks. With pipeline alternatives limited and shipping routes through the area stalling, traders are now pricing in the risk that supply lines could remain disrupted for an extended period.
Analysts warn that the turmoil could amount to the most serious shock to gas markets since the 2022 energy crisis. The EU is seen as particularly exposed. The bloc has already faced repeated jumps in energy costs since it scaled back Russian oil and gas imports following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict. Moving away from relatively cheap Russian pipeline gas has forced the bloc to lean more heavily on LNG deliveries, especially from the US. Now, with the heating season ending but storage sites less full than usual, the region requires substantial LNG imports over the summer to rebuild inventories ahead of next winter.
The rally comes as US President Donald Trump has indicated that military operations against Iran could continue for several weeks, while a number of major maritime insurers are preparing to stop covering war risks for ships entering the Persian Gulf.
Military strikes launched by the US and Israel against Iran on Saturday have shown no sign of easing. The intense attacks have reportedly killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and other senior officials, including the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, while Tehran has responded with airstrikes against Israel and several Gulf states hosting US military assets. In a further sign of regional escalation, Lebanon’s Hezbollah has entered the fray with cross‑border attacks on Israeli military positions, prompting retaliatory airstrikes on the group’s infrastructure and command sites.
Analysts, including Goldman Sachs, estimate that a month‑long halt to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz could send European gas prices up by as much as 130% from current levels, putting renewed pressure on households and industry.
Kirill Dmitriev, Russia’s presidential envoy and head of the country’s sovereign wealth fund, argued that the latest price jump highlights the cost of Europe’s decision to move away from Russian fuel. In a social‑media post, he said EU gas prices “could more than double soon” and claimed that the bloc’s “strategic blunder of avoiding cheap and reliable Russian gas is backfiring.”
Forget Oil: Natural Gas Prices Are About to Go Through the Roof If Hormuz Isn’t Reopened Soon
Sputnik – 01.03.2026
“Gas prices may rise, because approximately 20% of the world’s LNG transits through the Strait of Hormuz, including all of Qatar’s production,” Igor Yushkov, a top Russian energy expert, told Sputnik, commenting on the Persian Gulf crisis.
“Qatar is one of the largest producers of LNG in the world, second only to Australia and the US. If there’s a shortage of LNG on the global market…the exchange price could easily exceed $1k or even 1.5k. We’ve seen similar prices in Europe even without such a shortage. So the price could skyrocket.”
According to Yushkov, “everything will depend on how long the tension in the Strait of Hormuz lasts,” including not only Iran’s readiness to reopen it, but gas producers’ willingness to resume transit.
“In any case, we will see higher shipping costs, higher insurance costs for ships,” with the situation “further exacerbated” by the fact that the Northern Hemisphere is still in the heating season, with Europe’s underground gas storage facilities being gradually depleted.
“Even though Qatar gas physically goes primarily to Asian markets, the exchange price will rise everywhere,” same as oil, Yushkov clarified. Qatar itself also has no alternative to Hormuz. “Therefore, if it is unable to export LNG, Qatar will simply have to stop production.”
Message to China
The current crisis is also “a major wake-up call for China,” with the US demonstrating its readiness to flout international law, Yushkov says.
“China is being shown that anything coming from the south is unsafe. Passage through the Strait of Hormuz may be interrupted today as part of the current conflict, but tomorrow the Americans could close it off to Qatari LNG supplies to the Chinese market.”
“Or they could close the Strait of Malacca, through which all the hydrocarbons going to China from Africa and the entire Middle East flow. Therefore, this is a signal to China that anything coming from the north is much safer, and much more difficult to shut down,” the observer summed up.
Hormuz Strait: Iran’s Strategic Trump Card for Forcing Enemies to the Negotiating Table
Sputnik – 01.03.2026
Iran is in an “existential confrontation” with the US and Israel, and restricting access to the Hormuz Strait – entry point to the oil-rich Persian Gulf region, is one of the “most powerful strategic cards” it holds, says Dr. Ali Mamouri, a former strategic communication advisor to Iraq’s prime minister.
