Talks between senior US and Russian officials are raising the possibility of a new energy relationship between Washington and Moscow, including a potential role for US investors in the Nord Stream gas pipelines that once carried large volumes of Russian gas to Germany.
The discussions involve US Special Envoy Jared Kushner and Kirill Dmitriev, a close adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Five people familiar with the discussions told Reuters that bringing a US investor into the ownership structure of Nord Stream has been among the ideas considered as part of broader efforts to link economic cooperation with an eventual end to the war in Ukraine.
The prospect remains highly uncertain. The pipelines are under US and European sanctions, their physical infrastructure was damaged in explosions in 2022, and Germany has publicly ruled out a return to Russian gas under current conditions. Yet the fact that energy investment is being discussed alongside diplomacy illustrates how economic interests could become part of negotiations over Europe’s postwar security and energy architecture.
Energy as Part of the Peace Equation
Kushner, who has been involved in US efforts to broker a truce between Russia and Ukraine, has argued that economic incentives could help create a foundation for peace. The idea of restoring commercial ties would give Russia an economic stake in a postwar settlement while offering US companies opportunities to participate in future energy flows.
Stay ahead of the geopolitical week.
MD Briefing delivers expert analysis across five global fronts — the Indo-Pacific, energy, geoeconomics, European security, and the Middle East — every Monday morning. Free.
Kushner and Dmitriev have met in Moscow and New York in recent weeks. Although it is unclear whether Nord Stream was discussed during those meetings, the issue remains part of the broader conversation, according to people familiar with the matter.
A White House official said any potential agreements involving Russia would have to be negotiated with the US International Development Finance Corporation and the Treasury Department and would need to benefit US taxpayers and companies. The official also said there had been no recent discussions specifically about Nord Stream.
Dmitriev has separately been promoting the possibility of restoring Russian gas exports to Germany. Last month, he met representatives of the US Energy and Treasury departments to discuss possible US-Russia energy initiatives.
For Washington, the question is therefore not simply whether Russian gas could return to Europe. It is also whether US investment could turn an energy relationship that once depended heavily on Russian infrastructure into a commercially attractive arrangement involving American capital.
Germany Faces the Biggest Dilemma
Germany would be at the centre of any attempt to revive Nord Stream.
Before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Russian gas supplied more than half of Germany’s gas imports through pipelines including Nord Stream. Berlin subsequently moved to reduce its dependence on Russian energy, while the Nord Stream pipelines were ultimately taken out of operation after underwater explosions in September 2022.
Germany’s government has indicated that Russian gas remains sanctioned and that the country has developed alternative sources of supply. Its economy and energy ministry said any reopening would require government approval and was not currently desired.
That position reflects a broader transformation in German policy. Berlin has dramatically increased defence spending since Russia’s invasion and regards Moscow as a major security challenge. Restoring a major economic dependency on Russian energy could therefore clash with Germany’s wider strategy toward Russia.
The issue is also politically divisive inside Germany. The Alternative for Germany party has supported restoring Russian gas supplies, while other political forces argue that renewed energy dependence could strengthen Moscow.
German lawmaker Michael Kellner described the prospect of a US-Russian commercial arrangement over Nord Stream as a deal that could leave Europe bearing the strategic costs while American and Russian interests shared the financial benefits.
The disagreement highlights a central problem: an agreement between Washington and Moscow would not automatically translate into European acceptance.
Nord Stream Ownership Creates Another Obstacle
Even if political opposition could be overcome, ownership of the pipelines presents another challenge.
Gazprom, Russia’s state-controlled energy company, owns 51% of the company controlling the Nord Stream pipelines. German entities hold another 31%, while French and Dutch interests account for the remainder.
The German shareholders are seeking to retain their stakes, according to one person familiar with the matter, potentially allowing Germany to preserve some influence if Gazprom were to sell its position.
This could make any restructuring significantly more complicated than a straightforward Russian sale to an American investor.
There is also the legal question. Nord Stream is subject to US and European sanctions, meaning that restoring its operation would require major changes to the existing sanctions framework. US President Donald Trump could potentially modify or waive American sanctions, but domestic political opposition could make such a move more difficult if Democrats gain control of Congress.
European sanctions would create an additional hurdle beyond Washington’s authority.
Eastern Europe Remains Deeply Opposed
Any attempt to restore Russian gas flows would also face strong resistance from several European governments, particularly countries that view Russian energy dependence as a direct security risk.
Poland and the Baltic states have historically opposed Nord Stream because they argue that bypassing traditional transit routes increases Russia’s leverage over European energy supplies.
Polish political leaders are monitoring the discussions but remain opposed to reopening the pipeline, according to a person familiar with the government’s position.
The disagreement reflects two competing approaches to Europe’s energy security.
One approach sees cheaper Russian gas and renewed commercial ties as potential tools for economic recovery after the war. The other sees dependence on Russian energy as a strategic vulnerability that Europe spent years trying to eliminate.
That divide would make a new Nord Stream agreement politically difficult even if Moscow and Washington reached an understanding.
From Nord Stream to a Broader Russia-US Business Deal
The discussions between Kushner and Dmitriev reportedly extend beyond natural gas.
Two people familiar with the matter said they have also discussed the possible sale of Russian energy company Lukoil’s European and other international assets, including refineries and petrol stations.
Under the proposal, a consortium involving the US Development Finance Corporation and investors from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates could acquire the assets, while US authorities would lift sanctions.
A White House official said Kushner and US envoy Steve Witkoff had worked with the DFC on a structure involving a substantial upfront payment and a US interest in future profits.
If pursued, such arrangements would demonstrate a broader strategy in which sanctions relief and investment are linked to commercial opportunities. Rather than treating economic engagement as something that follows a peace settlement, Washington could use business incentives as part of the process of reaching one.
That approach, however, also raises questions over how economic normalization would affect Europe’s security calculations.
A Postwar Energy Order Is Still Uncertain
The discussions over Nord Stream do not mean that Russian gas is about to return to Germany.
Significant legal, political and infrastructure obstacles remain. European sanctions would have to change, Germany would have to reconsider its position, ownership disputes would need to be resolved and the damaged pipeline infrastructure would have to be assessed and potentially restored.
There is also a larger geopolitical question. European governments have spent several years reshaping their energy systems precisely to reduce dependence on Russian supplies. A return to the pre-2022 model would represent a major reversal.
For Russia, however, restoring access to the European energy market would provide more than export revenue. It could re-establish one of Moscow’s most important economic relationships with Europe.
For the United States, participation by American investors could create a different model in which Russian energy reaches European markets while US companies gain a direct commercial stake.
Whether such a model could satisfy European governments remains unclear.
The Nord Stream discussion therefore illustrates the difficult intersection of diplomacy, energy security and economic interests surrounding any future settlement of the Ukraine war. Even if Washington and Moscow find areas where commercial interests overlap, rebuilding Europe’s energy relationship with Russia would require decisions far beyond the negotiating table between the two countries.
With information from Reuters.
