Hungary cannot meet energy demands without Russia – FM

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto. © Getty Images / Sefa Karacan; Anadolu
RT | October 15, 2025
Hungary cannot meet its energy needs without Russian oil and gas and has no intention of abandoning supplies, Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said. Speaking at the Russian Energy Week forum in Moscow, Szijjarto stressed that Hungary’s energy security depends on existing supply routes and long-term contracts with Russian companies.
Brussels has repeatedly demanded that all EU members cut off ties with Moscow and stop purchasing Russian energy. Szijjarto said Hungary has been pressured to refuse Russian deliveries in the name of “diversifying” its imports, but dismissed the argument as “insane” and “completely illogical.” He questioned how abandoning one source of energy could possibly be described as diversification.
The minister warned that if Hungary were cut off from Russian gas supplies, it “will not be able to ensure the necessary fuel supplies.” He said the same applies to Russian crude oil delivered via the southern branch of the Druzhba pipeline. According to Szijjarto, other hydrocarbon routes cannot currently replace the volumes provided through the TurkStream gas pipeline and the Druzhba network.
Szijjarto praised Hungary’s cooperation with Russian energy companies, noting that they have never failed to meet contractual obligations. “If we needed more, they provided more; if we needed less, they provided less. Contract terms have always been honored, so why should we suddenly sever these relations?” he said. The minister added that thanks to its partnership with Russia, Hungary remains in a secure position regarding energy supplies.
The EU has called for a complete phase-out of Russian energy imports by 2027, though several member states, including Hungary and Slovakia, continue to rely on Russian crude delivered via Druzhba. In recent months, Ukrainian attacks on energy infrastructure connected to the pipeline have intensified, worsening tensions between Kiev and Budapest.
Szijjarto has said the strikes on Druzhba amount to an attack on Hungary’s sovereignty and urged the EU to ensure the security of the bloc’s energy supplies.
Moscow has described Brussels’ efforts to abandon Russian energy in favor of more expensive US alternatives as “suicidal.”
NATO must buy more US arms for Ukraine – Pentagon chief
RT | October 15, 2025
European NATO members should purchase more American-made weapons to sustain Ukraine’s war effort against Russia, US War Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Wednesday ahead of a meeting of the bloc’s defense ministers.
Moscow has repeatedly stated that Western arms shipments cannot change the balance of power on the battlefield, arguing that Ukraine’s chronic manpower shortage, fueled by mass draft avoidance and desertion, undermines any material advantage.
Speaking alongside NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, Hegseth praised the Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL) initiative and said the European members must spend more funds through it.
“Our expectation today is that more countries donate even more, that they purchase even more to provide for Ukraine,” Hegseth said. Rutte noted there was “firepower coming out of our defense industry” to bolster Ukrainian forces.
US President Donald Trump recently claimed that with European funding for American weapons, Ukraine could still achieve its territorial goals – a reversal of his earlier assessment that the county had “no cards” to play. Trump is expected to soon announce whether the US will approve deliveries of long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles to Kiev, a move Moscow has warned would mark a serious escalation but would not significantly alter the frontline situation.
The Russian government has accused European backers of Kiev of prolonging the conflict at the expense of Ukrainian lives, arguing that the former are unwilling to admit the failure of their strategy.
Meanwhile, European NATO members continue to bear the economic fallout of their sanctions policy against Russia. Having rejected affordable Russian energy, many EU economies have faced surging production costs and widespread industrial bankruptcies, while the US has benefited from increased investment inflows and higher sales of liquefied natural gas to Europe.
Warsaw demands halt to Nord Stream sabotage probe – FT
RT | October 14, 2025
Germany is acting against NATO’s interests by continuing a criminal investigation into the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage, Poland’s national security chief, Slawomir Cenckiewicz, has claimed, urging Berlin to shut down the probe.
The Nord Stream pipelines, which carried Russian gas to Germany under the Baltic Sea, were severely damaged by underwater explosions in September 2022. Russia, which led the pipeline project, called the incident an act of state terrorism, while Western states including Poland applauded the bombings.
