Europe’s Energy Crossroads: Why Hungary and Slovakia Are Resisting the EU’s Break from Russian Supplies
A Continent in Transition
For decades, much of Europe’s economic engine has quietly depended on energy flowing from the east. Oil and natural gas from Russia powered factories, heated homes, and fueled transport systems across the European Union (EU). That arrangement, once seen as mutually beneficial, has become one of the most politically charged issues on the continent.
In the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the EU began an ambitious effort to reduce — and eventually eliminate — its reliance on Russian fossil fuels. Yet not all member states see the path forward in the same way. While many countries have accelerated diversification plans, Hungary and Slovakia have signaled resistance to aspects of Brussels’ strategy.
The disagreement reflects deeper tensions about national energy security, economic vulnerability, and political autonomy within the EU. To understand what is at stake, it is essential to explore how Europe became dependent on Russian energy, why the EU wants to change course, and why some member states remain cautious.
How Europe Became Dependent on Russian Energy
The Post-Cold War Energy Model
After the Cold War, Europe sought reliable and relatively affordable energy supplies. Russia, with vast reserves of oil and natural gas, emerged as a major supplier. Extensive pipeline networks — including the Druzhba oil pipeline and multiple gas corridors — connected Russian fields to Central and Eastern Europe.
Over time, this trade relationship deepened:
- Russian gas accounted for roughly 40% of the EU’s total gas imports before 2022.
- Several Central European countries relied on Russia for more than half of their oil or gas consumption.
- Long-term contracts locked in supplies at competitive prices.
The system appeared stable. Energy trade continued even during political disagreements, reinforcing a belief that economic interdependence would ensure continuity.
Structural Dependence in Central Europe
Countries like Hungary and Slovakia inherited energy infrastructures designed during the Soviet era. Refineries, pipeline routes, and industrial systems were built specifically to process Russian crude and gas. Diversifying away from those supplies would require not just new contracts but also costly infrastructure upgrades.
This structural dependence explains why the energy debate affects countries differently. For some, alternatives are easier to access; for others, the transition is complex and expensive.
The Turning Point: War in Ukraine
The invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 reshaped Europe’s energy calculus. The EU introduced sanctions targeting Russian energy exports, aiming to reduce Moscow’s revenue streams.
The European Commission unveiled the REPowerEU plan, designed to:
- Rapidly diversify energy suppliers
- Accelerate renewable energy deployment
- Improve energy efficiency
- Expand liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports
Countries such as Germany and Italy invested heavily in LNG terminals and signed new supply agreements with the United States, Norway, and Middle Eastern producers. Renewable energy projects were fast-tracked across the continent.
However, oil and pipeline gas flows to some Central European countries continued under exemptions designed to prevent sudden economic disruption.
Hungary and Slovakia’s Position
: Energy Security and Economic Concerns
Hungary imports the majority of its crude oil and natural gas from Russia. Its main refinery infrastructure is calibrated for Russian-grade crude delivered through the Druzhba pipeline. Transitioning to alternative grades would require technical modifications and financial investment.
Budapest argues that:
- Immediate diversification would raise energy prices for households.
- Rapid shifts could disrupt industrial production.
- National energy policy should prioritize affordability and stability.
Hungarian officials have frequently negotiated exemptions from EU-wide energy sanctions, citing domestic economic concerns.
: Industrial Vulnerability
Slovakia faces similar structural challenges. Its economy includes energy-intensive industries, including automotive manufacturing. The Slovnaft refinery, a key facility, has historically processed Russian crude.
Bratislava has expressed support for the EU’s broader goals but has asked for gradual timelines and financial assistance to adapt infrastructure. Officials argue that a sudden cutoff would affect jobs, exports, and economic growth.
What the EU Is Proposing Now
The EU’s latest push seeks to further reduce remaining Russian fossil fuel imports, including pipeline oil and gas that still flow to certain member states. Proposals include:
- Coordinated phase-outs of remaining contracts
- Expanded interconnection projects to share energy across borders
- Joint purchasing mechanisms for gas
- Greater investment in renewables and hydrogen
The goal is not only political — to reduce dependence on Russia — but also strategic, to strengthen long-term energy resilience.
Why the Disagreement Exists
The friction between Brussels and Budapest or Bratislava is not solely about Russia. It reflects broader questions:
1. National Sovereignty vs. EU Unity
Energy policy remains partly a national competence. While the EU can set broad goals, individual countries retain control over energy mixes.
