RUBIO WARNS EUROPE ABOUT RUSSIAN ENERGY—WHILE WASHINGTON OPENS THE DOOR TO RUSSIAN DIESEL
Marco Rubio says Europe’s dependence on Russian energy helped convince Putin he could invade Ukraine without facing a strong European response.
There is a serious lesson in that warning. Buying essential supplies from an aggressive state can give that state leverage—and confidence that its customers will hesitate to confront it.
But how does Rubio reconcile that lesson with his own administration’s decision to authorize Russian diesel purchases?
On October 9, the U.S. Treasury issued a temporary license permitting specified transactions involving Russian diesel, including imports into the United States, through April 7, 2027. Washington is creating a commercial opening for Russian fuel while its secretary of state lectures Europe about the dangers of relying on Moscow.
The situations differ in scale. A temporary diesel arrangement does not reproduce Europe’s former dependence on Russian pipeline gas. Nevertheless, the underlying question remains: why should the economic and strategic risks matter less when Washington wants cheaper fuel?
Rubio also blamed European energy choices on “green hyperbole.” That overlooks the role of renewable energy, efficiency and diversified supplies in Europe’s effort to reduce Russian dependence. According to the EU Council, Russia’s share of EU gas imports fell from 45% in 2021 to 13% in 2025, while its share of oil imports dropped from 27% to below 3%. The separation remains unfinished, but the reduction is substantial.
Europe deserves scrutiny over the Russian energy it still buys. Washington deserves the same scrutiny over the trade it is choosing to permit.
An ocean does not change where the money goes or erase the political consequences of easing pressure on Moscow.
If Rubio believes Russian energy dependence helped embolden Putin, his administration should explain how opening another market for Russian diesel fits the lesson he wants Europe to learn.