German prosecutors have attributed the sabotage to a group of seven Ukrainian nationals who allegedly used a small rented yacht to carry out the attack. Moscow has dismissed that version as “ridiculous,” maintaining that the scale and complexity of the operation point to state involvement.
Several suspects have so far been detained across the EU, including one in Poland and another in Italy, for allegedly blowing up the pipelines. However, Warsaw has refused to extradite the suspect held in Poland to Berlin.
Cenckiewicz told Financial Times it was in Poland’s interest to protect anyone connected to the operation, calling the German probe “a clear contradiction in interests between Poland and Germany.” He said the investigation “doesn’t make sense, not only in terms of the interests of Poland but also the whole [NATO] alliance.”
Cenckiewicz argued that pursuing the cases “serves Russian injustice” and demanded an end to the probe, adding that Poland will not extradite the detained Ukrainian suspects.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk has also opposed extradition, saying “the problem with Nord Stream 2 is not that it was blown up, the problem is that it was built.”
Meanwhile, Russian officials have insisted that a state actor was likely behind the sabotage and have accused Germany of concealing evidence and excluding Moscow from the inquiry.
In 2023, veteran American journalist Seymour Hersh published a report alleging that the US, under then President Joe Biden’s orders, orchestrated the sabotage using Navy divers with Norwegian support during the NATO exercise BALTOPS 22. Washington and Oslo have denied the claim.
Farming in Russia vs the West
RealReporter | September 22, 2025
In this collab with @countrysideacreshomestead2008 I visit a Canadian family who moved to rural Russia to start a homestead from scratch.
Why they came to Russia –
• Family of 10 Leaves Canada for ‘Economic O…
Follow me on:
Rumble – https://rumble.com/user/RealReporter 👉
X – https://x.com/Real_ReporterX 👉
Instagram – / konstantinreporter 👉
Telegram – https://t.me/RealReporter_tg 👉
TikTok – / konstantinreporter
If you’d like to support my project:
Patreon – / realreporter
PayPal – https://paypal.me/RealReporter
Talk of Sending Tomahawk Missiles to Ukraine is Calculated Psy-Op to Pressure Russia
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 14.10.2025
The US won’t allow strikes on Russian refineries, says Alexander Mikhailov, head of the Bureau of Military-Political Analysis.
Psy-op in the Making
“I don’t see any military prospects for using Tomahawks against Russia, except for attempts at informational blackmail and political pressure,” Mikhailov tells Sputnik.
No Tomahawks have been sent or launched, yet Western media frenzy suggests a pressure tactic.
It’s all connected:
- Washington raises the stakes by hinting at sending Tomahawks to Russia
- Western media, aligned with Washington, hype the story — discussing targets, launches, and control
- The impression is the missiles are already on their way
A Tomahawk launcher might even be rolled out at a test range somewhere simply for PR videos, Mikhailov suggests. But it would be similar to the Taurus missiles Germany promised: hyped by the media – yet still absent from Ukraine.
Washington Isn’t Suicidal
The Kremlin has repeatedly said Ukraine cannot launch Tomahawks on its own.
“Every Tomahawk fired at Russia from a US-made system by American crews would mark the start of a war between the US and Russia,” Mikhailov says.
- The idea of US-made Tomahawks striking energy infrastructure inside Russia is a fantasy
- Such an act would cross a red line that would trigger a response the US is 100% not ready for
- Russia’s updated nuclear doctrine explicitly states that a massive cruise missile attack (like a volley of Tomahawks) can be met with a NUCLEAR response
- Are the Americans ready to “collectively die” for this? The expert is clear: “I am absolutely sure, no.”
What Does the West Want?
The real target would be the “shadow fleet” moving Russian oil, according to the pundit. To that end, NATO holds provocative Baltic drills and tries to seize Russian ships.
The Nord Stream sabotage exemplifies economic attacks to choke Russia’s energy exports abroad.
