The Green Deal and Energy Independence Turned Out to Be a Mirage: in the wake of the Iran war, we see that our civilization cannot exist without fossil fuels and that abandoning cheap Russian energy was the biggest mistake of the West, benefiting only China, which got the share of that energy that we had previously used.

This reflects the sharp current debate about how geopolitical conflicts, especially the Iran war in 2026, are changing Europe's energy strategy and relations with the world's great powers.

 

Here are the main aspects of how this situation is assessed today:

 

1. The impact of the Iran war and the energy "awakening"

 

The war in Iran has become the second major shock for Europe in four years. As the Strait of Hormuz was blocked, the flows of oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) were disrupted, and Europe's spending on fossil fuels increased by more than 25-32 billion euros in the spring of 2026, without any additional energy imports.

• Criticism: Critics say the move away from cheap Russian gas has left Europe vulnerable to global market fluctuations.

• EU response: The European Commission calls the crisis a “wake-up call,” calling for a redoubled effort to shift to domestic renewables and nuclear power to avoid dependence on unstable regions.

 

2. China-Russia energy alliance

This observation about China is well-founded – it has become Russia’s main energy consumer:

• Export shift: By early 2026, about 90% of Russia’s crude oil exports were going to China and India. Russia has overtaken Saudi Arabia to become China’s largest oil supplier.

• Price differential: While China receives large amounts of energy, it has a strong bargaining position and seeks lower prices, so Russia’s financial benefits from trading with Europe are smaller than they used to be.

• Infrastructure: Russia and China have signed agreements on the Power of Siberia 2 pipeline, which will divert gas from fields that previously supplied Europe eastward.

 

3. The Green Deal: A mirage or a necessity?

The debate over the Green Deal has reached a critical point in 2026:

• Arguments against: High energy prices and industrial decline are forcing some governments to ask for climate targets to be relaxed in order to protect the purchasing power of their populations and Western industry, without which modern defense is impossible.

• Arguments in favor: Energy experts emphasize that dependence on fossil fuels (whether in Russia or the Middle East) is a major cause of inflation. Investment in modernizing electricity grids and local production is seen as the only way to achieve true energy independence in the long term. But green hydrogen turned out to be too expensive, its use remained science fiction, we cannot do without fossil fuels, no matter what gynecologist van der Leyen in Brussels says.

 

Although in the short term the West is paying a huge price for the energy crisis, the strategic question remains the same: would a return to dependence on Russian fossil energy ensure stability and save the collapsing Western civilization, which, as it seems, has already been lost, the Iran war and the unstoppable competition of China, or would it only postpone the inevitable crisis and make it impossible to save Western civilization?

 

Unfortunately, nothing prevents the spread of false, propaganda advertising in Lithuania:

 

“Custom content report

 

Europe’s efforts to sever energy ties with Russia have yielded catastrophic results, but the final victory has not yet been achieved – dependence on a single supplier has transformed into systemic sensitivity to global markets. This is the main conclusion of researchers from the Faculty of Business of Kaunas University of Applied Sciences who have analyzed the turns in the European Union’s (EU) energy policy over the past few years.

 

According to the researchers, although the volume of Russian gas imports has fallen to a record low, the region has entered a new zone of uncertainty, where security is no longer determined by bilateral agreements, but by geopolitical fluctuations in distant parts of the world.

Structural problems overshadow short-term success

 

In 2022, the events in Ukraine tempted Europe to take radical action. The International Energy Agency (IEA) hastily prepared a 10-point plan, the goal of which was to – in a record short time – one year – to reduce Russian gas imports by a third. The strategy included not only diversification of supply, but also an ambitious leap towards renewable energy and a drastic increase in consumption efficiency.

 

Statistical data confirm: Europe has demonstrated incredible political will. If in 2021 about 40 percent of the EU's imported gas was supplied from Russia, today this indicator has decreased to single digits. However, Kaunas Kolegija scientists warn that these figures hide newly emerging risks.

 

Economist, Vice-Dean for Science of the Faculty of Business of Kaunas Kolegija Dr. Aistė Lastauskaitė notes that the first signs of stabilization should not be misleading. According to the scientist, the rapid response to the crisis helped to avoid disruptions in the energy system, but the fundamental  problems remain.

 

“Short-term measures have helped stabilize the situation, but they do not solve structural problems – the energy system remains sensitive to external shocks,” says Dr. A. Lastauskaitė.

 

Summing up the situation, the researcher emphasizes that energy security cannot be achieved solely by extinguishing the fires caused by the crisis, because without fundamental changes, the system remains vulnerable to any stronger impact from abroad.

 

This sensitivity became especially evident when Europe switched to the liquefied natural gas (LNG) model. After replacing Russian pipelines with gas transported by ships from the USA, Qatar or Norway, the continent became a direct participant in global competition.

 

Risk transformation: from supplier to market pricing

 

Associate Professor of the Faculty of Business at Kaunas College Dr. Bahmanas Peyravi emphasizes that the form of dependence has changed from geographical to market dependence.

 

“Europe has reduced its dependence on a single supplier, but at the same time has become more dependent on global energy markets,” explains Dr. B. Peyravi.

 

According to the associate professor, such a turn means that risk has not disappeared anywhere – it has become more fragmented and more difficult to predict, because now price fluctuations in Europe directly depend on demand in Asia or technical disruptions on other continents.

 

As a striking example, scientists point to the tension in the Strait of Hormuz, through which about 20 percent of the world's oil and LNG resources are transported. Any geopolitical conflict in this region today has a direct impact on the energy bills of European businesses and residents. This confirms the fact that liberation from a single political player has pushed Europe into dependence on complex global logistics chains and the dynamics of military conflicts.

The intersection of investment and climate goals

 

One of the most important elements of energy liberation is the transition to renewable sources. While Europe is setting records for the development of solar and wind power plants, Kaunas University researchers note that enthusiasm is being held back by infrastructure barriers. Dr. A. Lastauskaitė notes that the potential of savings measures has already been exhausted, so a qualitative leap is now necessary. According to the scientist, although reducing energy consumption helped to control the crisis in the short term, sustainable transformation requires investments in infrastructure and technologies.

 

However, even after ensuring investment flows, the processes do not always proceed smoothly. Dr. B. Peyravi points out that real changes are often stalled due to slow regulatory processes and administrative obstacles, which become the main obstacle to the prompt transformation of the energy system.

 

Meanwhile, Dr. Indrė Šikšnelytė-Butkienė, an associate professor at the Department of Business at Kaunas University specializing in energy economics, sees a danger that energy security can be achieved at the expense of climate goals. “Energy decisions are increasingly dependent on geopolitical factors and global market fluctuations, making long-term stability more difficult to predict.”

 

The researcher concludes that with high energy prices, political pressure on governments may force them to return to fossil fuels, thus pushing long-term climate goals into the background for short-term social stability.

Unfinished transformation: the main challenge of energy policy

 

Summing up the insights of the study, Kaunas University researchers agree: the transformation remains unfinished and uneven. Although the Old Continent has become less dependent on the dictates of one specific supplier, it has also become more vulnerable to global market fluctuations and geopolitical shocks and very high prices. This shows that energy independence in today’s world is not a final destination, but a continuous dynamic process.

 

According to Kaunas University researchers, the main challenge today is to reconcile energy security with long-term climate goals. Whether Europe will truly free itself from energy dependence or merely change its direction will depend on the decisions that will be made in the coming years.

 

The report was prepared by Kaunas College. The authors of the report are responsible for the accuracy and legality of the information provided.”