EU Indirectly Funding Russia: The Energy Paradox Amid the Ukraine War

1. A Costly Paradox in the EU–Russia–Ukraine Triangle

The issue of EU indirectly funding Russia has once again sparked heated debate as the war in Ukraine enters its fourth year.
Despite being Kyiv’s largest financial supporter with over €167 billion in aid, the European Union continues to import Russian energy, channeling more than €11 billion into Moscow’s war-driven economy during the first eight months of 2025, according to data from the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) reported by Reuters.

This contradiction raises a critical question: Is the EU unwittingly financing Russia’s war machine while helping Ukraine fight it?

2. Caught Between Two Fronts

Since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, the EU has cut its energy dependence on Moscow by about 90%, yet member states still spent €11 billion on Russian gas and oil in 2025.

Of the 27 EU nations, seven have increased imports compared with 2024 — including France (+40%), the Netherlands (+72%), Belgium, Croatia, Romania, and Portugal.

Ironically, these are also among Ukraine’s strongest political and military allies.

According to Vaibhav Raghunandan, senior analyst at CREA, “It’s a form of self-sabotage. The Kremlin continues to be funded by those who claim to oppose it.”

“Russia’s war economy is being sustained by European money,” Raghunandan added.

3. Why the EU Still Buys Russian Energy

- Long-Term Contract Obligations

Energy majors like TotalEnergies (France), Shell (UK), Naturgy (Spain) and SEFE (Germany) are bound by long-term LNG contracts stretching well into the 2030s and 2040s.

Many of these contracts include “take-or-pay” clauses, forcing buyers to pay for gas whether they receive it or not.

Since no full EU-wide ban on Russian LNG exists, companies could face heavy penalties or legal disputes if they cancel early.

- Europe’s Role as an Energy Transit Hub

Ports in France, Belgium, and Spain serve as transshipment hubs for Russian LNG, re-exporting the fuel to other EU countries such as Germany and the Netherlands.

Belgium’s recent surge in imports, for example, stems partly from EU rules restricting the re-export of Russian gas, forcing cargoes to unload locally instead of shipping onward to Asia.

- Legal and Political Constraints

Governments like the Netherlands say they back phasing out Russian energy but cannot unilaterally cancel legacy contracts without an EU legal basis.

Brussels aims to advance the Russian LNG phase-out to 2027 (from 2028), but this requires unanimous approval among all 27 members.

Hungary and Slovakia, however, openly maintain energy ties with Moscow and will be exempt from upcoming restrictions.

4. The Result: Billions Flowing Back to Moscow

Since 2022, the EU has imported over €213 billion worth of Russian energy, exceeding the €167 billion in total aid sent to Ukraine, according to Germany’s Kiel Institute for the World Economy.

Analysts warn that Europe risks funding both sides of the war — financing Ukraine’s defense while fueling Russia’s war revenues through energy trade.

During a recent UN session, former U.S. President Donald Trump sharply criticized Europe:

“They’re buying Russian oil and gas while fighting Russia — that’s disgraceful,” he said.

Beyond political optics, this dynamic also undermines the EU’s credibility as the self-proclaimed leader of global sanctions against Moscow.

5. What Lies Ahead: Can the EU Escape the “Energy Trap”?

Path 1: Accelerate the Russian Energy Ban

Brussels plans to end all Russian oil and gas imports by 2028, with liquefied natural gas (LNG) — which now makes up about half of all Russian energy imports — being targeted for earlier elimination.

Path 2: Leaning on U.S. Energy Supplies

Experts warn that relying more heavily on American LNG could make Europe dependent on Washington’s energy exports.

“U.S. LNG isn’t a one-to-one replacement,” said Anne-Sophie Corbeau, energy researcher at Columbia University.
“It’s controlled by private companies, not the government — meaning supply is dictated by global prices, not politics.”

Path 3: Accelerating Green Transition

The EU continues to push renewable energy expansion — from hydrogen and wind to solar power — as part of its long-term plan to eliminate geopolitical risk and reach energy sovereignty.

Conclusion: Europe’s Strategic and Ethical Crossroads

The ongoing reality of EU indirectly funding Russia underscores the complex intersection of ethics, economics, and energy security.
While Brussels continues to champion Ukraine’s cause, its energy payments still keep Moscow’s war machine afloat.

The planned 2027 cutoff will test Europe’s moral and strategic resolve more than any policy debate.
Ultimately, the world is watching to see whether the EU can truly sever the financial lifelines sustaining Russia’s war — or remain trapped by its own energy dependence.

💬 FAQ – Key Questions on the EU’s Energy Paradox

1. Why is the EU said to be “indirectly funding Russia”?
Because revenues from EU oil and gas imports still flow directly into Moscow’s budget, helping sustain its war economy.

2. Can the EU stop Russian imports immediately?
No. Long-term contracts and potential energy shortages make a sudden cutoff impractical. The EU plans a gradual phase-out through 2027–2028.

3. Which countries import the most Russian energy in 2025?
France (€2.2B), the Netherlands (€498M), and Hungary (€5B) are among the top importers, according to CREA data.

4. Can the U.S. fully replace Russian supplies?
Unlikely. U.S. LNG capacity is growing, but availability depends on market conditions, not government policy.