US trade deal could lock the EU into fossil fuel dependency – DW – 07/30/2025
Environmental groups have criticized a new trade deal that could see Europe spending more than $750 billion (€700 billion) on mostly fossil fuel imports from the United States over the next three years, warning it could undermine the bloc's climate targets.
"This risks locking Europe into decades of fossil fuel dependence, volatile energy bills, and accelerating the wildfires and flooding already wreaking havoc across the continent," said Andreas Sieber, associate director of policy and campaigns at climate group 350.org, in a statement.
As part of an agreement that US President Donald Trump dubbed the "biggest deal ever," EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said US energy would replace Russian oil and gas, "which we do not want anymore."
Instead, Europe would purchase "more affordable and better" liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the US, said von der Leyen.
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
The deal, which helped avert a trade war, includes a 15% tariff on key EU exports like cars. But critics said it represented an "about-turn" in Europe's climate policy.
"The new US-EU trade deal is a dramatic U-turn on the European Commission's and President von der Leyen's priorities from a couple of years ago," said Esther Bollendorff, senior gas policy coordinator at climate group CAN Europe. "Namely, building a future-proof European Green Deal based on climate ambition and rapid renewables build-out."
The Commission, under von der Leyen, unveiled the Green Deal to ramp up Europe's ambitions on fighting climate change at the end of 2019. Europe is the fastest-warming region globally, say scientists. The continent saw its hottest year on record in 2024.
Just weeks ago, the Commission presented proposals for a 90% bloc-wide reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2040 compared with 1990 levels.
The mid-term target aims to help the EU reach its wider 2050 goal of carbon neutrality, with measures including improving energy efficiency, electrifying the transport sector and boosting green energy. In the next five years, the bloc aims to have 42.5% of its energy come from renewable sources.
The US-EU trade deal "flies in the face" of these commitments, said Luke Haywood, head of climate and energy at the European Environmental Bureau, a network of environmental organizations.
"Tripling US energy imports in just three years isn't only physically implausible, it would derail the EU's mid-term decarbonization targets," he added in a statement. Burning oil and gas emits greenhouse gases like CO2, which trap heat in the atmosphere and warm the planet, fueling more extreme weather.
Swapping pipeline gas for US LNG would further increase Europe's emissions, said Chris Aylett, a research fellow at the Environment and Society Center of UK-based independent policy institute Chatham House. That's because LNG production and transport emits more methane — a greenhouse gas far more potent than CO2, though it doesn't stay as long in the atmosphere.
Still, there is skepticism about whether Europe can live up to its new pledge on US energy spending, with Aylett saying it would be "very difficult."
In 2024, the EU imported around €60 billion worth of oil and gas from the US. Another €24 billion came from Russia. Taken together, that's a "long way away" from the €216 billion the EU promised to spend each year, Aylett told DW.
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
The European Commission also cannot force member states or companies to buy US energy, said Aylett.
"It's an aspiration really. The EU has the means that it could encourage it [...] but it's all voluntary, so the Commission itself wouldn't be making the purchases," he added. "In some ways the promise has been made that the Commission itself doesn't really have any ability to deliver."
Swapping dependence on Russian energy with reliance on the US could be "catastrophic" for energy security too, warned Aylett.