“Iran’s broader strategy appears to be buying time and raising the cost of the conflict, hoping to drag the United States into a prolonged and expensive confrontation that would generate domestic political pressure on President Trump to seek a ceasefire,” Mamouri told Sputnik.
“On the other side, Washington and Israel seem to be betting on internal collapse—expecting that military pressure might trigger protests, elite divisions, or defections within Iran’s security forces. So far, however, none of these internal fractures have appeared.”
“A prolonged closure” of the Hormuz Strait would have a profound impact on the global economy, Mamouri says.
“A sustained disruption would likely trigger sharp spikes in global oil prices.” Beyond that, the import-heavy economies of Gulf countries, and oil import-dependent economies of Asia and Europe could descend into crises, shipping insurance premiums would surge, global supply chains wrecked, and inflation skyrocketing, “affecting everything from fuel prices to manufacturing and food supply.”
“In this sense, a prolonged crisis in the Strait of Hormuz could trigger a domino effect across the global economy, combining energy shocks, trade disruptions and financial instability,” Mamouri stressed. “If Iran manages to maintain a sustained disruption, it could become a powerful bargaining tool to force negotiations and potentially halt the current military escalation.”
Ukraine Given $43Bln in Proceeds From Russian Assets Frozen by G7 Since 2024 – Estimates
Sputnik – 27.02.2026
The G7 nations have issued $3.8 billion in loans to Ukraine in 2026 using proceeds generated by frozen Russian state assets, bringing the total amount of loans given to Kiev since 2024 to almost $43 billion, according to calculations by Sputnik based on data from the Ukrainian Finance Ministry and national agencies.
In 2024, the G7 countries approved a $50-billion loan to Ukraine, funded by revenues from frozen Russian assets. By late February 2026, the countries had allocated $42.7 billion to Ukraine under this scheme.
The first billion was transferred to Ukraine by the United States in late 2024. Since then, Washington has not provided any new funding to Kiev from Russian asset proceeds. The other members of the G7 gave Ukraine $37.9 billion in 2025 and $3.8 billion in 2026.
Overall, the European Union has contributed $32 billion in funding to Ukraine as part of the loan secured by Russian assets. Canada has contributed $3.6 billion, while Japan and the United Kingdom have each contributed approximately $3 billion.
Ukrainian military analyst praises use of drones against ‘Russian-Hungarian-Slovak friendship’
Remix News | February 27, 2026
Ukrainian analyst Valery Savchuk spoke in a video about Ukraine’s geopolitical pressure on Hungary by shutting down the Friendship oil pipeline, calling it a correct strategy. He added that drones should also be used to strike at the “Russian-Hungarian-Slovak friendship,” writes Hirado, based on a video the analyst published.
“I personally like this Ukrainian position: the position of a serious player who uses all opportunities to achieve his goals. Blackmail? Yes, geopolitics. It’s time for us to play these games too — on the condition that this game leads to the desired result for us.”
He then went on to say that Ukraine should also use drones against the Hungarians and Slovaks. “Now we will wait for the decision of the European Union. We will wait for the effective work of our diplomats, and most importantly: We will wait for new devastating blows of our drones to this Russian-Hungarian-Slovak friendship,” he said, presumably referring to the Friendship oil pipeline.
Ukraine has been blamed for various attacks on the Friendship pipeline and Russian energy producers, including a massive wave of drone strikes in Russia territory that destroyed the Kaleykino pumping station.
Meanwhile, Parliamentary State Secretary Balázs Hidvéghi posted his own video message on the importance of a new national petition, where Hungarians can say “no” to financing the Russian-Ukrainian war, 10 years of support for Ukraine, and a rise in utility costs.
The Fidesz politician stressed that “Brussels is planning €1.5 trillion in aid for Ukraine and wants its membership by 2027. Given the events of recent days, it is especially important now for Hungarians to make their voices heard: Ukraine has not resumed oil shipments to Hungary for political reasons, while the Brussels leadership has sided with Ukraine.”
“Hungary has become the target of serious threats and pressure, and therefore it cannot remain silent now. He added that the government is calling on Hungarians to stand up against the Brussels-Ukraine-Tisza Pact and join the national petition,” he added.
