Europe’s energy security remains vulnerable despite major efforts to reduce dependence on Russian fossil fuels. In a recent Pulse Energy article, based on analysis from RUSI, Petras Katinas examined how disruption in the Strait of Hormuz has exposed the EU’s continuing reliance on imported energy. The article argues that diversification alone cannot remove Europe’s structural exposure to global energy shocks.
Petras Katinas, Research Fellow in Climate, Energy and Defence at the Royal United Services Institute, explained that the EU’s energy challenge has shifted but not disappeared. After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Europe moved away from Russian pipeline gas and expanded alternative supply routes. Yet Katinas noted that global oil and liquefied natural gas markets remain exposed to geopolitical chokepoints, including the Strait of Hormuz.
The article highlights how rising tensions involving the United States, Israel, and Iran have brought traditional supply risks back into focus. Around one-fifth of global oil and LNG shipments pass through the Strait of Hormuz, making it one of the world’s most important energy routes. According to the analysis, Europe may face limited physical shortages in the short term, but price volatility remains a serious risk for consumers, industry, and governments.
Petras Katinas also emphasized the importance of domestic clean energy and electrification. The article argues that Europe’s long-term energy security depends on reducing exposure to imported hydrocarbons. Electrification can support this goal by shifting demand toward electricity generated from European sources. However, Katinas also warned that this transition brings new risks, including dependence on critical minerals and greater vulnerability to cyberattacks.
The wider discussion connects energy policy with European security, sanctions, and strategic resilience. The EU’s REPowerEU agenda helped reduce reliance on Russian fossil fuels, but the current crisis shows that supply diversification is not enough. Strategic reserves can ease short-term pressure, while long-term security requires investment, infrastructure protection, and coordinated policy choices. For Europe, energy independence remains both an economic priority and a security challenge.
To explore the full analysis and Petras Katinas’s commentary, read the complete article in Pulse Energy and the original RUSI commentary.
Further Reading: Sanctions Portal
For further expert analysis on sanctions, energy flows, and economic pressure, visit the portal’s recent publications in the Evidence Base. Learn more about sanctions against Russia and Russian economic retaliation by visiting the Sanctions Timeline, which tracks measures by date, country, and sector. See the latest media commentary from Petras Katinas and other experts in Media Highlights.
Policy Paper: the Hormuz Blockade
The most recent policy paper published on the FREE NETWORK presents calculations and modeling of how oil producers and consumers in selected countries may be affected by the de facto blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. The authors study two scenarios:
- one where strategic inventories cushion the effects
- and one where inventories have run out.
Russia profits substantially, equivalent to 6-11% of GDP, driven by higher global oil prices and a potential reduction in the sanctions-induced discount on Russian oil. Net oil importers lose, most substantially India, to some extent China, and to a lesser extent Europe. Within Europe, most countries lose, with the exception of Norway and possibly Estonia. Gulf countries generally lose since they cannot export their oil. Surprisingly, Saudi Arabia can make a net profit by earning high prices for oil redirected to its western ports.
