Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
Parliamentary questions
PDF 5kWORD 16k
19 June 2017
Question for written answer E-004024-17
to the Commission
Rule 130
Knut Fleckenstein (S&D)

 Subject:  Politicisation of major European energy projects such as Nord Stream 2
 Answer in writing 

On 14 June the US Senate proposed that sanctions against Russia should be unilaterally extended to European energy undertakings. At the same time the Commission asked the Council for a mandate to negotiate special rules for Nord Stream 2 different from those applicable to any other pipelines from third countries. These are two examples of the politicisation of trade with Russia, which is important for the whole of Europe, specially in the energy sector.

In view of the significance of Euro-Russian energy cooperation, both in economic and security terms, and of the crucial role of effective transatlantic cooperation, it is important to avoid further escalation and to dissuade the US Government from imposing unjustified unilateral sanctions targeting European firms.

In view of this:

What measures does the Commission propose to avert the immediate risk of US sanctions being imposed on European firms?

Does the Commission consider it defensible that the reasons given by the USA for its sanctions initiative against Euro-Russian energy cooperation include sales of American liquid gas and the aim of squeezing Russian natural gas supplies out of the European market?

If the Commission does not approve of these objectives of the proposed US sanctions, why is it facilitating them by politicising the Nord Stream 2 project in the Council rather than allowing firms to cooperate on the basis of existing law?

Original language of question: DE 
Legal notice - Privacy policy