by Mohammed Bello Doka
Was Western condemnation of Russian energy trade ever sincere — or was it just a moral facade to punish an enemy while the same powers quietly do business with the Kremlin?
That is not a rhetorical question. It is a moral indictment of a geopolitical order that condemns others for what it stubbornly refuses to stop doing itself.
Buying Russian Gas While Lecturing the World
Ever since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Europe has loudly condemned Moscow and imposed sweeping sanctions on Russian finance, defence, and a wide array of exports. But one major exception remained conspicuously under-noticed — Russian natural gas.
Despite repeated vows to end dependence, the European Union continued to import Russian gas in 2025. According to human rights and energy analysts, EU member states imported over 15 million tonnes of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the Siberian Yamal facility alone last year, netting an estimated €7.2 billion for the Kremlin — even as Brussels pledged to ban Russian LNG by 2027.
This wasn’t trivial: France alone received some 6.3 million tonnes of Russian LNG, and overall European port infrastructure was crucial in keeping the Arctic-exported gas flowing.
Europe’s reliance on Russian gas may have shrunk since 2021; Russia’s share of EU gas imports fell from historically over 40 % of supply to around 12 % by late 2025, according to EU trade records. Yet that decline was uneven — countries like Hungary, Slovakia, Belgium, and France continued to import Russian gas under existing contracts.
In other words: while the EU loudly condemned Russia in words, its energy markets were still tied directly to Russian fossil fuel revenues — revenues that continue to flow even now into Russia’s economy and its capacity to wage war on Ukraine.
Multiple reports showed that, paradoxically, the EU has spent more on Russian oil and gas than it has allocated in financial aid to Ukraine, underscoring the contradiction between proclamations of solidarity with Kyiv and the reality of European energy trade.
Yes, the European Parliament has now approved legislation to phase out all Russian gas imports by 2027, but this came after years of continued imports and dependency — and even then, exceptions and delays were built into the agreement to protect those same importing states.
Condemning Others, Ignoring Their Own Exception
Ask any Western diplomat about trading with Russia and you’ll hear sanctimonious warnings about “funding the Kremlin’s war machine.” That is precisely the rhetoric deployed to pressure countries in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East not to buy Russian oil, gas, or other exports.
Yet when their own markets continued to import Russian gas in significant volumes, that same rhetoric became optional morality — enforced selectively against others, but tolerated at home.
This is not mere hypocrisy; it emboldens those very governments the West criticises. For countries in the Global South, Western declarations about sanctions ring hollow when the EU and U.S. continue to transact large-scale energy purchases from Russia — even while urging others to stop doing exactly the same.
The result? Western moral authority on war, peace, and sanctions has been severely undercut.
Gaza: A Rubicon of Contradiction
Then came Gaza.
In the two-plus years since the deadly conflict erupted in October 2023, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza has been cataclysmic: infrastructure destroyed, public health systems devastated, and hundreds of thousands of civilians suffering under conditions of starvation, displacement, and devastation acknowledged by international agencies. Multiple credible sources documented tens of thousands of deaths and massive injuries.
A 2025 UN Human Rights Council independent inquiry concluded that actions by Israel in Gaza met the standards for genocide under the Genocide Convention, finding evidence of multiple genocidal acts such as deliberate infliction of life-destroying conditions and intent to destroy, in part, the Palestinian group.
Meanwhile, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and other senior Israeli officials, alleging they bear responsibility for using starvation as a method of warfare — a war crime under international law.
Yet what was the Western response?
Some European leaders expressed “deep concern” and called for humanitarian access, even as their governments actively resisted enforcement of these warrants and refused to support meaningful accountability mechanisms.
Across the Atlantic, U.S. political leadership condemned the ICC’s actions as politicised and sought to undermine the court’s legitimacy, even as it continues to provide military and diplomatic cover to an ally accused of crimes variously described by the foreign-affairs community as reprehensible.
This policy divergence is stark and telling: International justice matters — unless it implicates an ally.
The Moral Breakdown
Put bluntly:
The West castigates nations for trading with Russia — yet Europe continues to buy Russian gas, keeping Putin’s energy revenues alive.
The West champions international law — yet turns away from accountability when courts indict close partners.
The West proclaims concern over civilian suffering — yet persists in military aid that fuels further devastation.
These are not isolated contradictions. They form a pattern — one that destroys any claim the West has to moral leadership on matters of war, peace, or justice.
The double standard is not just embarrassing — it is dangerous. It deepens global cynicism, encourages authoritarian states to ignore sanctions, and weakens international institutions designed to hold all parties accountable.
The Global Backlash
Governments and publics from Africa to Asia and Latin America have watched this unfold with disillusionment. They see an international order where rules apply to the weak, but power defines exceptions.
If European capitals can justify buying Russian gas while castigating others for doing the same; if Western governments can dismiss ICC accountability when it targets favored allies — then international law becomes nothing more than a tool of convenience, not principle.
No More Exceptions
For decades, the West insisted on a “rules-based international order.” But rules that bend for the powerful and snap for the rest are not rules at all. They are power politics dressed up in legalese.
If the West truly means what it says, then condemnation must apply universally — to Russian gas deals and to any policies that contribute to mass civilian suffering. Anything less is not justice. It is cynicism.
And the world sees it. And will never forget it.
Mohammed Bello Doka writes from Abuja Nigeria, can be reached via [email protected]
Abuja Network News
Tags
Opinion