Russia has announced the suspension of gas exports to Poland and Bulgaria after the two countries refused to make payments in roubles. In response, the EU has stated that they will offer support even though Russia has said that any attempts to channel Russian gas through other countries to Poland and Bulgaria will be met with further embargoes. Following the announcement, European gas prices rose 20% and the euro fell further against the dollar.
It is unclear what the EU expected to happen. The Russians stated clearly that they would not make deliveries if payments were not made in roubles. Failure to do so will hurt Europe more than Russia; recent price action suggests that the price increases of gas will more than make up for the lost deliveries — confirming modelling I ran at the start of March. So, why did the Europeans think that Russia would back down?
This brinkmanship is particularly damaging to the countries that are on the frontline of the economic war. Bulgaria and Poland both have their own currencies — the lev and the zloty respectively. Neither country is particularly rich. If their internal energy markets collapse, they will face energy price hikes and rolling blackouts, which is a recipe for very high inflation. There is then a risk that this inflation leads to their currencies collapsing — a situation that, in the worst-case scenario, could lead to hyperinflation.
The motivations behind the European energy war appear chaotic. From a game theory perspective, risk aversion on the part of the Europeans seems remarkably low. One way to explain that is to assume that the Europeans are not aware of the risks that they are taking. Certainly, it is quite possible that the Poles and the Bulgarians are unaware of the magnitudes of risk involved here.
Both countries have energy grids dominated by coal. Coal provides 45% of Poland’s energy and 37% of Bulgaria’s. Meanwhile, gas provides 17% of Poland’s energy and only 6% of Bulgaria’s. There is a possibility that Bulgaria could live without Russian gas, but if almost a fifth of Poland’s energy market is impacted it will have a knock-on effect on the economy.
Still, if the countries continue to refuse to pay in roubles, Russia will presumably then choke off other energy sources. Even in the case of Bulgaria, which does not rely much on oil and gas for energy production, they still need access to petroleum for their vehicles. There is simply no way around it: if Russia provides the fuel, they hold all the cards.
Perhaps they have convinced themselves that allying with more powerful countries will ensure that these countries will (and can) come to the rescue. That is an unfortunate foreign policy mistake that many small countries have made in history.
If Poland and Bulgaria dig in and more energy sanctions come down the pipeline, their economies will likely collapse. At that point, the more powerful European countries will have to look at the resulting mess and see if they want a part of it. There are already indications that Europe is getting ready to make the rouble payments to Russia. In truth, it is difficult to see this playing out any other way. Which leads one to ask: what was the point of all this? All we got was volatility in the energy markets and yet more inflation.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeA similar proportion — 50% — cited Russian influence as a major concern.
support for Ukraine and Israel was a priority for only 23%
The contradictions between these figures is quite funny.
Do you think the 27% of people that cited Russia as a concern yet decided they don’t support the Ukraine war understand the many flaws in their brains.
It couldn’t possibly be the fault of people like her, could it ? Surely not the legacy of all she and her party have done over the last 20 years to enable and sustain the attitudes of the more extreme pro-Palestinian/anti-Israeli protests ?
When I was young, the geriatrics were in the Kremlin. These days they’re in the Democratic Party (Pelosi, 84; Biden, 81).
Wouldn’t mind them being quite so old if they were also wise …
Dear old Nancy P. She really has lost it. Clearly going down the same path as Biden. It’s time the US conducted a purge of its geriatric politicians who have been in office forever.
Maybe construct a kind of Potemkin village Capitol/White House and let them serve out their terms there. The reason the Constitution didn’t impose age limits on politicians is that the problem used to take care of itself.
It’s kind of a Potemkin Village now, isn’t it? They don’t really seem to be in charge.
Don’t knock it. It has worked for her for years, and I’m sure many of her bobble heads are nodding yes, yes, yes.
Dear God
Causes of Pro-Palestine protests:
1 Vladimir Putin
2 Trump
3 Systemic Racism
4 Climate Change
5 Misinformation
6 Covid
Side with Netanyahu and you are siding with this. Side with the Azov Brigade, and you are siding with Netanyahu.
Does that even make sense ?
FWIW, I can’t imagine that many UnHerd readers side with either (note: any sympathy or support for Israel by no means translates to any support or endorsement of Netanyahu).
Still an improvement over Hamas.
Intelligence is not your best asset…
Can the Democrats be a little more original with the ” Russia hoax” cry?