2. Economic Asymmetry
Western European states often have diversified supply routes and access to ports for LNG shipments. Landlocked Central European states face logistical constraints.
3. Political Orientation
Hungary’s government has maintained comparatively pragmatic relations with Moscow, emphasizing economic cooperation even amid EU sanctions.
Who Is Affected — And How
Energy policy decisions ripple through societies in visible and invisible ways.
Households
Higher energy prices can affect heating costs, electricity bills, and fuel expenses. In lower-income households, even small increases can strain budgets.
Industry
Manufacturers depend on stable and affordable energy. Sudden cost spikes can reduce competitiveness, particularly in sectors such as steel, chemicals, and automotive production.
Governments
Public finances may be affected by subsidy programs designed to shield consumers from price increases. The energy crisis of 2022–2023 prompted billions of euros in state support across Europe.
Comparing Energy Dependence
The degree of reliance on Russian supplies has varied significantly across the EU.
| Country | Pre-2022 Russian Gas Share | Pre-2022 Russian Oil Share | Diversification Progress (2024–2025) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hungary | High (over 50%) | High | Limited but gradual |
| Slovakia | High | High | Moderate transition underway |
| Germany | ~55% gas | Moderate | Significant reduction |
| Poland | High gas dependence | Moderate | Rapid phase-out completed |
| Spain | Low | Low | Minimal impact |
Figures reflect approximate pre-war reliance levels; diversification varies by infrastructure and contracts.
The table highlights how starting points shape policy preferences. Countries that had already diversified found it easier to adapt.
Environmental Dimensions
Reducing reliance on Russian fossil fuels has also intersected with Europe’s climate ambitions. The EU’s Green Deal aims to cut greenhouse gas emissions significantly by 2030 and reach climate neutrality by 2050.
In theory, accelerating renewable energy reduces both geopolitical vulnerability and carbon emissions. In practice, however, replacing pipeline gas has sometimes meant increased short-term LNG imports, which can have their own environmental footprint.
The transition, therefore, is not purely geopolitical — it also involves balancing energy security with sustainability goals.
The Broader Geopolitical Context
The energy debate is closely linked to the war in Ukraine. EU sanctions aim to limit Russia’s revenue from energy exports, which historically represented a major portion of its state income.
At the same time, global energy markets have adjusted. Russia has redirected some exports to Asia, particularly China and India, often at discounted prices. Europe has diversified suppliers, leading to shifts in global trade patterns.
The outcome has been a more fragmented global energy market with new alliances and pricing dynamics.
What May Happen Next
The EU faces several possible scenarios:
Gradual Compromise
Hungary and Slovakia could secure extended timelines and financial assistance to upgrade infrastructure while committing to eventual phase-outs.
Increased Tensions
If negotiations stall, disputes could deepen within EU institutions, potentially affecting other policy areas.
Accelerated Energy Transition
Technological progress and falling renewable costs may ease concerns about affordability and supply stability.
Market-Driven Adjustments
Global price shifts could influence decisions independently of political negotiations.
Much will depend on economic conditions, infrastructure investments, and the broader geopolitical climate.
The Human Side of the Transition
Behind policy debates are ordinary citizens adjusting to change. Energy transitions are rarely smooth. Households may invest in insulation or heat pumps. Companies may upgrade equipment to improve efficiency. Governments may redesign subsidy programs.
For Central European countries, the challenge is to modernize infrastructure without imposing excessive short-term costs. For the EU as a whole, the task is to maintain unity while respecting national realities.
A Defining Moment for European Energy Policy
The EU’s effort to reduce dependence on Russian energy marks one of the most significant shifts in its economic history. What began as a trade relationship rooted in geography and pragmatism has become entangled in geopolitical conflict.
Hungary and Slovakia’s reservations illustrate that energy policy is never purely technical. It touches on affordability, sovereignty, infrastructure, industry, and identity. Their stance does not necessarily reject diversification but calls for a pace aligned with domestic constraints.
As Europe navigates this transition, the central question remains: how to balance solidarity with flexibility. The outcome will shape not only the continent’s energy landscape but also its political cohesion in an increasingly uncertain world.
The coming years will test whether Europe can transform its energy system while maintaining unity among member states with very different starting points.