"It would be breaking the very first rule, which is that you don't just rely on one supplier," he told DW, adding that it would make the bloc "extremely vulnerable."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
23 minutes ago
- DW
Ukraine: Kyiv says it hit Russian oil, military facilities – DW – 08/02/2025
Ukraine says it has struck some key oil and military facilities on Russian territory. A blaze that broke out near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Plant after Ukrainian shelling has been brought under control. DW has the latest. Ukraine's military says it has hit key infrastructure inside Russia, including a significant oil refinery. Kyiv also says it struck a military airfield used for drones and an electronics factory. A fire that broke out near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant after Ukrainian shelling has been brought under control, according to Russian authorities. Meanwhile, the has reported that Indian government sources have revealed there are no plans to stop buying oil from Russia. This is despite US President Donald Trump's threats to impose penalties on will keep purchasing oil from Russia despite US President Donald Trump's threats of penalties. This is according to two Indian government sources and reported on by the Reuters news agency, via the. "These are long-term oil contracts," Reuters reported one of the sources as saying. "It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight." Trump last month suggested on social media that India would face additional penalties for purchases of Russian arms and oil. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video A fire that broke out near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant after Ukrainian shelling has subsided after being brought under control, the Moscow-installed administration of the Russian-held plant in Ukraine said on Saturday. Russia seized the Zaporizhzhia plant in the first weeks of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which got underway in February 2022. Since Moscow took the plant, both sides have accused each other of firing or taking other measures that could increases the danger of a nuclear accident. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Ukraine said it had struck infrastructure within Russia, including a major oil refinery as well as a military airfield for drones and an electronics factory. Ukraine's Unmanned Systems Forces (USF) said the military had hit the refinery in Ryazan, some 180 kilometers (110 miles) southeast of Moscow. The attack sparked a fire on its premises. The USF said it also hit the Annanefteprodukt oil storage facility in the Voronezh region. Elsewhere, the Ukrainian SBU intelligence agency said its drones had hit Russia's Primorsko-Akhtarsk military airfield. The airbase has been used to launch waves of long-range drones at targets in Ukraine. The SBU said it also struck a plant in Penza. According to the intelligence agency, the factory supplies Moscow's military-industrial complex with electronics. Ukraine's military said Saturday that it had hit key infrastructure inside Russia, including a significant oil refinery, as well as a military airfield used for drones, and an electronics factory. Mwanwhile, a fire broke out near the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant after Ukrainian shelling, before being brought under control. According to the , Indian government sources have revealed there are no plans to stop buying oil from Russia. This is despite US President Donald Trump's threats to impose penalties on New Delhi.
Int'l Business Times
2 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
Dmitry Medvedev: Russia's Hawkish Ex-president
Former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev, whose comments prompted US President Donald Trump to move two nuclear submarines, was once seen as a liberal reformer but has become one of the Kremlin's most prominent anti-Western hawks. The 59-year-old, who served as head of state between 2008 and 2012, sought "friendly" ties with Europe and the United States during his single term but faded into obscurity after handing the post back to President Vladimir Putin. Demoted to prime minister in 2012 and then made deputy head of Russia's security council in 2020 -- a largely advisory role -- Medvedev began espousing hardline views on social media shortly after Moscow launched its Ukraine offensive. In public statements since the conflict began he has described Westerners as "bastards and degenerates", declared that "Ukraine is, of course, Russia" and raised the possibility of using nuclear weapons against Russia's enemies. In June, after the US launched air strikes on nuclear facilities in Moscow-allied Iran, Medvedev suggested that "a number of countries" were willing to provide Tehran with nuclear warheads, prompting an angry Trump to accuse him of "casually" threatening a nuclear strike. On Thursday, Medvedev alluded to Moscow's semi-automatic "Dead Hand" nuclear arms control system in a Telegram post criticising Trump. Medvedev's critics have derided his posts as an attempt to retain political relevance in Russia's crowded elite circles, but Trump has taken the threats seriously. "Based on the highly provocative statements," Trump said Friday, "I have ordered two nuclear submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that." Medvedev's often incendiary posts contrast