Iran, Russia, Azerbaijan reach major agreement on cargo transit
Press TV – October 13, 2025
Iran, Russia, and Azerbaijan have agreed to significantly increase the volume of cargo that passes through their territories from the Baltic Sea and the Barents Sea to the Persian Gulf.
Iran’s Minister of Road and Urban Development Farzaneh Sadegh said on Monday that Tehran, Moscow, and Baku had agreed to set a target of 15 million metric tons (mt) for annual cargo transit via their territories.
Sadegh made the remarks after a trilateral meeting in Baku, where he discussed transport, energy, and customs issues with Azerbaijan’s Deputy Prime Minister Shahin Mustafayev and Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexey Overchuk.
Sadegh said the three countries had also agreed to streamline and modernize their customs operations to help increase the volume of cargo transit via their territories.
She said that Iran and Russia had accelerated works on the construction of a key railroad link in northern Iran that would significantly boost transit volumes via the International North–South Transport Corridor (INSTC).
Sadegh said that the Russian contractor of the Rasht-Astara railroad will be able to start work on the project after March 2026, when Iran finishes land purchases and other preparations for the construction of the 160-kilometer rail link.
Russia’s Overchuk also hailed the agreements reached during the trilateral meeting in Baku, saying that Iran, Russia, and Azerbaijan have been seeking to create a common commodity market with barrier-free logistics that could cover transit from the Barents and Baltic Seas to the Persian Gulf.
Overchuk told Russia’s Tass news agency that increased transit via the INSTC would lead to more economic welfare for the people of the three countries, adding that the project would entail major benefits for producers, exporters, and importers.
Ukraine’s Patriot defenses ‘down to 6%’ effectiveness – retired general
RT | October 12, 2025
Kiev’s US-made Patriot air defense systems are proving increasingly ineffective at repelling Russian missile strikes, former Deputy Chief of General Staff of the Ukrainian Armed Forces Igor Romanenko has claimed.
The first of the missile systems arrived in Ukraine in April 2023 and they have been supplied by a number of NATO countries, including the United States, Germany, and the Netherlands.
Kiev does not “have that many Patriot batteries,” and the effectiveness of those at its disposal has “fallen from 42% to 6%” recently, the retired lieutenant general told Ukraine’s Espreso TV on Friday.
Romanenko attributed the development to software upgrades the Russian military has made to its Iskander missiles, which have reportedly increased their speed and maneuverability as they approach their targets.
Last week, the Financial Times, citing anonymous Ukrainian and Western officials, similarly reported that Russian missiles are now capable of following a normal arc before veering into a steep terminal dive or performing maneuvers that “confuse and avoid” Patriot interceptors. According to the paper, Moscow has likely upgraded the Iskander-M mobile system and the air-launched Kinzhal.
According to the FT, a former Ukrainian official described the improved maneuverability of the Russian missiles as a “game changer.” The outlet cited data released by the Ukrainian Air Force indicating that the interception rate of Russian ballistic missiles had improved over the summer, reaching 37% in August, but then falling to just 6% in September.
In May, Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Yury Ignat stated that the ballistic trajectories of the Iskander-M missiles had been “improved and modernized.”
The Kremlin has consistently maintained that no amount of Western military aid to Ukraine can change the course of the conflict, and only serves to unnecessarily prolong the bloodshed.
On Friday, the Russian military reported launching a “massive strike” against Ukraine’s military-industrial complex and the energy facilities supporting its operations. The Russian Defense Ministry said the attack was in response to Ukrainian “terrorist attacks” on civilian facilities.
The strikes caused a large-scale blackout in Kiev, according to local media and officials. Power outages were also reported in several other regions across Ukraine. Vladimir Zelensky claimed that rainy weather and fog had prevented the Ukrainian air defenses from performing optimally.
US sanctions Serbian oil major over Russia ties
RT | October 10, 2025
US sanctions on Serbia’s Russian-majority-owned oil company, NIS, have been activated, prompting neighboring Croatia to halt crude deliveries and raising the risk of a shutdown at Serbia’s only refinery.
