Shaping the Union’s Response to Gas Supply Crises: Political Authority, Institutional Dynamics, and Legal Competence at Play

This paper traces the European Union’s response to energy crises, specifically major gas supply disruptions precipitated by tensions in Russo-Ukrainian relations. By dissecting the role of various actors, it demonstrates not only (legal) competence but also political authority and capacity determines both the role of each actor and the response of the Union at large. Looking at Germany and Poland, it tests the hypothesis that the ability of the Member State to influence the Union’s response corresponds to their success, or lack thereof, in having their position adopted by the European Council. That is, the highest political authority of the Union (van Middelaar, 2013). The paper studies four crises: disruption to gas supply in January 2006, extensive disruptions to supply in January 2009, disruptions and the prolonged risk thereof amid the deterioration of Russo-Ukrainian state relations in late 2013, and the energy crisis amid Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Broadly, a positive trajectory is evident towards deepening integration. In the interim, the Lisbon Treaty marked a key legal change, with its legal bases for general energy policy and emergency interventions, both referring also to solidarity (Arts. 194, 122 TFEU). While this trajectory is analysable through the unitary principle and legal integration, such analysis neglects to consider the roles of different actors, wherein Member States may also exert influence, and risks an overemphasis on formal legal competence as determinative of the Union’s role. Transverse integration (Dyson and Marcussen, 2010) encourages a more practical analysis that looks beyond formal legal positions or boundaries, to how other actors or factors can influence integration on a changeable basis. The present paper does so, by tracing the role of various actors in the four crisis responses. Its contribution is twofold: first, it demonstrates how political authority influences the role played by each and by the Union at large. Second, it anticipates that the Member States’ ability to influence that response corresponds to their success, or lack thereof, in having their preference adopted by the European Council.