sharply with his public image in office, when he declared Russia did not want confrontation with "any country" as part of his foreign policy doctrine. In 2010, he signed a nuclear arms reduction treaty with US President Barack Obama, while in 2011 he brought Russia into the World Trade Organisation after 18 years of negotiations. On his watch, Moscow also abstained in a key UN Security Council vote on Libya in 2011 that paved the way for a NATO-led military intervention, a decision Putin has relentlessly criticised since. But it was always clear who was the senior partner in a pairing dubbed Batman and Robin by a secret US cable. Medvedev's first act after winning a 2008 presidential election on the back of Putin's support was to appoint the Russian strongman as prime minister, giving Putin broad decision-making power. While some in the West greeted Medvedev's arrival, others saw him as simply a placeholder for Putin, who was able to circumvent constitutional term limits and remain in de facto power. In 2008 Russia sent troops into Georgia, fracturing relations with the West, a decision that Medvedev insisted he made but that a top general claimed was planned by Putin before Medvedev was even inaugurated. His trademark modernisation programme was marked by bold statements but was also mercilessly mocked by commentators for being short on actions as Putin held real power. Medvedev, born in Putin's home town of Leningrad, owes his entire political career to the former KGB agent. Putin took his protege to Moscow after being appointed prime minister in 1999 and Medvedev rapidly rose to become chairman of gas giant Gazprom. He also served as chief of staff at the Kremlin and as first deputy prime minister. After taking office, he said Russia's economy had reached a "dead end" and required urgent reform. But cynics pointed out that such words counted for little when Russia was still dominated by Putin, and Medvedev himself played down the idea there was any radical difference in their visions. After championing anti-corruption measures while in office, Medvedev was himself accused of graft in 2017, when late opposition leader Alexei Navalny alleged he had built a luxury property empire using embezzled funds. Navalny was labelled an "extremist" by Russian authorities in 2021. While liberals and the West hoped Medvedev would reverse the increase in state control and erosion of civil liberties during Putin's previous rule, he showed little desire for a radical break with Putin's legacy. "Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin really is modern Russia's most popular, experienced and successful politician," Medvedev said during an attempt to explain why he was standing down in favour of Putin in 2012. Medvedev's recent statements contrast sharply with his public image in office AFP Medvedev played down the idea there was any radical difference between him and Putin AFP
DW
4 hours ago
- DW
Inside the EU's stalled plan to penalize Israel – DW – 08/02/2025
For the first time ever, EU officials have threatened to restrict Israeli access to research funds over its conduct in Gaza. But the move is still under review, and many say it is too little, too late as famine looms. Something changed in Brussels over the last few days: After more than a year and a half of urging Israel to end bombardments and blockades of Gaza, the EU took a step toward backing its words with action. "The mood has hardened significantly," one EU diplomat who asked not to be named told DW. With the United Nations warning of a "grave risk of famine" in Gaza, the EU's executive — for the first time — has proposed penalizing Israel by barring Israeli startups from accessing some EU research funds. "With its intervention in the Gaza Strip and the ensuing humanitarian catastrophe, including thousands of civilian deaths and rapidly rising numbers of spreading extreme malnutrition specifically of children, Israel is violating human rights and humanitarian law and thus is in breach of an essential principle of ... EU-Israel cooperation," the European Commission wrote in its proposal on Monday. But the plan isn't over the line yet. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The new proposal hit a hurdle immediately after reached the EU's 27 capitals. Some states, including Germany, were asking for more time to asses the plan, EU diplomats told DW. And without Berlin's backing, the plan is unlikely to advance. On Monday, Israel's Foreign Ministry called Brussels' proposal "unjustified" and claimed any such punitive measures would only serve to "strengthen Hamas." Oxfam's Bushra Khalidi told DW there is now "clearly growing pressure within some pockets of the [EU] Commission, backed by some EU countries, to shift course" toward taking action on Israel. "But let's be clear," she added. "The fact that the EU cannot even agree on the smallest step is a disgrace. The bar is on the floor, and yet the EU and some EU countries are still managing to trip over it." Ever since the militant group's attacks on October 7, 2023, the EU has been united in its condemnation of Hamas — classed as a terrorist organization by the bloc — and in its call for the release of Israeli hostages. Beyond that, however, every statement on the EU's ties with Israel has been fiercely debated across a deeply divided bloc. On one end of the spectrum, there are countries like Spain and Ireland. Since February 