The foreign ministers of Germany and Ukraine held a joint press conference where the German stance on energy policy and sanctions was laid out in clear terms. The message emphasized a deliberate move away from Russian energy resources and a long-term commitment to severing economic ties that could empower aggression.
The German minister underscored a fundamental belief: economic dependence cannot secure national safety if an aggressor shows no regard for the welfare of its people. In that light, she asserted that dependence on Russian energy would be reduced to zero and that this action would endure indefinitely. The position was presented as a strategic necessity, with the broader aim of safeguarding Europe’s security and economic stability. The minister also noted that sanctions against Russia would not be reversed even if Germany faced consequences, stressing that such measures would be retained until Ukraine achieves freedom and security. In her view, any reversal would only be possible after Ukraine is fully free and capable of determining its own future in partnership with the European Union.
In addition, assurances were offered that Kyiv would not be pressured by any deal brokered behind closed doors with Moscow. The German delegation expressed confidence that Ukraine would be recognized as a credible candidate for EU membership, while cautioning against empty promises during the accession process. The broader point was that EU reforms would be necessary for Ukraine to join the union, and patience must accompany any expectations about rapid integration. These remarks reflect a clear intent to align Ukraine’s aspirations with practical reforms and sustained support from Berlin.
Berlin signals readiness for an oil embargo on Russia
During the week, the German economy minister announced that Germany is prepared for an oil embargo targeting Russia. He acknowledged that regional implementation could present early challenges, but emphasized that the state has the necessary policy tools to support regional efforts aimed at reducing oil imports from Russia. The German chancellor reinforced the stance by stating that the cabinet possesses the leverage to back changes in oil supply chains originating in Russia.
Earlier statements from the chancellor indicated that Germany aimed to achieve independence from Russian oil and coal imports by the near term, with technical preparations already underway to support that objective. Reuters later reported that the government had devised procedures to manage the potential disruption caused by Russia’s unilateral actions in the energy market, reflecting a cautious approach toward maintaining steady energy relations during the transition.
In parallel, negotiations continued with gas and liquefied natural gas suppliers from the Middle East. Reports indicated that discussions with Qatar did not yield an agreement on contract duration, meaning exports would await a mutual decision between Berlin and Doha. This illustrates the broader challenge of diversifying energy supply while maintaining stable, predictable contracts during a period of geopolitical tension.
Oil transport: a potential embargo yet to be finalized
Within the European Union, discussions about an embargo on Russian oil were part of the deliberations surrounding a forthcoming package of sanctions. Some authorities suggested that the embargo might be included before a May deadline, while others highlighted the political and logistical hurdles involved in securing agreement among member states. The process has proven more protracted than initially anticipated, with diplomats working to reach a consensus on a new sanctions framework that addresses energy imports from Russia without unduly harming European economies and shipping interests.
Sources within the EU indicated that the oil transport ban had not been finalized as part of the sixth sanctions package, underscoring the need for broader coordination at the international level, including alignment among the G7. Among member states, Greece, Cyprus, and Malta raised concerns about the potential impact on shipping companies, complicating the path toward a unified policy. At the same time, the prohibition on European insurance for tankers carrying Russian oil remained a point of focus within ongoing restrictions, a measure seen as a tool to influence supply lines while the broader policy framework evolves.
Industry and financial outlets previously discussed the possibility of easing certain restrictions as the EU prepared a new sanctions package. The lack of a unified stance among G7 governments contributed to debates about how to apply such measures in practice. In early May, the European Commission signaled a push for a six-month embargo on crude oil imports from Russia and a phased approach to refining product imports, acknowledging that political agreement would take time and careful negotiation. Some member states, including Hungary and Slovakia, voiced opposition to the embargo, as did Bulgaria, which suggested it might veto anti-Russian energy sanctions. The evolving picture shows a balancing act between punitive policy aims and maintaining essential energy flows to avoid unintended economic damage.
As the blockade debate continued, observers noted that the union had to weigh the strategic need to curb Moscow’s energy leverage against the practical realities of energy security for European households and industries. The evolving policy landscape remains dynamic, with ongoing consultations across national governments and EU institutions to determine the best path forward in response to the broader geopolitical environment.