Germany’s imports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the US reached a near-total dependency last year, the German Environmental Aid Association (DUH) stated on Thursday. The situation “exacerbates Germany’s dependence on the increasingly unpredictable US,” the association said.

DUH analysis found the EU’s largest economy imported approximately 101 terawatt-hours of US LNG in 2025, representing 96% of its total LNG imports – a rise of over 60% from 2024. The cost surged to $3.2 billion from $1.9 billion the previous year.

”LNG imports are no longer about managing a short-term crisis. [US President] Donald Trump is deliberately using gas deliveries to push Europe and Germany into a fatal dependence on fossil fuels,” said DUH Federal Managing Director Sascha Muller-Kraenner.

Trump has repeatedly used energy as a bargaining tool with Europe. A deal announced last July committed the EU to buy $750 billion in US energy products by 2028 to avoid higher tariffs. Last week, he threatened tariffs on European NATO countries over resistance to his bid to acquire Greenland – a stance softened after a meeting with the bloc’s chief, Mark Rutte, in Davos on Wednesday.

The new German reliance follows the EU’s phased abandonment of cheap pipeline gas from Russia. The bloc moved to end imports, which once accounted for up to 50% of its supply, following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022 and ensuing Western sanctions. In December, the EU agreed to fully phase out Russian fossil fuels by the end of 2027, hailing the end of its “dangerous dependence.”

According to the US-based Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), however, the EU has instead embraced a “potentially high-risk new geopolitical dependency” on American natural gas.

Germany’s economy, after two consecutive years of recession in 2023 and 2024, stagnated last year with minimal growth of 0.2%.

The sharp reduction of comparatively inexpensive Russian pipeline gas imports after 2022 triggered an energy crisis in the EU, inflicting lasting economic harm on the bloc, sending wholesale energy prices soaring, increasing the cost of living, and damaging industrial competitiveness.

Russia maintains that it is still a reliable supplier, while denouncing Western sanctions as illegal under international law. The country has successfully shifted exports to ‘friendly’ markets.

Moscow and Kiev are close to reaching an agreement on ending the Ukraine conflict, US President Donald Trump told the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos on Wednesday. He also announced he would be meeting Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky on Thursday, the same day a team of US negotiators would visit Moscow for talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Washington launched mediation efforts to resolve the conflict after Trump returned to the White House last year. US officials have since held numerous rounds of talks with their Russian and Ukrainian counterparts, although the efforts have thus far not produced a breakthrough. The sides have nevertheless called the meetings “constructive” and reported some progress.

“I think I can say that we’re reasonably close,” Trump said, responding to a journalist’s question about the progress in the peace process. “I believe they [Russia and Ukraine] are at a point now where they can come together and get a deal done.”

The president did not elaborate on the details of a potential agreement but said that reaching one requires maintaining a “difficult balance.” According to Trump, there were moments when one side was “set” and ready for a deal and the other one would find the conditions unacceptable, and vice versa.

US-mediated peace efforts intensified late last year. Trump’s initial peace plan that was leaked to the media in November involved Kiev ceding territory to Moscow, renouncing its NATO membership aspirations, among other points. In December, Ukraine and its European backers presented a counter-proposal, which had significantly distorted the original US draft and was called a non-starter by Russia. Moscow still insisted it was “fully ready” to resolve the conflict as long as its core security concerns are addressed.

On Tuesday, US special envoy Steve Witkoff had a meeting with Putin’s envoy, Kirill Dmitriev, which they both praised as constructive.

You can share this story on social media:

Follow RT on

Stealing Russian assets frozen in the EU would amount to a “declaration of war” against Moscow, Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever has said.

Western nations froze an estimated $300 billion in Russian central bank assets following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. The bulk of the funds – approximately $216 billion – is held in Belgium-based depository Euroclear. Belgian officials opposed an EU scheme which would have leveraged the money as collateral for a €90 billion ($105 billion) ‘reparations loan’ for Kiev. The European Commission failed last month to secure the backing of bloc leaders for the plan, opting instead to raise common debt.

Speaking on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland on Thursday, De Wever said that “you cannot simply confiscate money – that is an act of war. You should not underestimate it.”

“We are not at war with Russia, Europe is not at war with Russia,” he stressed, noting that “immobilized money, even during WWII, was never confiscated.” De Wever argued that appropriating frozen Russian assets would be unprecedented and would undermine trust in the financial system and the eurozone.