2024, Madrid and Dublin have been calling for an "urgent review" into Israeli compliance with the agreement that governs its trade and relations with the EU. On the other end, Hungary is seen as Israel's staunchest EU ally, and has been blocking any measures requiring bloc-wide backing. This includes sanctions on a handful of violent Israeli settlers — in contrast to the UK, an ex-EU member, which approved a similar measure months ago. Berlin has also been seen as a strong Israeli ally. Germany views itself as having a historic responsibility toward Israeli security, due to its Nazi past and its systemic murder of six million Jews during the Holocaust. While the EU remains divided on Israel, first signs of a diplomatic shift came in May of this year, when most of the bloc's 27 members backed Spain and Ireland's year-and-a-half old call to review Israel's compliance with the EU association agreement. The Netherlands was among countries which switched camps and prompted the turning point. Germany stuck to its position and warned against the review, urging dialogue instead. However, Berlin was overruled and the investigation went ahead. The review pointed to a series of suspected Israeli breaches, from blocking aid entry to Gaza and attacking hospitals and journalists, to expanding illegal settlements. In a letter seen by DW, Israel blasted the review as a "moral and methodological failure," claiming the UN reports the review was based on were "anything but impartial." But the EU executive stood by its findings and in June, most EU states asked the bloc's officials to draw up a list of possible punitive measures. According to a leaked internal document seen by DW, that list includes halting visa-free travel for Israeli citizens, restricting student exchanges, banning imports from illegal settlements, and sanctioning some Israeli ministers. Some of the measures — such as sanctions — would require unanimous EU support. Others — such as trade restrictions — only require a rubber-stamp from a weighted majority of EU governments. However, even those measures would need to be endorsed from at least a few of the EU's most populous states — Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Poland. Armed with these potential options, the EU's top diplomat Kaja Kallas held talks with her Israeli counterpart — and announced what seemed like a breakthrough just days before EU ministers were due to discuss punitive measures. "Significant steps have been agreed by Israel to improve the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip," Kallas said in a statement on July 10. Germany also helped broker the so-called "common understanding." EU officials said Israel's commitments included facilitating a "substantial increase" in trucks entering Gaza and reopening some aid routes. When EU ministers met on July 15, they decided not to advance any steps against Israel, instead asking for regular reports on its compliance with the new deal. Israel's foreign minister called that outcome "an important diplomatic success." "We managed to fend off all types of obsessive attempts by several countries to impose sanctions on Israel in the EU," Gideon Sa'ar wrote on X later that day. But as the month of July went on and warnings of starvation mounted, Brussels' diplomacy option looked less and less effective. "There has been some progress," the EU's humanitarian aid chief Hadja Lahbib said on Friday in a post on X. "But let's be honest: it's still a drop in the ocean. Without access, we cannot properly assess needs or deliver aid." The Israeli government told DW it has "begun implementing significant measures to facilitate humanitarian aid," including "humanitarian pauses," and designating "secure routes" for food delivery. The statement blames the UN and Hamas for the crisis and claims there is "no starvation" in Gaza — despite aid groups' evidence to the contrary. But most European governments say Israeli measures fall far short. Some states including Sweden, the Netherlands and Spain are now openly calling for the EU to go much further and freeze its trade deal with Israel. That would make it more expensive and difficult for Israeli firms to export goods to the EU — Israel's biggest trading partner. "The situation in Gaza is utterly deplorable, and Israel is not fulfilling its most basic obligations and agreed-upon commitments regarding humanitarian aid," Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson wrote on X on Thursday. "Economic pressure on Israel must increase," he added. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Restricting trade is a power that lies with the EU's executive in Brussels, meaning national governments can't take matters into their own hands. But individual EU states have taken other decisions to pile pressure on Benjamin Netanyahu's government. Several countries including Spain and Belgium have restricted arms exports to Israel. And with EU-level sanctions looking unlikely, Slovenia and the Netherlands have also banned two far-right Israeli ministers from entering their territory earlier this month, accusing them of promoting "ethnic cleansing." In a visit to Israel on Thursday, Germany's foreign minister warned his Israeli counterpart that he risked isolation. Capitals across Europe watched the visit carefully — because any shift in Germany's approach could determine whether planned EU penalties will kick in, or remain an empty threat.
