Is Russia's energetic monopoly (Gazprom) on Europe enough to secure them control over E.U. policies?

Question

Has the military threat posed by the U.S.S.R been replaced with an energetic one posed by the Russian Federation

Answer 1

only after a liter of vodka

Answer 2

40% or European oil and gas come from the Russian Federation. European's would be naive to think of Russia as anything but a threat. The arguement that the EU would simply buy oil from another country isn't economically sound. Should Russia force the EU to buy oil and gas from a different source, oil and gas prices would soar therefore leaving the EU bankrupt. Europe only has six months worth of reserves. Russia is also strategically linked with Iran which could further complicate the search for alternate sources of fuel. Iraq is occupied by the Americans and the British . . . Venezuela depends on the Americans to refine 90% of its crude . . . Canada is already set up to pipeline oil to the U.S. . . And China controls African oil . . .Not a pretty picture for Europe should relations with Russia sour.

Answer 3

The word "energetic" means "active" or "enthusiastic", and is not used in English as an adjective to describe "energy".

No, because the EU can obtain energy supplies from other sources. It wasn't dependent on Soviet energy twenty years ago; why would it make it vulnerable to a single energy source today?

Answer 4

Russian economy is turning into a powerful bargaining medium over EU policies to be lenient with it concerning trade. Economy is sometimes an alternative effective weapon aside from military might.

Answer 5

If Russia decided to keep there oil and gas resources EU would face some big problems but not enough to make them vuanerable to attack!

Answer 6

Russia are not part of the EU so have no control at all over EU policy