Washington had granted Belgrade several temporary exemptions from restrictions imposed in January on NIS (Petroleum Industry of Serbia), in which Russia’s Gazprom and Gazprom Neft hold a majority stake. The most recent waiver, issued on October 1, was valid for only one week.
NIS confirmed Thursday that the US Treasury Department had not extended the waiver, leaving the company under full sanctions. It said it was “working to overcome the situation” and would engage with the US authorities to seek delisting.
The new sanctions have forced Croatia to stop crude supplies, pushing Serbia’s only refinery to the brink of a shutdown, President Aleksandar Vucic said on Thursday. He warned the facility, a critical supplier of gasoline and jet fuel, faces closure by November 1 unless deliveries resume.
“These are extremely severe consequences for our entire country. It’s not just about the functioning of one company,” Vucic said in a televised speech.
The sanctions effectively bar the company from purchasing crude oil or exporting refined products.
Croatian pipeline operator JANAF, the sole supplier of crude to the refinery, has already announced it will halt all business with NIS. Analysts say the company’s only recourse is for the US to reverse the sanctions or for its Russian shareholders to divest.
The impact swiftly reached consumers, as NIS notified customers that its network of some 350 stations would no longer accept American Express, Mastercard, or Visa cards.
NIS is a leading Balkan energy company with an oil refinery in Pancevo, near Belgrade, and a retail network of more than 400 filling stations. Gazprom Neft is the largest shareholder with a 44.85% stake, Gazprom holds 11.3%, and the Serbian state owns 29.87%.
Although Serbia formally seeks to join the EU, it has refused to take part in Western sanctions on Russia over the Ukraine conflict. Brussels and Washington have repeatedly pushed Belgrade to sever its energy ties with Moscow, a key historical partner.
Europe’s Nord Stream headache: Poland, Germany, and Ukraine turn on each other over arrest
By Uriel Araujo | October 11, 2025
The Nord Stream saga has taken a new twist. A Ukrainian citizen detained in Poland at Germany’s request over the 2022 pipeline sabotage has now become the center of a diplomatic storm. Ukraine’s reported pressure on Poland is straining ties with Warsaw and Berlin, reopening questions European leaders have tried to bury.
Polish authorities have resisted Germany’s extradition request for the detained Ukrainian, citing national interest and judicial independence. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk stated bluntly that it was “not in Poland’s interest” to hand the suspect over to Berlin — a statement that speaks volumes about the deepening mistrust within the European Union. He added that “the problem of Europe… is not that Nord Stream 2 was blown up, but that it was built.”
This is symptomatic of Europe’s broader crisis: a continent that once aspired to “strategic autonomy” now grapples with American influence, tensions over the “Ukranian Question”, and internal divisions.
The destruction of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines in September 2022 effectively ended decades of German-Russian energy cooperation, forcing Europe into costly dependence on American LNG. From that moment onward, every official narrative seemed to deflect attention away from one key question: who truly benefited?
One may recall that in August, Italian police arrested Ukrainian national Serhij K. for alleged involvement in the 2022 Nord Stream sabotage. According to Der Spiegel, he coordinated a Ukrainian team that planted explosives from the yacht “Andromeda.” The operation was reportedly approved by Ukraine’s military.
At the time, I wrote that the Nord Stream case has been a tale of confusion and cover-ups. I pointed out that a so-called “Ukrainian diver” suspect (unnamed to this very day) could be a lone scapegoat, a proxy, or just a minor operative in a much larger operation. All signs, I argued, pointed to the US as the main orchestrator, with Ukraine likely playing a supporting role on the ground.
According to Pulitzer Prize–winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh’s sources, the CIA is behind the deed. Ukraine’s latest behind-the-scenes pressure on Poland suggests Kyiv has more to hide than to reveal. The Eastern European country has long been a key hub for CIA operations.
Indeed, one must ask: why would Ukraine intervene at all, unless it feared what an open extradition to Germany might uncover? Berlin’s prosecutors have hinted that their investigation connects the detained suspect to a wider network tied to Ukrainian intelligence. If that thread were ever pulled, it could expose not just Kyiv’s denials, but also shake the credibility of the entire Western narrative since 2022.
