by Dr. Samuel Furfari
The Dutch Ministry of Defense has published its Energy Security Roadmap, a national strategy to ensure that its armed forces have reliable energy supplies. While produced by a single NATO member, the document reflects a broader reality: Energy security is inseparable from military power.
The “roadmap” defines energy security as the continuous availability of reliable and affordable energy for both peacetime activities and military operations. It explicitly references NATO’s “single fuel policy,” which standardizes military logistics around liquid fossil fuels, particularly kerosene, to guarantee interoperability between allied forces. Currently, more than 95% of Dutch military aircraft, ships, and vehicles are powered by hydrocarbons.
Nonetheless, the European Union’s (EU’s) decarbonization proponents continue to demonize fossil fuels and advance wind and solar technologies that account globally for slightly more than 3% of energy supplies after two decades of subsidies. Even the Dutch document pays homage to EU decarbonization, but the need for liquid hydrocarbons will not be satisfied by climate rhetoric.
The bottom line for U.S. policymakers is that EU energy policy must be considered in assessing the continent’s defense capability.
The significance of the Dutch security document extends beyond military logistics. It is a wakeup call that energy is not simply an environmental or economic issue. It is fundamentally an issue of national security. Armed forces, industrial production, transportation networks, and critical infrastructure all depend on abundant and reliable energy. Without it, military readiness, economic strength, and national autonomy decline.
Throughout history, energy has been the foundation of state power. Nations with secure access to affordable energy possess stronger economies, greater military capabilities, and more freedom of action. Nations dependent on external suppliers expose themselves to coercion and worse.
Global energy trends reinforce these facts. According to the 2026 Statistical Review of World Energy, 86% of global primary energy consumption was fed by fossil fuels. Despite growth in renewable technologies, the world remains overwhelmingly reliant on oil, natural gas, and coal. Many major powers are adapting to this reality, as the Brussels bureaucracy seems to ignore it.
China, for example, is expanding renewable generation while simultaneously building new coal capacity and securing control over supply chains for strategic minerals. This strategy prioritizes energy availability and resilience as foundations of national power. China is strengthening both its economic position and its long-term security.
This intersection of energy policy with defense capability may be an existential crack in the EU’s “green” facade. The European Union remains heavily dependent on imported energy and critical raw materials, while many industries face significantly higher energy costs than competitors in the United States and Asia. Rising costs have contributed to pressures on steel, chemicals, and manufacturing, industries that form the backbone of a nation’s defense.
Armies require fuel, but they also need steel, chemicals, machinery, shipbuilding capacity, electronics, and advanced manufacturing. A nation that struggles to sustain competitive industrial production will have difficulty producing tanks, munitions, drones, aircraft, and warships at the scale required in a crisis.
As the EU has demonized fossil fuels in the name of climate policy, industrial electricity prices have risen to about twice U.S. levels and about 50% above China’s. Last year, steel output fell to its lowest level since 1960. ThyssenKrupp is cutting 11,000 jobs from its steel division, and that is just one example. This deindustrialization is incompatible with a robust defenseand sovereignty.
NATO’s military capabilities depend not only on budgets and troop numbers but also on the energy supplies and industrial foundation that support them. The Dutch strategy implicitly recognizes that operational readiness begins with energy security.
The United States has reinforced its strategic position through abundant domestic oil and gas production, which supports both economic growth and projection of military power. Meanwhile, Europe refuses to take full advantage of domestic energy reserves, clinging to economically destructive policies that can only undermine the security of the West.
The lesson of the Dutch Energy Security Roadmap is that energy security is a prerequisite of national security. An alliance that seeks to deter adversaries and maintain sovereignty cannot afford to overlook that connection.
Dr. Samuel Furfari has been teaching energy geopolitics since 2003 and served as an official at the Directorate-General for Energy of the European Commission for 36 years. He is the author of more than 20 books on energy policy and geopolitics.
This commentary was first published at Daily Signal August 26.