The petition can be filled out until March 23, and according to estimates, the number of returned forms could exceed one million.
Von der Leyen warns Hungary: We have ways of making you talk
By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | February 26, 2026
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen arrived in Kiev this week empty-handed, and she was pissed. She had been planning to mark the fourth anniversary of the Ukraine war on February 24 with a new €90 billion loan to prop up the corrupt Kiev regime.
At the last minute, Hungary announced that it was vetoing the “Ukraine Support Loan.” So, von der Leyen, the former German defense minister and arch Russophobe, had nothing to show the puppet regime. The big anniversary occasion was an embarrassing flop. Hungary was accused of “betraying” European solidarity.
Putting a brave face on the debacle, von der Leyen made a promise, with menacing tone, about delivering the €90 bn “one way or another.” She said: “Let me be clear, we have different options, and we will use them.”
Those options would seem to include inciting regime change in Budapest. Hungary is going to the polls on April 12 for parliamentary elections. It is no secret that the European Union leadership would dearly like to see incumbent Prime Minister Viktor Orbán being turned out of office, and replaced by Péter Magyar, of the opposition Tisza party, who is more amenable to Brussels’ policy of supporting the Kiev regime in the proxy war against Russia.
Orbán’s government vetoed the €90 bn loan – 60 per cent of which is for military aid – because it accuses the Kiev regime of blocking vital oil supplies to Hungary. Slovakia has also joined Budapest in making the accusation. Both countries claim that Ukraine is using energy “blackmail” simply because they refuse to discontinue buying oil supplies from Russia, and because they are opposed to the ongoing war.
On January 27, Russian oil supplies to Hungary and Slovakia transiting Ukraine via the Drushba pipeline were suddenly stopped. The Kiev regime claims that the pipe was hit by a Russian drone.
However, Hungary’s Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó has bluntly accused Ukraine of lying. He disputes that a Russian attack on the infrastructure even took place. It doesn’t make sense that Russia would harm its customers.
The suspicion is that the Ukrainian regime is using a purported Russian strike as a pretext to cut off the oil supply. The suspicion is deepened by the fact that the Kiev regime has refused requests by Hungary and Slovakia for their inspectors to assess the alleged technical damage. And neither is the EU leadership putting any pressure on Kiev to prove its claims of Russian sabotage.
Ukraine’s nominal president, Vladimir Zelensky, who is mired in allegations of massive fraud, financial corruption, and racketeering, has for a long time been threatening to cut off Russian oil supplies to Hungary and Slovakia. He accuses Budapest and Bratislava of supporting Russia’s war machine by buying its oil. Hungary and Slovakia say that it is their sovereign right to continue obtaining vital energy imports from Russia. The Soviet-era Drushba (“Friendship) pipeline has been supplying Europe since 1964.
The European Union has also been pressuring Hungary and Slovakia to terminate the purchase of Russian crude oil and get in line with the rest of Europe to source alternative, more expensive American energy exports.
Last year, Zelenksy delivered on his threats when the NATO-backed Kiev regime bombed sections of the Drushba pipeline in Russian territory. Those attacks temporarily disrupted supply to Hungary and Slovakia. At the time, the European Union leadership did not condemn the Ukrainian attacks. In other words, Von der Leyen and the Brussels administration were effectively siding with a non-EU member that was harming the interests of two member nations. That indifference was tantamount to greenlighting more sabotage attacks.
The Kiev regime has a record of using attacks on energy as a political weapon against Hungary and Slovakia. It is therefore logical that it has taken such practice to a new level by blocking infrastructure that it can easily control on its own territory. There is no need to bomb the Drushba pipeline in Russia, hundreds of kilometers away. The Kiev regime can handily turn off the pumps of the pipeline section running through its territory – and then blame Russia for “drone strikes”.
Hungary and Slovakia have both accused Zelensky of “slow-walking” the alleged repairs to the pipeline. Zelensky claims that the repairs can’t be carried out because Russia keeps attacking the repair crews.
