The decision itself is correct, of course. Europe must never return to being as dependent on Russian energy as it used to be when Nord Stream was still around.
That said, I wonder if it’s wise to discard it as bargaining chip at this point. If Russia at least believes that Nord Stream may reopen in the future, this might be something that brings Putin back to the negotiating table. As for Trump, a European commitment to gas (if only by lip service) might help stroke his fossil-fuelled ego and weird pro-Russian leaning just long enough for Europe to build up capabilities that allow for a more confrontational attitude towards the U.S.
The thing is: Regardless of the outcome of that war, we need to decarbonize. If we are still using gas and fossil fuels in the 2040s, we are totally cooked.
No disagreement between us on this. I’m not saying we should seriously consider returning to fossil fuels.
What I’m proposing is a strategic ruse: Europe should pretend Nord Stream could be back on the table, in order to leverage that option to its benefit. Both the leadership in the west and the east are lying through their teeth whenever they open their mouths, ready to walk back on their threats and promises when it suits them (TACO, anyone?). In this diplomatic climate, it’s unwise to stick to blatant honesty and take reopening Nord Stream off the table (even if you’re never planning to do that) and thus waste leverage in negotiations.
We’ve got some big-ass donkeys that we need to cross that bridge. Why let a good carrot go to waste? Why not dangle it in front of their eyes, even if we’re not planning to give it to them? Not sure if Putin is going to fall for it, but the orange moron definitely will, and it could help us drive a wedge between them (“See? Putin doesn’t want peace!”), which could benefit Ukraine.
I’m not asking anyone to trust Putin’s word - that’d be foolish. I’m suggesting we speak a language Putin does understand. “We’re never opening up Nord Stream again” is nothing that he can work with; shrug shoulders and carry on with the war. “Stop X, or we shall bury Nord Stream forever; start doing Y, and we may reconsider the project” - that is something he might think about.
Nord Stream doesn’t really have anything to do with the Nordics. The pipelines go south of the Nordics, from russia to Germany.
But you are right that they have been moving away from fossil fuels. Especially russian ones. If you look at Finland, they went from importing like 30% of their energy consumption from russia to basically zero, in just a few years.
And I didn’t say we should go back to fossil. If anything, the current energy shock shows that European commitment to decarbonisation and renewables was right.
What I’m saying is we should pretend that there is an option to reopen Nord Stream, and use it as leverage with the autocrat in the East and the would-be autocrat in the West, who both are very much pro-fossil.
The decision itself is correct, of course. Europe must never return to being as dependent on Russian energy as it used to be when Nord Stream was still around.
That said, I wonder if it’s wise to discard it as bargaining chip at this point. If Russia at least believes that Nord Stream may reopen in the future, this might be something that brings Putin back to the negotiating table. As for Trump, a European commitment to gas (if only by lip service) might help stroke his fossil-fuelled ego and weird pro-Russian leaning just long enough for Europe to build up capabilities that allow for a more confrontational attitude towards the U.S.
The thing is: Regardless of the outcome of that war, we need to decarbonize. If we are still using gas and fossil fuels in the 2040s, we are totally cooked.
No disagreement between us on this. I’m not saying we should seriously consider returning to fossil fuels.
What I’m proposing is a strategic ruse: Europe should pretend Nord Stream could be back on the table, in order to leverage that option to its benefit. Both the leadership in the west and the east are lying through their teeth whenever they open their mouths, ready to walk back on their threats and promises when it suits them (TACO, anyone?). In this diplomatic climate, it’s unwise to stick to blatant honesty and take reopening Nord Stream off the table (even if you’re never planning to do that) and thus waste leverage in negotiations.
We’ve got some big-ass donkeys that we need to cross that bridge. Why let a good carrot go to waste? Why not dangle it in front of their eyes, even if we’re not planning to give it to them? Not sure if Putin is going to fall for it, but the orange moron definitely will, and it could help us drive a wedge between them (“See? Putin doesn’t want peace!”), which could benefit Ukraine.
Putin is like Bibi, there’s no negotiating with liars and narcissists. Their word means nothing.
I’m not asking anyone to trust Putin’s word - that’d be foolish. I’m suggesting we speak a language Putin does understand. “We’re never opening up Nord Stream again” is nothing that he can work with; shrug shoulders and carry on with the war. “Stop X, or we shall bury Nord Stream forever; start doing Y, and we may reconsider the project” - that is something he might think about.
Nordic countries are buying a ton of EVs and installing a ton of renewables.
The writing is on the wall for oil, has been for decades.
Can we do that in North America, please? We’re installing conservatives everywhere, and all they do is sell the rights to American Petro-corps.
Nord Stream doesn’t really have anything to do with the Nordics. The pipelines go south of the Nordics, from russia to Germany.
But you are right that they have been moving away from fossil fuels. Especially russian ones. If you look at Finland, they went from importing like 30% of their energy consumption from russia to basically zero, in just a few years.
Nord Stream is a gas, not an oil pipeline.
And I didn’t say we should go back to fossil. If anything, the current energy shock shows that European commitment to decarbonisation and renewables was right.
What I’m saying is we should pretend that there is an option to reopen Nord Stream, and use it as leverage with the autocrat in the East and the would-be autocrat in the West, who both are very much pro-fossil.