The Polish position is equally telling. Tusk’s refusal to comply with Germany’s request exposes the uneasy balancing act that Poland now faces. On the one hand, it remains a staunch supporter of Ukraine in its proxy war with Russia. On the other, it has domestic political reasons to resist appearing subservient to Berlin — and perhaps also to shield itself from unwanted entanglement in the Nord Stream mystery.
Poland, after all, was one of the loudest voices calling for the pipelines to be dismantled long before the explosions happened. The fact that the blasts occurred in waters close to Denmark and Sweden, yet remains unsolved three years later, is remarkable enough.
The European Union’s silence is thus deafening. While media attention focuses on minor procedural disputes, the larger strategic implications are quietly ignored. The Nord Stream sabotage was no mere act of vandalism — it was a geopolitical earthquake that permanently reshaped Europe’s energy map. By destroying the infrastructure that connected Germany to cheaper Russian gas, someone ensured Europe’s long-term dependence on transatlantic energy imports. It is worth remembering that American officials, including then President Biden himself, had publicly threatened to “end” Nord Stream 2 before the current Russo-Ukrainian conflict even began. That is too much of a coincidence.
In that light, the current Polish-German-Ukraine triangle takes on a new meaning. It reveals the uncomfortable truth that Europe’s supposed allies are now quietly at odds. Germany apparently wants to restore a semblance of legal order by investigating the crime, while Poland wants to preserve its political leverage. Ukraine wants to avoid revelations that could alienate its Western backers. Washington in turn seems content to keep the entire affair buried under layers of confusion and selective leaks.
The deeper irony is that the Nord Stream pipelines were not merely Russian assets — they were European lifelines. Their destruction accelerated deindustrialization and skyrocketed energy prices, while American energy exporters reap the profits. The most obvious suspects remain Washington and Kyiv.
Yet European leaders cling to transatlantic loyalty. Berlin’s alignment with American policy verges on economic self-harm, while Brussels pushes “solidarity” as factories close and households struggle with high energy costs. The result is a Europe that’s strategically adrift and economically weakened — a dynamic that suits Washington.
If this Poland-Germany-Ukraine scandal deepens, it could force a reckoning. Europe will have to confront what everyone avoids: was the Nord Stream sabotage an act of war — and by whom? Until then, diplomacy remains a messy game where allies distrust each other, and truth is sidelined for convenience.
The Nord Stream affair may be remembered not just as sabotage, but as the moment Europe lost its last illusion of autonomy. It could confirm how dependent the continent has become on external powers — even in matters of justice. Politically, this could be as explosive as the pipelines blasts themselves.
Uriel Araujo, Anthropology PhD, is a social scientist specializing in ethnic and religious conflicts, with extensive research on geopolitical dynamics and cultural interactions.
From NATO’s flank to Eurasia’s core: Türkiye’s break with the West begins
By Farhad Ibragimov | RT | October 10, 2025
For decades, Turkish nationalism marched under the NATO flag. But now, one of Türkiye’s most influential right-wing leaders is calling for a turn East – toward Russia and China. His proposal may mark the country’s clearest ideological break with Atlanticism since joining the Alliance.
In September, Türkiye’s political landscape was shaken by a statement that many experts called sensational and potentially transformative. Devlet Bahceli, leader of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and a long-time ally of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan within the People’s Alliance, proposed the establishment of a strategic trilateral alliance involving Türkiye, Russia, and China to counter the “US-Israel evil coalition.”
Bahceli emphasized that such an alliance is “the most suitable option, considering reason, diplomacy, the spirit of politics, geographical conditions, and the strategic environment of the new century.” The proposal extends far beyond the usual nationalist agenda, positioning Türkiye as a player capable of initiating new formats of international cooperation.
To grasp the importance of this statement, we must note the historical context. Turkish pan-Turkism has traditionally been oriented toward the West, and nationalists were seen as staunch defenders of the pro-Atlantic course. In this light, Bahçeli’s call for an alliance with Moscow and Beijing marks a symbolic break from that tradition, reflecting growing distrust toward NATO and the US within Türkiye’s political landscape.
