Zelensky on EU "blackmail" over the Druzhba oil pipeline: drones as "oil" and the challenges of world politics

Tensions between Kyiv and Brussels have reached a new high. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has publicly accused European allies of “blackmail” by demanding the restoration of the damaged Druzhba pipeline, which carries Russian oil to Hungary and Slovakia. The statement, made in Kyiv, reveals deep divisions in European solidarity and highlights the difficulty of balancing economic expediency with a principled stance against an aggressor. Against this backdrop, Ukraine is also seeking to turn its drone expertise into a new strategic “oil,” offering the United States a large-scale partnership.

Archive photo of a section of the Druzhba oil pipeline near the city of Stryi in western Ukraine, 2009

Energy stalemate: Zelensky's accusations and the Druzhba dilemma

Volodymyr Zelensky’s accusations against European allies, which were made in Kyiv, have become one of the sharpest signals of growing tension within the Western coalition. The essence of the conflict is Brussels’ demand to restore the Druzhba pipeline, which delivers Russian oil to Hungary and Slovakia. The Ukrainian leader is categorically against it, stating that such a step is tantamount to lifting economic sanctions against Moscow. “We either sell Russian oil or we don’t. Because [the EU] is forcing me to restore Druzhba,” Zelensky stressed. “How is this different from lifting sanctions against the Russians?”¹.

The Druzhba oil pipeline, built in Soviet times, is the world's largest network of main oil pipelines. It begins in Russia and branches into northern and southern branches, supplying oil to Belarus, Ukraine, Poland, Germany, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Latvia and Lithuania. For landlocked countries such as Hungary and Slovakia, it is a key artery for the supply of raw materials. Its operation is critical to the energy security of these countries, which have historically been heavily dependent on Russian energy resources²Ukraine says the pipeline was damaged by Russian airstrikes in January and has yet to be repaired, although European officials are urging Kyiv to allow inspectors to assess the damage and speed up restoration.

This situation creates a precedent that could undermine unity on the issue of sanctions pressure on Russia. The Ukrainian position, which consists in a principled refusal to facilitate the transit of Russian oil, is a logical continuation of its efforts to completely economically isolate the aggressor. However, the desire of some European countries to ensure their own energy stability against the backdrop of high energy prices causes a conflict of interests.

Hungarian Vector: Orban, Elections, and Blockade

A key player in this oil drama is Hungary. The country, led by Prime Minister Viktor Orban, has long been known for its skepticism of sanctions against Russia and its close ties to the Kremlin. Hungary is completely dependent on Russian energy supplies and is using that dependence as leverage in negotiations with the EU. Budapest is blocking both new EU sanctions against Moscow and a vital €90 billion ($103 billion; £78 billion) loan to Kyiv until the pipeline is restored.³.

Viktor Orban’s stance has deep domestic political roots. Ahead of the April elections, he made hostility to Ukraine a key issue in his campaign. His party, currently lagging in opinion polls, is seeking to mobilize its electorate with anti-Ukrainian and anti-Brussels rhetoric. Some EU officials fear that Zelensky’s opposition to the pipeline could help Orban win re-election, further complicating European unity and support for Ukraine.⁴.

In recent years, Hungary has often clashed with Brussels over the rule of law, democratic standards and migration policy. Its “Ostpolitik” (Eastern policy) – a policy oriented towards the East, particularly towards Russia and China – has caused concern in many EU capitals. In this context, energy dependence is not just an economic one, but a powerful geopolitical tool that Orbán skillfully uses to strengthen his domestic position and oppose the “dictation” of Brussels.

The Sanctions Debate: The Weight of Principles vs. Economic Pragmatism

Zelensky clearly formulated the moral aspect of the conflict: "If we decide to resume the supply of Russian oil, then I want them to know that I am against it. And you should not accuse me of blocking something. I am not blocking. I say openly: I am against it. But if they set me conditions that Ukraine will not receive weapons, then, excuse me, I am powerless in this matter. I told our friends in Europe that this is called blackmail."¹This highlights the dilemma facing Ukraine: whether to stick to principles or succumb to pressure that could affect vital arms supplies and financial aid.

Zelensky's statements came after the US eased sanctions that had banned other countries from buying Russian oil in an attempt to ease an energy crisis caused by the escalating conflict in the Middle East.⁵. The move has drawn criticism from a number of European leaders and, apparently, outrage in Kyiv. The temporary lifting of US sanctions on Russian oil already at sea was in effect until April 11. Vladimir Putin’s economic spokesman, Kirill Dmitriev, immediately said that the lifting of the sanctions demonstrated Russia’s key role in the stability of the global energy market and that further easing was “inevitable.” The situation highlights how interconnected global energy markets and geopolitical interests are, and how difficult it is to maintain a united front against an aggressor country when new crises arise.