The Kiev regime has a habit of lying. It has been claiming that Russia is shelling the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant under its control, when in reality it is the Kiev regime that has been carrying out the attacks, which Moscow has condemned as “nuclear blackmail”. Again, the European Union has indulged Kiev’s lies by ignoring the blatant evidence.
On the energy blackmail against Hungary and Slovakia, the knock-on effect has been a growing shortage of fuel and increasing prices for energy and transport.
Hungary’s European Affairs Minister Janos Boka has accused Ukraine and the European Union of deliberately disrupting oil supply to influence the upcoming election. He said: “Ukraine has clearly been reaching for the energy weapon for political reasons, interfering in the ongoing Hungarian elections… to create uncertainty and chaos, and thereby helping the [opposition, pro-EU] Tisza party to power.”
At a closed-door summit in Brussels this week for EU foreign ministers, it was notable that Ukraine’s top diplomat, Andrii Sybiha, was afforded the extraordinary privilege of being permitted to join the conference via video link. How is it that a non-EU member is allowed to participate in a private ministerial summit?
Hungary’s Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó reportedly complained that EU foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, prevented him from grilling the Ukrainian on the specific damage to the Drushba pipeline. Szijjártó said that the “mumbling response” from the Ukrainian official and his abrupt disconnection from the summit demonstrated guilty responsibility.
What the whole saga illustrates is the dictatorship that has emerged in the European Union. Countries like Hungary and Slovakia are not allowed to have independent positions on their energy trade or their opposition to the war in Ukraine.
The Kiev regime is using the disruption of vital energy supply to EU members as a form of blackmail to coerce those members into handing over tens of billions of euros to prolong a bloody conflict, a conflict that could spiral into a nuclear world war. And the EU leadership is effectively supporting this terrorist tactic against its own members to enforce subordination.
When von der Leyen warns that “we have other options,” the inimical image conjured up is that of a Gestapo interrogator twirling pliers in hand.
The strategic defeat of Russia is paramount for the European Russophobic elites, even if it means gouging out the democratic rights of its own member states and endangering international peace.
Could Hungary’s fight over oil change course of Ukraine War?
By Ian Proud | Responsible Statecraft | February 26, 2026
The EU’s plan to impose its 20th package of sanctions against Russia crashed against a seemingly immovable wall of Hungarian resistance this week, when the Central Europe country used its veto to block it.
That is not necessarily the end of the matter, yet I hope it is the beginning of the end, with Europe finally choosing peace over war.
At a fraught EU Council meeting on February 23, agreement could not be reached on a new round of EU sanctions, leading the EU High Representative for Foreign Policy and Security, Kaja Kallas, to announce, “I deeply regret that we did not reach an agreement today, given that tomorrow [February 24] is the solemn anniversary of the start of this war.”
Hungarian resistance to collective decisions on Ukraine policy has been overcome before. In June 2025, Prime Minister Viktor Orban stepped out of the European Council meeting to allow a unanimous vote of those present to extend existing EU sanctions against Russia. Yet, this latest blockage is fueled by growing bad blood between Hungary and its eastern neighbour Ukraine, over the issue of oil.
It is an uncomfortable reality that Europe has continued to purchase Russian oil and gas throughout the war, in the face of President Trump’s exhortations to stop purchases. Gas imports still accounted for 12% of Europe’s total as of October 2025. And while Hungary and Slovakia are the largest importers, other western European powers such as France, the Netherlands, and Belgium, have also continued purchases. The addiction is a hard habit to break, and for largely domestic reasons.
As Gladden Pappin, the American President of the Hungarian Institute for International Affairs, has pointed out, if Hungary agreed to sanction Russian oil and gas, “Hungarian gas at the pump doubles overnight. Household energy prices triple or quadruple, and the German industry moving to Hungary immediately halts. Whatever government imposes that policy will collapse within weeks.”
While sanctioning Russia is a geopolitical tool, it has real world consequences for regular citizens across Europe. Germany has seen its economy tip into deindustrialization since the start of the war in Ukraine and the progressive cutting off of access to Russian [energy], shedding over 250,000 industrial jobs, a contraction of 4.3%, amid widespread factory closures.