Bahceli’s comments are not random. Over the past few years, he has steadily ramped up his criticism of the West, advocating for Türkiye’s sovereign development “beyond blocs and alliances.” But this is the first time he has explicitly named Russia and China as preferred partners.
Reactions inside Türkiye were mixed. Right-wing circles called Bahceli’s words “revolutionary,” while leftists saw them as confirmation of a broader anti-Western consensus. Internationally, the statement underscored Ankara’s growing distance from Western power centers and its gradual rhetorical shift toward the East and Greater Eurasia.
Shortly afterward, Erdogan made a cautious comment, saying he was “not fully familiar” with Bahceli’s initiative but adding, “Whatever is good, let it happen.” The ambiguity is typical for Erdogan, who avoids publicly rejecting the ideas of key allies while keeping his political options open.
On one hand, the president is wary of provoking open conflict with Western partners, given Türkiye’s economic vulnerabilities. On the other, his comments suggest that Bahçeli’s initiative could serve as leverage – a way to pressure the US and EU by signaling that Ankara might strengthen ties with Moscow and Beijing.
A day later, Bahceli clarified his position, saying, “We know what we are doing. Türkiye should not be the implementer of regional and global projects put forward by others, but rather must be the leading actor of its own unique projects.”
In other words, Bahçeli not only intensified his anti-Western rhetoric but also asserted Türkiye’s claim to be an independent power center in the emerging multipolar world order. His stance reflects the desire of part of Türkiye’s leadership to move from being a peripheral NATO ally to a pioneer of alternative alliances in Eurasia.
From NATO loyalism to Eurasian realism
For decades, Türkiye was one of NATO’s most loyal allies. Since the Cold War, the Turkish elite believed that integration into Euro-Atlantic structures was the only viable strategy. A world order based on American leadership seemed stable and predictable.
Erdogan shared similar views when he first became prime minister in 2002. But as global competition intensified, disagreements with Washington deepened, and multipolar trends gained momentum, he realized that the unipolar system could not last. Türkiye, he concluded, must adapt – and play a role in shaping the new order.
Seen in this light, Bahceli’s proposal is more than nationalist fervor. It reflects an understanding among parts of Türkiye’s leadership that the country’s future lies in greater strategic autonomy and in building ties with alternative centers of power. His words echo those within Erdoğan’s circle who believe Türkiye can assert itself only through closer engagement with Russia and China.
This shift reveals how Türkiye’s elites have moved from trusting the stability of a Western-centric system to recognizing its limits – and searching for new frameworks in which Ankara can act as a key player rather than a subordinate.
Redefining Türkiye’s place in the world
Bahceli’s remarks highlight deep shifts within Turkish nationalist circles and Ankara’s growing readiness to reconsider its global role. He argues that neither China nor Russia is Türkiye’s enemy, despite efforts by Western ideologues to claim otherwise. Instead, he sees the West as the true obstacle – determined to prevent Türkiye from becoming an independent power center and confining it to a role of “watchdog” in the Middle East.
In his latest statement, Bahceli stressed the need for a new strategy:
“We believe that Türkiye, located at the center of Eurasia, which is the strategic focus of the 21st century, should pursue multidimensional and long-term policies aimed at strengthening regional peace and stability and developing cooperation opportunities, especially with countries in the Black Sea and Caspian Basin, including Russia, China, and Iran. Considering the changing and complex structure of international relations, producing permanent and comprehensive solutions to global issues such as terrorism, illegal migration, and climate change is a responsibility that no country can achieve alone.”
Essentially, Bahceli is saying that Türkiye must transcend old constraints and stop being a tool in the hands of external forces. His stance embodies a new paradigm: only through an independent, multilateral, and Eurasian policy can Türkiye become a true architect of regional stability and a major player in the future global order.
The end of oscillation
Türkiye has long oscillated between Atlantic alignment and independent ambition. These cycles rarely evolved into a lasting doctrine. But the current geopolitical environment is forcing Ankara to make a choice.
