The Ukrainian crisis has highlighted the European Union’s energy supply problems. This unfortunate system is reflected in the sixth packet of sanctions, which were officially announced in Brussels in early June. A packet that, beyond the grandiloquent rhetoric, reveals certain structural limits.
First of all, internal divisions and competing vetoes meant that it took a month for the package to be approved, which highlighted a worrying lack of timeliness. Secondly, there are significant sticking points in the package. The embargo on Russian oil imports will come into effect only in six months, whereas some countries have obtained exemptions and exceptions. All these factors obviously make this measure less effective. On the other hand, India and China are increasing purchases of Russian oil but it must be remembered that overall, the European Union has a 27% dependency on Moscow’s crude oil: a significant figure, but significantly less than the 40% gas dependency. That gas could soon become a subject of debate for any new European sanctions against Russia.
Both these problems have two main causes. The first is obvious and relates to the old problem of governance in the European Union. The second cause is a dramatic lack of strategy that has led Brussels in the past to neglect the important question of energy independence. Unfortunately, Europe’s ruling class preferred to pursue ideological and politicized environmentalism, also suffering under the political weight of the previous German chancellor Angela Merkel, who – during her long term of office – made Germany increasingly dependent on Russian gas, despite the alarm bells sounded in the international community by US President Donald Trump, already in 2018. In this connection, it must be remembered that she was one of the main architects of the controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline: a project that was keenly wished for in Moscow but which constantly alarmed Poland and Ukraine.
Lastly, it must not be forgotten that a certain ideological environmentalism has repeatedly wanted to focus almost exclusively on investments in renewable energy. This focus is not in itself wrong but it is an operation that – as in the case of gas – cannot ignore geopolitical considerations. Some of the technologies required for sources of renewable energy are in fact linked to rare earths. These elements are currently largely under the control of the People’s Republic of China. These aspects must be pointed out. The energy question cannot only be read through the prism of the environment or the economy but also – if not above all – through that of geopolitics and national security: this need was also emphasised by Copasir (Parliamentary Committee for the Security of the Italian Republic) in its report of January 2022.
This is in fact the only way in which the risk of vulnerability to hostile powers can be avoided and a freer foreign policy can therefore be pursued. It is true that the European Commission recently presented RePower EU: an energy plan that is supposed to make the EU free of Russian gas. But the move has come rather late and anyway this independence would not be possible before five years. This further reflects the fact that the last two European Commissions have shown themselves to be unsuitable and fundamentally incapable of tackling the question of energy sovereignty through a geopolitical approach. Prompt action is therefore needed on several levels.
Stabilization of Libya is needed first of all. This North African country is again on the brink of a civil war and its instability makes it extremely difficult to increase gas supplies. If this increase could be achieved it would significantly reduce our dependence on Russia. Secondly, extraction of gas from Italian fields should be increased and others might be opened; Croatia is already drilling in the Adriatic Sea. Obviously, focusing on domestic fields would not solve the problem in itself but would help to increase our energy independence.
A third point that must be considered carefully is the EastMed pipeline: this project seemed to have been shelved but has been revived because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This project would link Israel to Cyprus and after reaching Greece would enter Puglia through the Poseidon pipeline. It is clear that in addition to ensuring significant diversification of the energy supply this project would offer a further advantage: the gas would be supplied by a network of countries that are democracies. This factor would significantly reduce the risk of energy pressure and blackmail for geopolitical reasons. Obviously, three connected aspects must be borne in mind.
The first is that the project will take a few years. This is an impelling reason for Rome to work on other fronts at the same time. Secondly, it is clear that if EastMed is to proceed, the question of stability in the Mediterranean becomes even more important. This must be guaranteed by political, diplomatic and, if necessary, military means. We also recall the recent seizure of two Greek oil tankers by Iran, in addition to the fact that in the recent past Turkey has displayed an ambiguous attitude to EastMed. The third aspect is technology. In just a few years giant steps have been made and the world seems ready for LNG. This opens the path to new projects and agreements between Israel and Egypt with the possibility of connecting by pipes only a very small part of the Eastern Mediterranean without crossing the Turkish and Greek borders to then use Egypt as a terminal. This is also a great opportunity that does not exclude the return to a further source of procurement.
Italy should think seriously about opening fourth-generation nuclear power stations. We should also remember that thanks to nuclear energy France has suffered less than other countries from the recent sanctions imposed on Russia. Obviously, all this does not mean that renewable energy should be neglected. But it must be remembered that the concept of “sustainability” should not only have an environmental but also a geopolitical value. As mentioned, renewable energies are often connected to raw earths that, according to Copasir, are “extracted almost exclusively in Africa and are mostly controlled by Chinese players”. We also point out that according to the US Geological Survey in 2019 China accounted for 80% of the global imports of these elements. We must therefore be very careful to ensure that trying to reduce European dependency on Russia does not increase dependency on the Chinese Popular Republic. In addition, China has very close political and economic ties to Moscow. In this case, we need to avoid new energy dependencies that risk producing harmful geopolitical impacts. In view of this, hydroelectric power could be a safe renewable source for Italy, so this sector should be protected and built up.
A word of caution: the question of energy sovereignty is not a problem that just Italy and more in general the European Union are raising. The debate is particularly intense also in the US, where the Republican Party is also criticizing some environmental policies of President Joe Biden that are considered to be excessively ideological and basically counter-productive. These policies are according to their detractors contributing to the energy spike and making national security increasingly vulnerable. It is no coincidence at least some parts of the Democratic Party (especially in areas like Pennsylvania) are rather unenthusiastic about some of the green measures of the current incumbent of the White House. In addition, in January 2022, a bipartisan legislative initiative was submitted to the US Senate to try to reduce Washington’s dependence on China for rare earths. The topic is thus considered to be more urgent than creating party divisions and putting up partisan stockades.
All this shows that the question of energy sovereignty concerns the entire west: a west that needs to realize the risks arising from its dependence on the Sino-Russian axis. In such a case, Italy should not be caught unprepared. In other words, it is imperative for Rome to free itself of any ideological constraints and adopt a geopolitical approach. The challenge is to diversify energy supplies to increase independence. It goes without saying that this objective can be fully achieved only by rebooting the international role of our country: a reboot that should mainly concern the Mediterranean area and should be part of an urgent reinforcement of the southern flank of NATO.
