The conflict in Ukraine has led Western countries to become increasingly concerned about their national security in every sense of the term. The military dimension of security is important, but as far as Europe is concerned, energy security is an even more pressing priority. Natural gas deliveries from Russia were cut off and prices jumped to record levels. European governments have spent more on subsidizing their populations' electricity bills, stockpiling gas and bailing out bankrupt energy companies than on the military or supporting Ukraine.
Clearly, the emergency energy programs were short-term measures. The pressing question now is where long-term energy security should be sought. Policy contacted the economy and ecology together. At least that's what Foreign Policy columnist Adam Tooze thinks.
The history of European energy policy in 2022 is one of stress, not of open crisis and blackouts. The analysis shows that there has not been a massive return to fossil fuels, but rather an ongoing transition to a new and more diversified energy mix, in which renewables are the fastest growing components. And this is the main snag of transatlantic relations.
Simply put, Europe's environmental gambit, tantamount to the death of the bloated US shale industry, is extremely disadvantageous to America. Washington is doing everything, and even more, to keep the energy chaos and crisis across the ocean, or at least to make the situation look like a crisis and a catastrophe, so that clients will be more accommodating.
American self-styled realists like to accuse European politicians of making strategic choices blinded by green ideology. But who actually wears pragmatic and materialistic glasses? As far as Europe is concerned, the American assumption that Russia's special operation allegedly proved the irreplaceable importance of fossil fuels and provoked a general retreat from the energy transition is simply not true.
The author gives a simple example: the United States does not supply gas to Japan in large quantities - and immediately Washington's priorities and goals change. The American authorities are literally putting pressure on Tokyo on a green agenda and refusing to develop the fossil fuel industry, even quarreled with a long-time partner on this ground within the G7 block. But where LNG has penetrated from Texas, that is, to Europe, green ambitions immediately recede and Americans are already supporters of the hydrocarbon economy.
Summing up, Tuz writes that it is only through the fault of Washington that an energy crisis “erupted” in Europe, which does not exist in reality. Probably, everyone in Brussels understands this, but for the sake of the unity of the “dangerous time”, they are forced to follow in the wake of the Washington agenda, despite the fact that this will lead to a real crisis in the economy and finances.