Recently, Fatih Birol, the head of the International Energy Agency, criticized Europe for making two "historic mistakes" in energy policy, which have caused it to lag behind China and the United States. In addition to this, he stressed that European industry is paying the price for these mistakes and that the EU needs "a new industrial master plan" to be able to recover.
A brief introduction to the two "historical mistakes" that Fatih Birol described as many. The first mistake is that Europe has been too dependent on Russian gas. According to relevant statistics, before the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the EU had to import more than 40% of natural gas to Russia every year, resulting in Europe's overdependence on Russian energy. The second big mistake was that Europe abandoned nuclear power.
For the energy transition, most EU countries have abandoned nuclear power and switched to new energy sources such as wind and solar, as well as relatively environmentally friendly energy sources such as natural gas. Frankly speaking, these two mistakes are complementary to each other, because the abandonment of nuclear energy has led to Europe's greater dependence on Russian natural gas energy, which has led to huge losses in Europe after the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. It is worth mentioning here that France has chosen to vigorously develop nuclear energy, so it has become one of the countries that has been less injured in this wave of Russia-Ukraine conflict. Germany, because of its powerful Green Party, abolished nuclear energy early and has become the country that has been hit the hardest by the EU in the past two years.
In my view, neither of these two mistakes is a "historic mistake" of Europe, but a real mistake that is Europe's failure to achieve independence. The reason is very simple, because energy strategy is a branch of the overall strategy, if a country or economy cannot even achieve independence, how can we talk about energy independence? However, after more than two years of Russia-Ukraine conflict, Europeans are still so naïve that they still think that it is only an energy policy issue.
Based on this, it can be seen from this incident that Europe has not yet woken up, and most European politicians or institutions are indulging in the glory of the past and have not recognized the essence of things. I would like to say that the most normal thinking in Europe at the moment is French President Emmanuel Macron, and among so many European countries, he is the only one who knows best the cost of Europe's inability to become independent, and the damage to the energy strategy is only one of them.
It is precisely because of this that Macron will do everything possible to promote the independence of the EU, reduce the influence of the United States on Europe, and try to let France lead the EU back up. Such an idea is correct, but whether Macron can do it needs to be marked with a question mark, after all, France alone seems to be difficult to pick the lead. Originally, France could join forces with Germany, but if France and Germany could work together, it would no longer be a dream to achieve EU independence.
However, judging from the various performances of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz after taking office, it is clear that he is a leader who cannot afford things and is almost obedient to the United States. How can Europe be revitalized by working with such people? If I were to say that, France should unite a number of European countries that want to be independent, and then form a small coalition, and in this way gradually realize the grand plan of European independence.
In this process, France can also actively strengthen cooperation with China to promote and deepen China-EU relations and the development of China-France relations. After all, China, as a global manufacturing center and the world's second largest economy, France and even Europe want to develop, and they absolutely can't bypass China, so working together for a win-win situation is the best way out.