Economic dependency, regional instability, and Israel’s aggressive behavior – including attacks on Iran and Qatar – have created a sense of urgency. In Ankara, some now fear that Türkiye itself could become a target.
Globally, the old unipolar order is losing balance, and an alliance with Russia and China may offer Türkiye not guarantees, but strategic advantages – especially in securing its autonomy and status as an independent power center.
At the UN General Assembly, US President Donald Trump urged Erdogan to stop buying Russian oil and even floated bringing Türkiye into the anti-Russia sanctions regime. For Ankara, that would mean economic damage and deeper dependence on the West – a risk the leadership is no longer willing to accept.
Bahceli’s initiative, and Erdogan’s carefully measured reaction, mark a pivotal moment. Türkiye is beginning to institutionalize its search for an alternative political philosophy – one grounded in multipolarity, strategic pragmatism, and a redefined vision of its place in the 21st century.
Farhad Ibragimov – lecturer at the Faculty of Economics at RUDN University, visiting lecturer at the Institute of Social Sciences of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Turkiye to boost US gas imports, cut reliance on Iran and Russia
The Cradle | October 9, 2025
Turkiye is moving to cover more than half of its natural gas demand by 2028 through domestic production and increased US liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports, decreasing reliance on Iran and Russia, according to analysts cited by Reuters on 8 October.
The plan follows a White House meeting on 25 September, during which US President Donald Trump urged Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to curb Russian energy purchases, as part of the US push to press allies to scale back ties with both Moscow and Tehran.
Ankara’s strategy centers on expanding LNG terminals and boosting local output through the state-owned energy firm, Turkish Petroleum Corporation (TPAO).
According to Turkiye’s Energy Exchange (EPIAS), the country’s LNG terminals can now import up to 58 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas each year, enough to meet its entire domestic demand.
Domestic production and contracted LNG imports are projected to exceed 26 bcm annually from 2028, compared with 15 bcm this year.
That would account for more than half of Turkiye’s 53 bcm gas demand, sharply reducing its need for Russian and Iranian pipeline supplies.
“Turkiye has been signalling that it will take advantage of the [global] LNG abundance,” said Sohbet Karbuz of the Paris-based Mediterranean Organisation for Energy and Climate (OMEC).
Although Russia remains Turkiye’s largest supplier, its share of the market has fallen from over 60 percent two decades ago to 37 percent in the first half of 2025.
Moscow’s long-term pipeline contracts – covering 22 bcm annually via Blue Stream and TurkStream – are nearing expiry. Iran’s 10 bcm contract ends next year, while Azerbaijan’s 9.5 bcm deals run until 2030 and 2033.
To replace these, Ankara has signed $43 billion worth of LNG agreements with US suppliers, including a 20-year deal with Mercuria in September.
Turkish Energy Minister Alparslan Bayraktar said in a recent interview that Turkiye “must source gas from all available suppliers,” which includes Russia, Iran, and Azerbaijan, but noted that US LNG offers cheaper alternatives.
Analysts believe Ankara will likely burn Russian and Iranian gas domestically while re-exporting imported LNG and its own output to Europe, where a full ban on Russian energy is expected by 2028.
Turkiye’s state energy company BOTAS has already begun small-volume exports to Hungary and Romania as part of its efforts to become a regional gas hub.
The Mystery of Trump, Ukraine, and Russia
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | September 18, 2025
Hardly anyone in the mainstream press addresses the mystery of how Trump went from what was supposedly a secret agent of the Russians to an ardent opponent of Russia in the Ukraine-Russia war. My hunch is that the commentators in the mainstream press are so excited that Trump has turned pro-Ukraine that they don’t care that they were, not so long ago, accusing him of being a secret agent of Russia.