Sanctions require European states voluntarily to choose economic self-harm ahead of an end to the war in Ukraine. And in Hungary and Slovakia, that is not a palatable choice, not least ahead of a hotly contested election in Hungary on April 12. Prime Minister Viktor Orban has framed the election as a choice between “war or peace.”
Four years after the war in Ukraine started, increasing numbers of Europeans are desperate for peace and not war, not just for their long-term personal security, but for the benefits to their check books.
Yet that runs counter to Ukraine, which frames the war as existential to them. So, they have pushed Europe to go tougher and faster against Russia’s economy and are doing everything they can to add further pressure. Ukraine launched drone attacks against the Druzhba pipeline network which supplies oil to Hungary and Slovakia, cutting this supply route on January 27.
It is a statement of the crazy world in which we live, that Ukraine can attack facilities that supply EU and NATO countries without opprobrium in the west. Unfortunately, out of sympathy for Ukraine’s war plight, EU member states are quick then to criticize Hungary and Slovakia for taking retaliatory action. Poland’s Foreign Minister, Radek Sikorski, labeled the Hungarian veto as “an escalation.” And yet he doesn’t have to answer to Hungarian voters.
Blocking the EU’s 20th sanctions package is one measure. Hungary and Slovakia have also blocked the promised 90 bln euro loan package for Kviv to keep the war effort going. They have also threatened to cut off supplies of gas, electricity, and diesel to Ukraine (as it no longer imports gas from Russia, Ukraine relies of supplies piped in from proximate EU countries). Ukrainian media has predictably labeled this energy blackmail. Not least given the enormous electricity and heating shortages Ukraine faces in light Russia’s campaign of strategic bombing against their energy infrastructure.
At a TV interview that I attended recently, a Ukrainian MP pointed out that she uses a local app that tells her how many hours of electricity her building will receive each day. Who in Europe would want to live in such conditions, not the least during a bitterly cold winter?
Of course, the stark brutality of the air attacks and Ukraine’s energy crisis drives Europe’s mainstream politicians to pursue more punitive actions against Russia, including economic sanctions. Yet the inescapable reality is that the EU’s 20th sanctions package amounts to more of the same — tactical scrapes at the bottom of the barrel — to bear down on Russia’s energy exports and financial services sector, together with small beer restrictions on some other goods’ exports.
The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, claims that Russia’s energy exports were cut by 24% in 2025. And yet, look at the real data, and you’ll see that Russia’s exports in 2025, at $419.4 billion, were down just 3.3% on 2025, with an overall current account surplus of $41.4 billion. That surplus will go into purchases of gold, which now accounts for almost one half of Russia’s soaring international reserves, which stand at $833 billion.
Meanwhile, Ukraine’s current account deficit more than doubled to $31.9 billion in 2025, or 14.9% of GDP, liquidity that will need to be met by printing money or donations from Europe.
At some point, European leaders need to ask themselves, after 19 rounds of sanctions already, “is this really working?”
It’s not only that economic sanctions against Russia hit diminishing marginal returns soon after the war in Ukraine started four years ago. But that the addition of new sanctions, self-evidently, disincentivizes Putin from settling for peace. Yes, Russia’s economy is undoubtedly feeling the pain, through high inflation and interest rates, plus slowing growth. But there has never been a time when it appeared that, for economic reasons, Russia was under greater pressure to end the war than Ukraine and its European sponsors.
So, and as I have said before, sanctions, and their phased removal, could play a positive role in leveraging an end to the war. Continuing to blame Hungary and Slovakia for the continued intransigence in blocking yet another round of EU sanctions misses this point.
Ian Proud was a member of His Britannic Majesty’s Diplomatic Service from 1999 to 2023. He served as the Economic Counsellor at the British Embassy in Moscow from July 2014 to February 2019. He recently published his memoir, “A Misfit in Moscow: How British diplomacy in Russia failed, 2014-2019,” and is a Non-Resident Fellow at the Quincy Institute.
