Nearly 100,000 Russian troops have joined others along the border with Ukraine. U.S. intelligence has warned of a planned invasion, and tensions between Moscow and the West have reached their highest point since the end of the Cold War.
President Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin had a two-hour video call on Dec. 7 to help calm the crisis. During this meeting, Biden reiterated America’s support for Ukraine’s territorial integrity — and warned that if Russia invades Ukraine, the United States and its European allies would respond first and foremost with strong economic measures. One specific measure: ensuring the failure of Moscow’s Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project across the Baltic Sea toward Germany.
Why is the United States using energy to deter Russian aggression, and why is this a risky strategy? Research on energy security, including my own, demonstrates the constraining effect of energy interdependence. Europe’s energy dependence on Russia means threats to this pipeline project could cause as much damage to our allies as to Russia. Any pipeline pushback thus requires a strong transatlantic consensus. At the same time, Russian-European energy interdependence — and a new gas pipeline that appears ready to boost supplies to the West — shapes Russian interests and renders an invasion of Ukraine less rational.
Why are Russian troops on the Ukrainian border?
The border tinderbox threatens to draw Russia and the United States and its allies into open conflict over the future of Ukraine and, ultimately, European security. Russia and Ukraine have been at war since the Kremlin illegally annexed the Crimean peninsula in 2014 and supported separatists in an ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine. Attempts at resolving this conflict, including the Minsk agreements in 2014 and 2015, haven’t been successful.
The U.S. and NATO promised to protect Ukraine. If Ukraine is the aggressor, all bets are off.
The Kremlin says the Russian troop buildup is in response to large-scale and unplanned NATO exercises near its borders. Russia has long considered NATO’s eastward expansion a threat to Russian security. And Moscow regards the installation of ballistic missile defense systems on the territory of NATO allies Poland and Romania as a breach of the post-Cold War security order. Putin has said that further NATO activity on Ukrainian territory is a “red line” for Russia, and the Kremlin is seeking a legal guarantee that NATO will not expand to the east.
Europe’s energy picture complicates this conflict
The European Union relies on Russia for over one-third of its energy supplies. In turn, Europe is one of Russia’s most important consumers of oil, solid fuel and natural gas — and Moscow is highly dependent on these export sales.
Social science research has demonstrated how trade interdependence can affect sovereignty, and energy has one of the most constraining effects on a country’s ability to pursue its goals. Generally, countries that do not have significant natural resources and rely on few suppliers are more vulnerable to supply shocks and coercion. The 1973 oil crisis, for instance, caused the United States to fundamentally shift its grand strategy toward securing and diversifying U.S. energy supplies.
Europe’s energy dependence on Russia has led to a more cooperative relationship than is typical in U.S.-Russia relations. This has caused some friction between Europe and the United States over the years. The most prominent recent example was when some European countries were reluctant to implement a harsh sanctions regime against Moscow for its annexation of Crimea, as they were loath to disrupt the established energy and economic order.
The controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline is emblematic of the complexity wrought by European and Russian energy interdependence. Russia is keenly awaiting German regulatory approval of the now-completed pipeline. If certified, Nord Stream 2 will deliver approximately 15 percent of the European Union’s annual gas imports directly to Germany, cutting out Ukraine as a key gas transit route and depriving the Ukrainian government of important revenue, while also removing a critical deterrent against Russian aggression.
Europe is facing a severe energy crisis this winter, and Putin argues that approval of the pipeline is the only way Russia can help alleviate the crisis. The new German government broadly supports Nord Stream 2, as it’s an important issue for powerful German business lobbies.
In contrast, Ukraine, Poland and other European countries argue that Nord Stream 2 is designed to blackmail Europe and lock in further dependence on Moscow’s resources. As long as Ukraine remains a key transit corridor for Russian energy to European markets, the costs of full-scale war will be high for Moscow.
For its part, the U.S. government has long opposed Nord Stream 2, both to protect Ukraine’s interests and sovereignty and to reduce Europe’s dependence on Russia. In 2019, President Donald Trump authorized sanctions against companies involved in the pipeline’s construction in the hopes of deterring the project. Biden waived these sanctions in May, arguing at the time that maintaining good relations with Berlin was more important than punishing Russia.
Don’t miss any of TMC’s smart analysis! Sign up for our newsletter.
What does this mean for Ukraine?
The current Ukraine crisis demonstrates a fundamental challenge of European security: Deterring Russia is difficult because of the high level of interdependence between Russia and Europe. While some Eastern European countries view Russia as an existential security threat, many Western European governments view it as a vexing but profitable economic partner.
For now, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the West needs a credible deterrent against Russian aggression in Ukraine. With little appetite in Washington or European capitals to deploy U.S. or NATO forces to help Ukraine defend itself, Washington’s approach is to hit Moscow where it hurts: Russia’s energy exports. This, however, hinges on a united transatlantic approach, one that many European allies may be reluctant to implement because of the risk of damaging their own economies.
For Ukraine, short of military intervention, Washington has little leverage over Russia that doesn’t also hurt its allies. Understanding the constraints of energy interdependence in Europe may become more critical than ever as Russia seeks to force Western engagement on a reassessment of Ukraine’s future and European security.
Professors: Check out TMC’s expanding list of classroom topic guides.
Emily Holland (@EmilyJHolland) is an assistant professor in the Russia Maritime Studies Institute at the Center for Naval Warfare Studies, United States Naval War College. The views expressed here are hers alone and do not express those of the Naval War College, the U.S. Navy or the Department of Defense.