After all, who can forget the daily refrain during Trump’s first term in office. “Robert Mueller is going to save us!” We had to be subjected to that refrain from both Democrats and the mainstream press for more than a year. The notion was that Trump was, as president of the United States, secretly serving the interests of Russia. Democrats and most of the mainstream press were convinced that Robert Mueller, a lawyer who had been appointed as special counsel to investigate the matter, was going to save us all by concluding that Trump was, in fact, serving as a secret agent of Russia, which would then result in Trump’s removal from office through impeachment.
As we all know, Robert Mueller did not save us because there was nothing to save us from. The entire matter was one great big ridiculous conspiracy theory on the part of the mainstream press and Democrats. After a year of extensive investigation by a huge and very expensive staff of lawyers, Robert Mueller ended up concluding that the allegation was bogus.
Nonetheless, most everyone thought that Trump would do everything possible to establish friendly and peaceful relations with Russia. Such a policy, of course, wouldn’t make him a secret agent of Russia, any more than President Kennedy’s efforts in that direction made him a secret agent of Russia.
Yet in his first term in office, Trump ended up taking a fairly adversarial stand toward Russia. It was reasonable to conclude, however, that one reason he did that was an effort to bend over backwards to show that the secret-agent accusations were entirely bogus.
This time around as president, however, there was nothing that Trump had to prove. During his 2024 campaign, he made it clear that he intended to bring an end to the Ukraine-Russia war as soon as he took office. Of course, the easiest and fastest way to have done that was to immediately cut off all U.S. foreign aid to Ukraine. For a while, it appeared that that was precisely what Trump was going to do. When Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky visited Trump and Vice President Vance in the White House, both of them berated, insulted, humiliated, and dressed down Zelensky in public. Zelensky ended up leaving that meeting with his tail between his legs. Trump even stated that it was Ukraine that had started the war. The message seemed clear — U.S. aid to Ukraine was going to terminate, which would, of course, have been the logical course of action given Trump’s conviction that it was Ukraine that started the war.
However, sometime afterward, Trump did an about-face and began berating Russia and Russian president Vladimir Putin for not doing enough to end the war. He began threatening Putin with more economic sanctions. He made it clear that the U.S. government would continue supporting Ukraine, especially with weaponry. He has also taken an increasingly aggressive position toward Russia and Putin.
The mainstream press treats all this as perfectly normal. I myself find it extremely mysterious. How does a guy who is accused of being a Russian agent go all the way to becoming a Russian adversary? For me, that’s quite a switch.
The following is my opinion as to what has happened to bring about this very radical turnaround. As longtime readers of my blog know, I have long maintained that it is the national-security branch of the federal government — i.e., the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA — that is in charge of the federal government, especially in foreign affairs, and that the other three branches simply operate in support of the national-security branch.
It was the national-security branch that used NATO to successfully provoke Russia into attacking Ukraine. It did that by having NATO, an old relic from the Cold War racket, move eastward toward Russia’s borders knowing full well that Russia would object and ultimately invade Ukraine, after which they could condemn Russia for its “aggression.” The objective was to use a war with Russia to “degrade” Russia, give Russia its own “Afghanistan,” and bring about regime change within Russia. The U.S. would supply the weaponry and cash to Ukraine to accomplish this. It would only be Ukrainian soldiers, not American soldiers, who would be dying and so the American people wouldn’t care about what the national-security branch had done to bring about the war.
What the Pentagon, the CIA, and the NSA failed to confront was the distinct possibility that Russia would end up winning the war, which would necessarily mean a defeat of the United States. After the deadly 20-year U.S. fiasco war in Afghanistan and the installation of a pro-Iranian regime in the U.S. war of aggression against Iraq, the last thing the national-security branch wants is the humiliation of another military defeat, especially at the hands of Russia — its adversary in its old Cold War racket.
So, it’s my opinion that the national-security establishment has put the squeeze on Trump and made him see how important it is to “national security” that Russia not be permitted to win this war. It is my opinion that Trump has caved in to such pressure, just like Congress and the federal courts have long deferred to the national-security branch. That, to me, is a logical explanation for Trump’s about-face on Russia and also why he no longer heavily emphasizes the need to “drain the swamp” and bring an end to the “deep state.”