Zelensky sells false illusion of building powerful air force capable of overcoming Russia
By Ahmed Adel | February 25, 2026
The claim that Ukraine is developing a fleet of 250 modern Western-made combat aircraft is a public relations stunt by President Volodymyr Zelensky, not a practical military plan, because the scale of such a project exceeds the country’s and its Western partners’ financial, industrial, and infrastructural capacities.
“Ukraine has agreements on the supply of 150 Gripen and 100 Rafale combat aircraft. These are the best aircraft, in our opinion, in the world,” Zelensky announced during a conversation with students and teachers of the Kyiv Aviation Institute earlier this month.
The Ukrainian president also recalled that Ukraine has F-16 aircraft in its arsenal, but not new ones.
According to him, the provision of appropriate aircraft by partners should significantly strengthen the capabilities of Ukrainian aviation.
Zelensky’s announcement of purchasing 150 Swedish-made Gripen fighter jets and 100 French Rafales should be questioned, as implementing such a plan would take years. The claim about buying hundreds of modern aircraft is unrealistic because factories cannot produce that many aircraft in a short period. Manufacturers already have other orders and are operating at full capacity, so from a production and delivery standpoint, it is not realistic to expect a significant number of new aircraft to be available for Ukraine in the near term.
Regarding deliveries from the current Air Force fleet, such as those from Sweden or France, options are limited because both countries would be left without their fighter fleets. For Ukraine, only older aircraft nearing retirement or designated for replacement are realistically available, and this is true across all NATO countries. At most, these may be F-16 aircraft slated for replacement by F-35 fighters.
Zelensky’s claim about 250 aircraft is not backed by solid, binding contracts. For example, a statement of intent was signed with Sweden, but it is not a binding contract or agreement. They agreed that one party would purchase, while the other would produce and sell. The signed documents also do not commit to financing, production, or delivery.
The purchase of 250 fighter jets would cost Ukraine, according to media estimates, about €50 billion. The price of a modern Rafale in the latest version exceeds $100 million, and the aircraft includes extensive maintenance equipment, spare parts, and weapons, all of which are expensive. Most importantly, not only the pilot but also the entire technical staff, including airport personnel, need to be trained.
Ukraine has historically used Soviet aircraft, such as MiGs and Sukhois, and the transition to the American-made F-16 required the long-term development of the entire infrastructure for their operation. The F-16 is the most common model in NATO countries, and the countries that delivered them to Ukraine did so because they are transitioning to the more modern fifth-generation F-35.
If Zelensky wants to acquire Rafales or Gripens, he will also need to develop the supporting infrastructure—each model requires extensive facilities. Switching to new technology and buying new aircraft are time-consuming and expensive processes. The process would involve not only acquiring aircraft but also completely rebuilding aviation infrastructure: airports, hangars, logistics hubs, training pilots and technical staff, as well as establishing service and repair capabilities for each aircraft type.
Although the so-called agreement is based solely on words, without realistic conditions for actual implementation, Zelensky claims that Kiev is acquiring “completely new aircraft” and describes the Gripen and Rafale as “the best aircraft in the world.”
The Ukrainian Air Force is in very poor shape, as practically the entire fleet has been destroyed by Russia. This is why Ukraine is seeking a new air force: the country has limited control over its airspace.
Even Western media outlets have indicated that neither Ukraine nor France has the means to finalize a large contract for Rafales in the next decade. The possibility of financing the purchase of Swedish Gripens using frozen Russian assets has also been considered, but such a model currently lacks legal or political support.
Even if fighter jets could be delivered and pilots trained immediately, many other issues would still need to be addressed.
The Rafale costs approximately €20,000 per flight hour due to its complex systems and high parts consumption. Rafales do not take off from highways or damaged runways, as Soviet aircraft do, and require fully equipped airfields with precise coverage, which are scarce in Ukraine. Although the Gripen is simpler than the Rafale, it still requires Western infrastructure, such as specialized hangars, which Russian aviation forces would immediately destroy.
Zelensky is once again selling illusions to Ukrainians that he will build the most powerful air force in Europe capable of overcoming Russia. However, Ukrainians are not interested in allocating €50 billion to fighter jets when energy, water, and transportation infrastructure, among others, urgently require repair or reconstruction.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