EU Decarbonization Is a Security Threat for the West
by Dr. Samuel Furfari
The Dutch Ministry of Defense has published its Energy Security Roadmap, a national strategy to ensure that its armed forces have reliable energy supplies. While produced by a single NATO member, the document reflects a broader reality: Energy security is inseparable from military power.
The “roadmap” defines energy security as the continuous availability of reliable and affordable energy for both peacetime activities and military operations. It explicitly references NATO’s “single fuel policy,” which standardizes military logistics around liquid fossil fuels, particularly kerosene, to guarantee interoperability between allied forces. Currently, more than 95% of Dutch military aircraft, ships, and vehicles are powered by hydrocarbons.
Nonetheless, the European Union’s (EU’s) decarbonization proponents continue to demonize fossil fuels and advance wind and solar technologies that account globally for slightly more than 3% of energy supplies after two decades of subsidies. Even the Dutch document pays homage to EU decarbonization, but the need for liquid hydrocarbons will not be satisfied by climate rhetoric.
The bottom line for U.S. policymakers is that EU energy policy must be considered in assessing the continent’s defense capability.
The significance of the Dutch security document extends beyond military logistics. It is a wakeup call that energy is not simply an environmental or economic issue. It is fundamentally an issue of national security. Armed forces, industrial production, transportation networks, and critical infrastructure all depend on abundant and reliable energy. Without it, military readiness, economic strength, and national autonomy decline.
Throughout history, energy has been the foundation of state power. Nations with secure access to affordable energy possess stronger economies, greater military capabilities, and more freedom of action. Nations dependent on external suppliers expose themselves to coercion and worse.
Global energy trends reinforce these facts. According to the 2026 Statistical Review of World Energy, 86% of global primary energy consumption was fed by fossil fuels. Despite growth in renewable technologies, the world remains overwhelmingly reliant on oil, natural gas, and coal. Many major powers are adapting to this reality, as the Brussels bureaucracy seems to ignore it.
China, for example, is expanding renewable generation while simultaneously building new coal capacity and securing control over supply chains for strategic minerals. This strategy prioritizes energy availability and resilience as foundations of national power. China is strengthening both its economic position and its long-term security.
This intersection of energy policy with defense capability may be an existential crack in the EU’s “green” facade. The European Union remains heavily dependent on imported energy and critical raw materials, while many industries face significantly higher energy costs than competitors in the United States and Asia. Rising costs have contributed to pressures on steel, chemicals, and manufacturing, industries that form the backbone of a nation’s defense.
Armies require fuel, but they also need steel, chemicals, machinery, shipbuilding capacity, electronics, and advanced manufacturing. A nation that struggles to sustain competitive industrial production will have difficulty producing tanks, munitions, drones, aircraft, and warships at the scale required in a crisis.
As the EU has demonized fossil fuels in the name of climate policy, industrial electricity prices have risen to about twice U.S. levels and about 50% above China’s. Last year, steel output fell to its lowest level since 1960. ThyssenKrupp is cutting 11,000 jobs from its steel division, and that is just one example. This deindustrialization is incompatible with a robust defenseand sovereignty.
NATO’s military capabilities depend not only on budgets and troop numbers but also on the energy supplies and industrial foundation that support them. The Dutch strategy implicitly recognizes that operational readiness begins with energy security.
The United States has reinforced its strategic position through abundant domestic oil and gas production, which supports both economic growth and projection of military power. Meanwhile, Europe refuses to take full advantage of domestic energy reserves, clinging to economically destructive policies that can only undermine the security of the West.
The lesson of the Dutch Energy Security Roadmap is that energy security is a prerequisite of national security. An alliance that seeks to deter adversaries and maintain sovereignty cannot afford to overlook that connection.
Dr. Samuel Furfari has been teaching energy geopolitics since 2003 and served as an official at the Directorate-General for Energy of the European Commission for 36 years. He is the author of more than 20 books on energy policy and geopolitics.
This commentary was first published at Daily Signal August 26.
Share this: