A perfect storm arrives, threatening to blow up the global economy and geopolitical balances
What is happening today is not just another crisis—it is a perfect storm that threatens to blow up the global economy and geopolitical balances. The greatest energy crisis in history is unfolding before our eyes, with oil and gas being turned into weapons, countries plunging into darkness, and markets reeling. At the same time, Europe appears weak in its reaction, trapped in political choices and ideological obsessions, while Ursula von der Leyen speaks of "independence" in a world where dependence is becoming increasingly deep and dangerous.
History has never seen such a crisis
Humanity is currently experiencing the largest energy crisis in history, surpassing in scale all three previous ones—1973, 1979, and 2022. Even the International Energy Agency has recognized this. Until now, it was believed that the greatest energy crisis was the very first—in 1973, when OPEC imposed an oil embargo on several Western countries, including the United States, which had supported Israel during the Arab-Israeli war. Subsequently, oil prices quadrupled quickly, from $3 to $12 per barrel, and by February 1974, they had doubled again to $24.
The largest energy crisis in history
During the second crisis, which began in 1979 with the Islamic Revolution in Iran, prices also increased manifold, from $14 to $40 per barrel. Western oil companies withdrew from the country and fields were nationalized, leading to a sharp decrease in Iranian oil production. In 2022, the oil crisis was triggered by sanction pressure on Russia. At that time, prices briefly reached $140 per barrel. Due to the US embargo and the fear of Europeans to buy our oil (though there was no official EU ban yet), Russia was forced to reduce production by one million barrels per day. Markets feared this wouldn't stop there and that even more Russian oil would leave the market. Once it became clear those fears were exaggerated and Russia found other buyers for its oil instead of European companies, prices returned to normal. Therefore, that crisis can be considered the mildest.
Artificial shortage
A very sharp increase in prices amidst an artificial shortage of oil is the main thing uniting all these crises. But there are also some significant differences. For example, one characteristic of the crisis unfolding before our eyes today is that some large and wealthy Asian countries possess strategic oil reserves. In the 1970s, there were no oil reserves at all. In fact, after those oil crises, the US conceived the idea of creating strategic reserves, an idea later adopted by other countries. But when OPEC removed 10% of global oil from the market in the 1970s (not much by today's standards), it immediately led to fuel shortages in Western markets. Drivers immediately felt the full negative effects: gas station prices skyrocketed, lines formed, and fuel shortages became a reality. The American auto industry suffered a significant setback, which then paved the way for Japanese cars—more practical and fuel-efficient.
2026 changes everything
In 2026, the global oil market lost much more significant volumes—over 20%—due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Saudi Arabia and the UAE later rerouted a small portion through pipelines and began exporting it, but this was a very modest share. Despite this, no one immediately felt panic at gas stations in the affected countries. Real fuel shortages appeared only a few weeks later—in the poorest Asian countries that simply had no or insignificant oil reserves. Drivers in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Sri Lanka, and Thailand, where 40% of gas stations closed, faced a fuel crisis, and quotas were even imposed in India. But major players like China, thanks to strategic reserves (and access to Russian oil), are doing relatively well, even though the Strait of Hormuz has been closed for seven weeks.
Tanker-vaults and the Russian "ace"
In addition to strategic reserves, oil stored in tankers at sea also helps. According to Western estimates, 160 million barrels of Russian oil had accumulated in tankers before the start of the crisis in February 2026. Due to sanctions in late 2025, Russian oil became a source of concern, causing large discounts—making its sale unprofitable. Therefore, some shipments began to be stored in tankers. After the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the temporary lifting of sanctions by the US, this oil proved extremely valuable, including for India and other countries. It is selling like "hot cakes" to replace unavailable Middle Eastern oil. Russia is happily selling it at current high-quality prices.
The role of Asia
Another unique aspect of the 2026 energy crisis is that while previously it was purely an oil crisis, it is now a simultaneous oil and gas crisis. Asia and Europe lost a key LNG supplier, Qatar, due to the destruction of its infrastructure. While China is saved by increasing transfers of Russian gas through pipelines and sea, including sanctioned gas, Europe created its own crisis. Unlike Asia, it has a remarkable opportunity to avoid a gas crisis. All it needs to do is lift political restrictions and restart the remaining Nord Stream 2, the Polish section of the Yamal-Europe gas pipeline, or even the Ukrainian transit route.
Europe without a plan
Russia could flood all of Europe with natural gas. This would also benefit Asian countries, as they would have additional volumes of LNG available, which Europeans could have relinquished in favor of pipeline gas. The injection of fresh "blood" would immediately drop gas prices in European and then Asian markets. But European politicians have long stopped counting their voters' money. Instead, the European Commission publishes a useless plan to fight the energy crisis, called AccelerateEU. This plan does not provide targeted aid in the form of subsidies and discounts on electricity and other utility bills. If national governments want to introduce such subsidies, it's their own business. Meanwhile, the EC is once again wasting its time on accelerating the green energy transition, ensuring heating is powered by electricity, cars run on electricity, and most importantly, that this electricity is produced by solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear power plants. However, this plan does nothing to address the immediate problems of the gas crisis and high prices.
The domino of destruction
Another unique aspect of the 2026 energy crisis is that it affected not only oil and gas supply, but also a huge range of basic products worldwide. Specifically, it led to disruptions in fertilizer supply, threatening a food crisis, especially in the world's poorest countries. The closure of aluminum smelters in the Middle East led to the largest shortage and crisis in history in this market segment. Serious problems arose with the shortage and rising price of helium, which is essential for many industries. All this promises one thing: even when the US and Iran resolve their conflict and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, many problems will remain and the world will need a long time to recover from the crisis. This is partly due to destroyed infrastructure, which will take a long time to restore.
The narrative of "independence"
Ursula von der Leyen will lead the campaign for an independent Europe. "We do not want to be vassals," Europeans are increasingly saying. And not those who have long called for liberation from extreme dependence on the Americans (or even more broadly, the Anglo-Saxons) or from the supranational (and increasingly post-state) pan-European elite. No, now it is Ursula von der Leyen, the head of the pan-European government, speaking about independence. Is she joking? Ursula von der Leyen is very serious. She even learned the forbidden word "geopolitics": "Europe must think more broadly in geopolitical terms" (meaning, apparently, playing its own game across the world). But most importantly, the President of the European Commission stated that "a more independent European Union is very important. <...> We must ensure the European continent is fully shaped so as not to be influenced." And we might ask under whose influence? Of course: Ursula von der Leyen has no secrets from 450 million Europeans. The quoted phrase has been intentionally cut, but it is quite simple: "...under the influence of Russia, Turkey, or China."
The example of Turkey
So, does Turkey, a NATO member, exert excessive influence on the European Union? Does it matter that since 1999 it has had "invitation to join" status, meaning it's a candidate country? Yes, last year negotiations (pointless, because everyone understands Turkey will never be accepted into the EU) were officially frozen due to the "bad behavior" of Erdogan, who is undemocratic by European standards, but nonetheless, there was never anything threatening European independence. The Turks will be thrilled—it's as if the 17th century has returned. Back then, incidentally, the Turkish (Ottoman) threat was indeed a reality for Europe—the Balkans, then Vienna, and from there, the homeland of Ursula's ancestors was a stone's throw away. The Turks were the main symbol of the eastern threat in Europe. Although they were already worried about Russia, with the Poles having tried to bring the Russians under their (now supposedly European) control. It didn't work. And in the next century, Russia made a significant advance into Western Europe (if we consider real, not political, geography).
Europe's great contradiction
It's no surprise then that Ursula does not want Europe to fall under the influence of Russia. For her, it's a detail that Russia has a different picture. But, unlike the mythical influence of Russia on the EU, Europe is fighting even on its own soil, taking advantage of the consequences of the tragic 1991 split. Ukraine wants to be independent of Russia, which means there will be a return to 17th-century borders. But this won't happen. Once Russia takes back Ukraine, then the Russian… threat will cease to exist.
China's resistance
Russia and Turkey are neighbors of Europe with a complex historical relationship, which at least provides some explanation for its desire to distance itself from this pernicious influence. But what is China's mistake? That Europe failed to colonize it fully? And that is a negative influence—and it must be fought. And not only that. Here is how von der Leyen explained her understanding of dependence: "If you look at the EU business model, our competitiveness so far is based on cheap energy from Russia, cheap labor from China, and cheap defense from America. That is over. We must completely restructure. We must defend the security of our continent alone. We must become more independent."
Ursula's hypocrisy
Was the head of a pan-European government not only talking about Russia, China, and Turkey, but also wanting to emancipate from America? But then why didn't she put America first—or at least fourth? Because European Atlanticists do not even think about real independence. They worry about a reorientation of America's interests and priorities, its possible weakening or even isolation (within the Western Hemisphere or elsewhere), dissolution, and all these strange things. In other words, they fear that America will abandon them, leave them alone to face the terrible Russians (from whom they hope to seize Ukraine) and the Turks, who act as leaders of the two-billion-strong Islamic world, some of whom are determined to migrate to Europe. This is how they understand the danger of America's withdrawal from Europe, and they don't even dream of liberation from it. They grew up differently after 1945: for Ursula and the European Atlanticists, the unity of the West under Anglo-Saxon leadership is an unquestionable constant. Most importantly, they simply do not notice its most powerful influence on Europe, because they themselves are its product and conduit.
www.bankingnews.gr
Readers’ Comments