This study focuses on the potential implications of resuming Russian natural gas transit through
Ukraine – a scenario that is increasingly being discussed in the context of ongoing peace
negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow. The study assesses whether such a move would be in
line with Ukraine’s national interests and Europe’s broader energy security priorities.
Following the expiration of the gas transit agreement between Naftogaz, Ukraine’s national
energy company, and Russia’s Gazprom at the end of 2019, Ukraine officially ceased the transit
of Russian gas to the EU as of January 1, 2025. This decision marked a significant shift in the
European energy landscape.
While the cessation of transit activities resulted in economic losses for Ukraine, it also led to a
substantial weakening of the Russian Federation’s position within the European energy market.
This, in turn, diminished the Kremlin’s capacity to utilize energy resources as a political instrument.
Geopolitical shifts: The ongoing Russian aggression against Ukraine, in conjunction with the
European Union’s (EU) endeavors to diversify its energy sources, has resulted in a significant
decline in Russian gas imports. Specifically, Russian gas imports have decreased from 41% of
the EU’s supply in 2020 to just 9% in 2023. The termination of gas transit through Ukraine at the
beginning of 2025 did not result in substantial disruption to the energy security of the European
Union. However, it did result in the Russian Federation’s loss of revenues from gas sales.
Economic impact for Ukraine: Termination of transit will cost Ukraine up to $1 billion a year in
lost revenue. Additionally, gas reserves had fallen to just 0.7 billion cubic meters as of April 2025
due to a decline in domestic production resulting from Russian attacks, leading to escalating gas
import costs for Ukraine.
Alternative gas transit scenarios: Scenarios involving the use of Azerbaijani gas, direct booking
by European companies of transit capacities, or strategic cooperation on utilizing Ukraine’s
underground gas storage facilities are considered, but each faces technical, legal, or geopolitical
obstacles.