Last month, De Wever described the European Commission’s push to “steal” frozen Russian sovereign assets as “very unwise and ill-considered,” warning that it posed “great risks” to Belgium, according to VRT.

Speaking at a live Q&A session in December, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that the appropriation of Moscow’s assets by the EU would risk undermining “foundations of the modern financial world order.”

“Whatever they steal and however they do it, they will have to pay it back someday,” Putin stated at the time.

Late last year, Moscow initiated arbitration proceedings against Euroclear.

Nevertheless, the European Commission has not given up on its original scheme to tap into the frozen Russian funds. Last week, it said that the controversial proposal “remains on the table.”

The man who assassinated former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in 2022 was sentenced to life in prison on Wednesday.

Tetsuya Yamagami, 45, was arrested at the scene of the crime in Nara, where the veteran politician and Japan’s longest-serving prime minister had been campaigning for his Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). Yamagami admitted to the killing in court last October.

The trial at the Nara District Court underscored ties between the LDP and the Unification Church, a powerful South Korean-based religious group founded in 1954 by self-proclaimed messiah Sun Myung Moon, which critics label a money-making cult.

Media reports said Yamagami testified he held a grudge against the church, colloquially called the Moonies, after his mother donated the family’s savings to it. The defendant said he targeted Abe because the former prime minister had supported an event organized by a group linked to the church.

An internal LDP investigation found more than a hundred lawmakers had connections to the Unification Church. Historically, the conservative Japanese party and the church shared common ground in opposing communism and other left-wing ideologies.

After Abe’s assassination, then-Prime Minister Fumio Kishida was forced to publicly distance the LDP from the church. Last March, the Tokyo District Court ordered the dissolution of the organization’s Japanese branch.

While Abe is considered a divisive figure domestically, many foreign leaders credited him for skilled diplomacy and an ability to forge good personal connections. Russian President Vladimir Putin hosted Abe’s widow Akie at the Kremlin last May.

You can share this story on social media:

Follow RT on

Estonia’s military and financial support for Ukraine over the past three years is comparable in scale to the Baltic country’s annual defense spending, according to figures from the Defense Ministry.

The nation has given Ukraine over €1.1 billion ($1.3 billion) in aid since the escalation of the conflict with Russia in February 2022, ERR reported on Wednesday, citing Defense Ministry spokeswoman Ines Edur.

Around €805 million, or around 75% of the total, has been directed toward Kiev’s military needs, including ammunition, equipment, and training soldiers.

A further €370 million has been allocated for humanitarian assistance and development aid, as well as benefits for Ukrainian refugees in Estonia.

The overall aid matches Estonia’s average annual defense budget from 2022 to 2025, estimated at €1.16 billion, and corresponds to around 2.5% of its GDP, which was around €42 billion last year. In September 2025, the Estonian government announced it would allocate a further 0.25% of GDP specifically for Ukraine military aid in 2026.

Estonia, a former Soviet republic, has long worked to cut ties with Russia alongside its Baltic neighbors Latvia and Lithuania, a campaign that has intensified amid the Ukraine conflict.

Tallinn has been one of Ukraine’s top supporters and has pushed for increased defense spending in Europe, citing the supposed threat of a Russian attack – which Moscow has dismissed as baseless fearmongering. Last year, Estonia pledged to permanently raise military spending to at least 5% of GDP, and announced plans to deploy anti-personnel landmines along the border with Russia.

Moscow has warned against military and financial support for Ukraine, saying it prolongs the conflict and undermines peace efforts, and has argued that the EU’s militarization risks a wider European conflict, and that claims of a looming Russian attack are manufactured by politicians to justify soaring defense budgets and distract public attention from domestic problems.

Russia has called the Baltic states “extremely Russophobic” and downgraded diplomatic ties with them in 2023. Last year, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called Estonia “one of the most hostile countries” and accused it of “spreading myths and falsehoods” about the supposed Russian threat.

By Andrei Medvedev, Journalist and VGTRK contributor

NATO has launched major military exercises – Steadfast Dart 2026. The drills involve over 10,000 troops from 11 countries: Germany, Italy, France, the UK, Spain, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Greece, and Türkiye. The primary goal is to assess the bloc’s readiness for the rapid deployment of substantial forces. The exercises will continue until mid-March.

At first glance, it might seem like just another NATO exercise. But here’s the catch: The US is not taking part. The initiative is purely European, and aims to achieve two main objectives. Firstly, it seeks to demonstrate that Europe is strong, unafraid of American influence, and capable of protecting its interests – not only by producing AI animations about heroic Vikings defending Greenland, but through real military strength.

