France and Belgium, the European Union’s two largest importers of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG), are resisting the European Commission’s proposed phase-out of Russian gas imports by 2027, calling instead for further legal and economic clarity before any commitment is made.
The opposition from Paris and Brussels stands in contrast to the positions of Spain and the Netherlands, who have indicated support for the plan.
The European Commission intends to introduce legislation that would end short-term purchases of Russian LNG later this year and gradually eliminate long-term supply contracts by the end of 2027. The proposal is part of a broader effort to sever the EU’s dependence on Russian fossil fuels following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Last year, France, Belgium, Spain, and the Netherlands imported 16.77 million tonnes of Russian LNG, amounting to 97 per cent of the EU’s total LNG imports from Russia and more than half of Moscow’s global LNG exports. Combined, these four countries spent over €6 billion on Russian gas in 2024, according to figures from the commodities platform Kpler.
While Spain and the Netherlands have welcomed the Commission’s intentions, France and Belgium are requesting further guarantees before endorsing the proposal. France has adopted a strategy focused on diversification of supply sources and has signed multi-decade LNG agreements with Qatar. Belgian authorities are seeking a detailed impact assessment from the Commission on the economic consequences of the proposed restrictions, particularly regarding their national LNG infrastructure.
French energy policy remains constrained by existing contractual obligations. TotalEnergies, France’s main energy company, holds a 20 per cent stake in the Yamal LNG project in Siberia and is bound by a supply contract with Russian firm Novatek until 2032. Belgium also faces long-term commitments and is expected to continue receiving Russian LNG until at least 2035.
The hesitancy of France and Belgium presents a challenge for the European Commission, which requires broad backing from key member states to advance the legislative proposal. Without the support of the bloc’s two largest buyers, efforts to enforce a uniform phase-out across all 27 member states could face delays or dilution.
Hungary and Slovakia, two member states reliant on Russian pipeline gas and oil, are already expected to oppose the Commission’s roadmap. Both governments have publicly stated their objection to any measures they believe would undermine national sovereignty or disrupt domestic energy supply. Hungary’s foreign ministry has previously described similar EU initiatives as coercive, while Slovak officials argue that alternatives are either too costly or logistically unfeasible in the short term.
The Commission is preparing supporting documentation that will include legal analysis and projections of the economic impact of the proposed measures. A draft declaration circulating among EU capitals suggests a growing appetite for a coordinated legal and economic assessment before any binding commitments are made.
Despite the internal divisions, Brussels is pushing ahead with its objective to eliminate all imports of Russian gas within the next two and a half years. The broader strategy includes reducing purchases of Russian oil and coal, while accelerating investment in alternative suppliers, LNG terminals, and renewable energy infrastructure.
Analysts believe that, even if the proposal were enacted, a supply shortfall is unlikely. Countries such as the United States and Canada are expected to increase LNG export capacity significantly starting in 2026. Moreover, some EU member states, including Spain, have sufficient gas storage and access to diversified supply routes, making them less vulnerable to disruptions.
The forthcoming legislative proposal is expected to form part of a wider debate on energy security, legal liabilities, and geopolitical alignment as the EU continues to reassess its long-term relationship with Russia.
Read also:
The European Commission’s Russian Energy Failure: A Toothless Bureaucracy Masked by Rhetoric
