The United States is reportedly exploring a plan that could reopen a route for Russian natural gas to reach European markets through Ukraine, potentially reversing years of efforts by European governments to reduce their dependence on Moscow.

According to a report published by The Wall Street Journal on November 2, US negotiators have discussed resuming Russian gas deliveries through pipelines crossing Ukrainian territory as part of wider negotiations aimed at securing an energy ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine.

The proposal reportedly involves using an American intermediary to facilitate the sales, potentially creating a new role for US companies in the European energy market.

The idea was discussed by US envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff during visits to Moscow and Kyiv in September, according to officials familiar with the discussions cited by the newspaper.

The proposal has not been agreed upon, and it faces major political, legal and diplomatic obstacles.

How would the proposed arrangement work?

Under the reported plan, Russian natural gas could once again travel from Siberian fields through existing pipeline infrastructure crossing Ukraine and into European markets.

Rather than selling the gas through the traditional direct arrangements, an American intermediary would reportedly be involved in the transaction.

One proposal discussed by US officials would place the revenue from gas sales in an escrow account in a third country. The purpose would be to prevent the Kremlin from using the money to finance its military operations while the wider conflict continues.

The arrangement could also generate transit fees for Ukraine, which would receive income from allowing the gas to pass through its territory.

For Washington, the potential return of Russian gas to Europe could become an economic incentive for Russian President Vladimir Putin to accept a broader energy ceasefire or make progress toward a wider peace agreement.

However, the details remain under discussion. There is no confirmed agreement to restart deliveries.

Europe faces a major political dilemma

The proposal directly conflicts with the European Union’s energy strategy.

Before Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Russian supplies accounted for approximately 45% of Europe’s natural gas imports. That share has since fallen to around 11%, while American liquefied natural gas has become a much larger part of the European supply mix.

The EU has adopted legislation requiring Russian natural gas imports to be phased out by the end of 2027. European officials have also argued that restoring dependence on Russian energy would create serious strategic risks.

The Kyiv Independent reported on November 2 that EU officials were unlikely to accept the American proposal. European representatives have stressed that the bloc’s phase-out policy also addresses Russian gas entering indirectly through third countries.

The political resistance is rooted in Europe’s experience during the war, when energy supplies became a major source of tension between Moscow and European capitals.

For many European governments, the issue is no longer simply the price of gas. It is also about energy security and avoiding a situation in which Russia can again use energy exports as political leverage.

Why Washington is pushing the idea

The Trump administration appears to see the proposal as a possible way to connect economic incentives with diplomatic negotiations.

A return of Russian gas could potentially help lower energy costs in Europe, while offering Moscow a financial reason to support an energy ceasefire.

The plan could also benefit Ukraine through transit revenue, giving Kyiv an economic stake in the arrangement.

But the proposal comes at a sensitive moment. Europe’s energy costs have been under pressure, and disruptions to global liquefied natural gas supplies linked to the war involving Iran have added to concerns ahead of winter.

The United States has also become a major supplier of liquefied natural gas to Europe. Any return of Russian pipeline gas could therefore reshape the commercial balance of the European energy market and create opportunities — as well as competition — for American energy interests.

A striking shift in Trump’s approach to Russian energy

The proposal also marks a significant contrast with Trump’s earlier position on Russian gas.

During his first administration, Trump strongly criticized Germany’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline, arguing that the project would make Europe too dependent on Russian energy. His administration also imposed sanctions connected to the pipeline.

Now, according to the reported discussions, Washington is considering a framework in which Russian gas could return to Europe under an arrangement involving American commercial interests.

The future of Nord Stream has also reportedly been discussed as part of broader economic negotiations, although restarting the damaged pipelines would be a much more complicated undertaking.

The route through Ukraine, by contrast, could potentially be restarted more quickly because much of the existing infrastructure remains available.

Russia has not agreed, and Europe may block the plan

Even if Washington succeeds in persuading Moscow to consider the proposal, there is no guarantee that Russia will accept the conditions or that European governments will permit the gas to enter their markets.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on November 2 that an immediate resumption of Russian gas exports to Europe was not possible under the current circumstances, while leaving open the possibility of future deliveries if buyers and sellers reached an agreement.

European officials, meanwhile, have made clear that the bloc’s legal commitments to phase out Russian gas remain in place.

The proposal therefore faces three major challenges: securing Russian agreement, obtaining Ukrainian support and overcoming European opposition.

For now, Russian gas is not officially returning to Europe. But Washington’s reported proposal has reopened a major debate about energy security, sanctions, the future of the war in Ukraine and who will control Europe’s energy market.

Sources:The Wall Street Journal, The Kyiv Independent, Anadolu Agency