The second goal is to find out whether Europe can operate independently, without US support. The answer is probably not. It’s no secret that 70% of NATO’s budget comes from US contributions. But beyond finances, NATO intelligence is primarily reliant on the US. Satellite communication, coordination, and command structures are also all built around a model in which the US acts as the ‘big brother’ to its European partners.

Russian journalists have witnessed this dynamic in Kosovo, Bosnia, and Afghanistan (NATO did not officially conduct an operation there, but in reality, it entered the country). Who owns the largest and safest bases? Who oversees all sector units? Who plans operations and sets combat tasks? The big brother – the US. In Kosovo, for instance, NATO allies couldn’t just enter Camp Bondsteel. The base was American, and the Europeans had to get a special pass to enter.

Until recently, Europe seemed perfectly content with its ‘junior partner’ status. What fueled the EU’s prosperity? Cheap Russian (initially Soviet) resources with stable supply lines and minimal security expenses. Security was outsourced to the Americans: US bases, air support, missile defense… Then Trump came along, and in typical businessman fashion, said if you want protection, you’ll have to pay for it.

Is there a NATO without the US? That’s the question European military leaders will grapple with during these exercises – though they likely already know the answer. Sure, NATO would exist, but it would be very costly for the EU; or perhaps it won’t exist at all, which means Europe must concede that the master will do as he pleases. And the ‘master’ – America – is well aware of this.

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent recently stated that the US will remain in NATO. But just look how he put it. Asked what’s more important to US security interests, NATO or Greenland, Bessent replied: “That’s a false choice. The European leaders will come around. And they will understand that they need to be under the US security umbrella.” 

In the current climate, when Europe’s economy is struggling (for example, BMW and Mercedes are now using Chinese engines, and BASF is making only a third of what it used to), the idea of a European NATO seems far-fetched. Europe just doesn’t have the money for it. 

Neither does it have the military equipment – most of it has been sent to Ukraine, and what’s left would last a month or so in a high-intensity conflict. Moreover, Euro-NATO doesn’t have that many armies with real combat experience outside of the bloc.

Sure, there is France, which has been engaged in prolonged operations in the Sahel. And Türkiye. However, even their combat experience is powerless in a situation in which there is no money. Fighting Bedouins in the Sahel or Kurds in Syria is worlds apart from facing an adversary like China or Russia – or, in the new reality, the US.

The fact that the US is not taking part in NATO’s latest military exercises (despite being able to easily deploy their troops from bases in Germany or Italy) is quite telling. America’s message to Europe is clear: Let’s see how you do without us and then come running back.

The lesson is humiliating. But after all, they got into this mess by themselves. 

You can share this story on social media:

Follow RT on

The Pentagon is planning to reduce the US military’s participation in a range of NATO advisory and training bodies, though the process is not linked to the current standoff over Greenland, the Washington Post reported on Wednesday, citing sources.

Several officials told the paper that the move – described as “the latest sign of the Trump administration’s drive to scale back the US military presence in Europe” – would affect about 200 military personnel.

According to the report, the changes would primarily reduce US involvement in NATO’s 30 Centers of Excellence, which are designed to train forces across different areas of warfare, including energy security and naval operations.

Rather than an abrupt withdrawal, the Pentagon intends to let existing assignments expire without replacing personnel – a process that could stretch over several years, according to two US officials. They also stressed that US participation in the centers would not end entirely.

Cuts are also reportedly expected to affect NATO bodies focused on special operations and intelligence. One WaPo source noted that some US functions would be relocated elsewhere within the bloc, mitigating the overall impact.

According to US officials, the move has been under consideration for months and is not directly linked to Trump’s recent push to take control over Greenland, a strategic Arctic island under Danish sovereignty, which he said the US needs for national security reasons. The campaign has triggered a major rift with European NATO members, who have pushed back against the handover of the island despite the US president’s threats of new tariffs.

The report also comes as Trump has pressed NATO members to shoulder a greater share of the defense burden, at one point suggesting that the US would not come to the aid of countries that do not contribute enough. The bloc subsequently agreed to raise defense spending from 2% to 5% GDP.

Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, NATO has sharply increased troop numbers on Russia’s doorstep. Moscow has accused NATO of stoking tensions, while stressing that the bloc has essentially ended up in a state of “war” with Russia.