The geopolitical oppositions caused by this pipeline.
|  | (Source: Consultancy.eu) |
| What is North Stream 2? | Nord Stream 2 is a large gas pipeline of 1,230 km under the Baltic Sea. It runs from Russia to Germany. It was built to increase the amount of gas that could be sent through the first pipeline, called Nord Stream 1. | The project was led by Gazprom, Russia's state-owned gas company. It was made with the help and money from several big European energy firms. These include Uniper, Wintershall Dea, OMV, Engie, and Royal Dutch Shell. It was designed to carry up to 55 billion cubic meters of natural gas each year. That amount would double the total capacity of the first Nord Stream. | The main goal was to give Europe, mostly Germany, a steady and low-cost supply of gas. Germany wanted to use this gas as it moved away from nuclear power and coal. It was hoping to make energy cleaner while keeping costs under control. | From an economic point of view, the project seemed to make sense. It could make Europe's energy supply more reliable. But it would also allow lower prices for people. | But from the very start, Nord Stream 2 caused debate. It quickly became one of the most opposed projects of the century. Many EU states and the U.S. warned that it would make Europe too dependent on Russia's gas. It would give Moscow more power over Europe's energy future. | | | | | A source of oppositions | The fiercest criticism came from Poland, Ukraine, the Baltic states, and the U.S. They warned that it would make Europe too dependent on Russia's gas. It would give Moscow more power over Europe's energy future. | For Poland and Ukraine, it was a direct economic and security threat. It bypassed usual land routes through their state. This would deprive them of transit fees worth billions of euros per year. It would also weaken their strategic importance in EU energy networks. | Ukraine viewed the pipeline as a severe threat. For decades, its network of pipelines served as the main route for Russia's gas exports to Europe. The new route would allow Russia to export gas directly to Western Europe. It could enable it to exert pressure on Ukraine or even cut off its gas supply. This would then not disrupt deliveries to Germany and other EU countries. | The U.S. shared this view. It said the pipeline prevented EU's energy diversification. This would then threaten NATO's unity. The U.S. also saw it as an economic rival. It sought to expand its own export of LNG to Europe. | German perspective and EU division | Germany said the pipeline was a purely commercial project. It had nothing to do with politics. Berlin said that Russia had been a reliable energy partner for decades. It also said that diversification did not mean cutting off Russia's gas. Germany's industry supported the project. They hoped for stabilized energy prices and ensured supply during the green transition. | But this stance led to deep divisions within the EU. East and North EU states said Berlin put its own interests above the bloc's joint security. The EU Commission did not block the project outright. But it introduced new gas-market regulations. These aimed at increasing transparency and limiting Gazprom's control over the pipeline. Nord Stream 2 became a test case to see if EU was able to balance national interests with broader strategic issues. | 2022 turning point | The construction of Nord Stream 2 began in 2018. It ended 3 years later. But it never entered service. Just days before Russia attacked Ukraine, Germany suspended the certification of the pipeline. The war marked a historic turning point in EU energy policy. Overnight, the rationale for Nord Stream 2 collapsed. Germany shifted to LNG imports. It boosted green-energy projects. It also joined EU sanctions on Russia's energy sector. | That year, a series of explosions damaged both Nord Stream pipelines. Germany, Denmark, and Sweden stated it was sabotage. Italy and Poland arrested some of the people involved. They were Ukrainians. But both states refused to deliver them to Germany's justice. They argued that they did it because of the war. They just wanted to make sure these pipelines would not serve Russia's war machine. This led to tensions with Germany. | Geopolitical impact | The Nord Stream 2 revealed the deep ties between energy and geopolitics. For Russia, the project was a strategic tool. It was a way to secure long-term revenue while dividing the West. For the EU, it was a warning about the risks of energy over-reliance. | It transformed EU's energy landscape. In response to the war and the loss of Russian supplies, the EU rapidly diversified its energy imports. It invested in LNG terminals, renewable energy, and storage capacity. The energy crisis of 2022-2023 forced a reckoning with decades of policy decisions that prioritized cheap gas over strategic autonomy. | Decoding geopolitics isn't a job. It's survival. | Joy |
|
| | | | Update your email preferences or unsubscribe here © 2025 GEOPOLITIKS 17 Littoral Frédéric Mistral
Toulon, France 83000, France | | Terms of Service |
|
|
|
|
|
Post a Comment
Post a Comment