Ukraine has consistently advocated for increasing, not easing, sanctions pressure on Russia. For Kyiv, every dollar Moscow receives from oil or gas sales is converted into missiles and drones that attack Ukrainian cities. Sanctions easing, even temporary, is seen as direct support for Russia’s ability to finance its aggression. Discussions about the “political price” Ukraine is paying for Hungary’s “anti-European policy” demonstrate not only the moral aspect, but also the real consequences for Ukraine’s security and survival.

"Ukrainian Oil": Drones as a New Economic and Security Currency

Amid energy and geopolitical battles, Zelensky introduced a new concept to the world: “Ukrainian oil” is its interceptor drones. This metaphor emphasizes the growing importance of technology in modern warfare and economics. He declared his readiness to conclude a $50 billion deal with the United States to jointly produce drones¹.

Since the outbreak of the conflict in the Middle East, many countries, especially in the Persian Gulf region, have turned to Ukraine for help in protecting themselves from cheap Iranian-made drones. Ukraine has become a world leader not only in the production of cheap interceptor drones, but also in improving the tactics of their use against almost daily Russian attacks. This is a unique experience gained in real-time and intense combat. “For us, it’s like oil,” Zelensky said, explaining the strategic value of the production of modern drones and the corresponding Ukrainian experience. He stressed that Ukraine expects to receive money and technology in exchange for any deals, noting that a proposal to jointly produce drones with the United States was made last year, but which was not agreed upon at the time⁶.

This initiative is an attempt by Ukraine to turn its military experience into an economic and strategic advantage. Developing its own defense-industrial base and exporting high-tech products, especially in the field of UAVs, can provide Ukraine with long-term stability and new sources of income. It also allows strengthening its position as a significant player in the global security arena, capable of offering unique solutions to counter modern threats. Potential cooperation with the United States in this area could also be a powerful impetus for the Ukrainian economy and its integration into Western defense networks.

The Shadow of the Middle East: Geopolitical Changes and Challenges for Ukraine

Zelensky also openly warned about the risks that a war in the Middle East poses for Ukraine. “We don’t want to lose Americans; we’re talking about it openly,” the Ukrainian leader said. He acknowledged that the United States is now undoubtedly more focused on the Middle East, which could lead to delays in the delivery of certain weapons or a reduction in the volume of critical defense supplies for us.¹.

These fears are well-founded. Global attention and the resources of major powers, especially the United States, are limited. When a new flashpoint emerges, priorities can shift. The escalation of the conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran, as well as the potential escalation in the Persian Gulf region, require significant diplomatic, military, and financial efforts from Washington. This inevitably affects the volume and speed of aid flowing to Ukraine.

Ukraine, despite its lack of illusions about the Iranian regime and its open support for Russia, is not interested in expanding the conflicts. “And in general, this war in the Middle East does not help us here and now, although we have no illusions about the Iranian regime and we absolutely do not support it — and that is putting it mildly,” Zelensky said. This situation highlights the complexity of the modern multipolar world, where regional conflicts can have global consequences, reshaping alliances and changing the balance of power. Ukraine has found itself at the epicenter of these changes, forced to adapt to new challenges while continuing to fight for its existence.

Breaking the deadlock: diplomacy and the future of energy security

The Druzhba pipeline situation is a reflection of the larger geopolitical challenges facing Europe and the world. This is not just a conflict between Ukraine and Hungary, but also a test of the strength of European unity, the effectiveness of sanctions, and the collective West's ability to sustain a long-term strategy against aggressive regimes. The EU's decision to provide Ukraine with a €90 billion loan, approved by all 27 countries, must be implemented, Zelensky stressed. Hungary's blocking of this package is a direct violation of agreed commitments and an undermining of trust within the Union.

An intensive diplomatic effort is needed to break this impasse. European leaders must find a way to influence Hungary to abandon its destructive stance, despite Orbán’s domestic political considerations. This may include compromises on Hungary’s energy security, but without undermining the fundamental sanctions regime. It may be necessary to seek alternative oil supply routes or accelerate the diversification of sources for countries dependent on the Druzhba. Strengthening common energy networks and investing in renewable energy sources become even more relevant in this context.

At the same time, Ukraine’s proposal to jointly produce drones with the United States paves the way for a new model of partnership, where Kyiv acts not only as a recipient of aid, but as a strategic partner offering unique technologies and combat experience. This could become the basis for strengthening defense ties and forming a stronger alliance that can withstand the challenges of the future, reducing dependence on traditional energy resources and building an innovative security architecture. In the long term, this “Ukrainian oil” could prove to be much more valuable than any hydrocarbons, shaping the future not only of Ukraine, but also of global security.

Sources

1. BBC News: Zelensky accuses EU allies of 'blackmail' in oil pipeline row
2. International Energy Agency: The Role of Russian Pipelines in European Energy Security
3. Politico Europe: Hungary's Orban plays hardball over Ukraine aid and Russian oil
4. Council on Foreign Relations: Hungary's Contentious Relationship with the EU and Russia
5. Reuters: US loosens sanctions on Russian oil amid Middle East conflict
6. Defense News: Ukraine seeks $50B drone co-production deal with US