The Experts Club think tank has analyzed European countries’ responses to the fuel crisis. European countries’ responses to the 2026 fuel crisis have so far been mixed. Some governments are directly intervening in the fuel market by restricting exports, introducing price caps, and releasing reserves. Others are limiting themselves to price monitoring and coordination at the EU and G7 levels, trying not to provoke a shortage with even tougher measures.
Serbia has chosen the most aggressive form of intervention. The authorities have temporarily suspended exports of oil, gasoline, and diesel until March 19, explaining that this is to protect the domestic market from shortages and price spikes. Reuters notes that Serbia had already been controlling fuel prices since February 2022, meaning that the current decision is a continuation of a more interventionist regulatory model.
Hungary has opted for a mixed scenario. On the one hand, Budapest has introduced a price cap on gasoline and diesel for cars registered in Hungary. On the other hand, the government decided to use state reserves, and the Minister of Economy, according to Hungarian media reports, also announced a reduction in excise duties and a ban on the export of some petroleum products. This is a typical example of a combined anti-crisis scheme, where the authorities simultaneously try to keep retail prices down and maintain the physical availability of fuel on the market.
Croatia has chosen a softer approach—limiting maximum retail prices for a two-week period. The government has set a maximum price of EUR1.50 per liter for Eurosuper, EUR1.55 for diesel, and EUR0.89 for “blue diesel,” and has also limited prices for liquefied gas. Zagreb has stated outright that without this measure, diesel would cost EUR 1.72 per liter and gasoline EUR 1.55. This means that Croatia is trying not to isolate the market, but to soften the final effect on households and businesses.
Slovakia and, to some extent, the Czech Republic have focused not on retail regulation but on supporting physical supplies. After the failure of supplies via Druzhba, Slovakia approved the use of 250,000 tons of oil from strategic reserves for refining, while Hungary and Slovakia began negotiations on the use of reserves back in February. The Czech Republic, in turn, announced its readiness to send small volumes of oil to Slovakia via the eastern Druzhba pipeline.
The UK has not yet introduced price caps or export bans. Treasury Secretary Rachel Reeves said the government was monitoring the situation closely and warned retailers that it would not allow “excessive profits” amid the oil shock. This approach is closer to a supervisory model: the authorities are signaling to the market that they are ready to tighten control over the behavior of sellers, but are not moving to direct price administration.
At the pan-European level, caution prevails for now. The G7 and the EU are discussing possible measures, including the use of strategic reserves, tax changes, and carbon price adjustments, but no decision on coordinated release of reserves has been made yet. France, as chair of the G7, says that “all options are on the table,” but acknowledges that there is no immediate shortage in Europe.
The European Commission, for its part, points to the structural vulnerability of Europe, which imports more than 90% of its oil and about 80% of its gas.
The main conclusion for Europe now is that countries are responding differently depending on their own vulnerability. Balkan and Central European countries, which are dependent on imports and specific supply routes, tend to act faster and more aggressively — through bans, price caps, and reserves. The large economies of Western Europe are still favoring coordination, market pressure, and preparing tools in case the situation worsens. But if the oil shock drags on, the current targeted measures could turn into a broader wave of European intervention in the fuel market.
In the “Medium and Long-Term Market” section of the UEB, trading continued for February and March 2026. In total, six companies formed positions for the sale or purchase of natural gas: Ukrnafta, VK Ukrnaftoburinnya, SP BNK, Kyivvodokanal, LTK Elektrum, and Energo Zbut Trans. A total of 15.71 million cubic meters of natural gas was sold in this section, which is 10 times more than in the previous week. Natural gas was sold with delivery to the gas transmission system and underground gas storage facilities in February and March. The prices of the positions sold ranged from UAH 18,833 to UAH 20,833 per thousand cubic meters, excluding VAT.
On the short-term natural gas market of the UEB, participants formed bids on the intraday market and the day-ahead market. A total of 29 deals were concluded with a total volume of 1,087 (+26.88%) thousand cubic meters.
Fundamental indicators in Europe remained weak amid mild weather and stable gas supplies. Traditionally, from late March to May, there is a decline in demand for heating and cooling, which often leads to a seasonal decline in prices. This makes spring one of the most attractive periods of the year for concluding forward contracts. Prices may be relatively attractive before the summer heat or unexpected supply disruptions lead to renewed volatility. On Thursday, gas markets were characterized by high volatility in both directions across the curve.
The overall fill rate of EU gas storage facilities fell to 30.19% by February 25. The market expects lower withdrawal rates for the remainder of the winter period.
Natural gas imports from Europe averaged around 25.2 million cubic meters per day and were virtually unchanged from the previous week.
The average level of reserves in underground storage facilities in Europe fell to 29.99% at the end of the gas day on February 27, according to data from Gas Infrastructure Europe. This is 16 percentage points lower than the average for the last five years.
The fill rate of underground storage facilities in Germany and France, Europe’s leading economies, is significantly lower than the European average — 20.6% and 21.4%, respectively, and 10.7% in the Netherlands.
The spot price of gas with “day ahead” delivery on the benchmark European TTF hub closed at $387 per 1,000 cubic meters on Friday.
Since the beginning of 2025, the transit of Russian gas through Ukraine has ceased. Europe is trying to compensate for the shortage of Gazprom’s pipeline gas supplies by importing liquefied natural gas. At the end of 2025, countries in the region purchased 109 million tons of LNG (142 billion cubic meters after regasification), which is 28% more than in 2024. In February 2026, liquefied gas imports reached 9 million tons, which is 9% higher than a year earlier.
Despite high demand, there remains a large unused capacity reserve—on February 27, terminals were operating at 64% of their throughput capacity.
Europe entered the current heating season with incomplete underground gas storage facilities. The need to replenish the reserves used up during this period will be an additional factor driving demand on the global market throughout the coming year.
Given not only technical but also realistic and economic constraints that will limit the European injection campaign in the summer of 2026, the question of how much Europe will be able to fill its UGS facilities by next winter and how risky the 2026/27 heating season will be will be relevant.
In the Medium and Long-Term Market section of the UEEX, trading in the resource continued in February and March 2026. A total of 9 companies formed positions for the sale or purchase of natural gas: Ukrnafta, MC Ukrnaftoburinnya, Ukrzaliznytsia, Tepla, JV BNK, etc. The section sold 1.58 mcm of natural gas. Natural gas was sold exclusively for delivery to the GTS in February and March. The prices of the sold items were in the range of UAH 19718-21150 per thousand cubic meters excluding VAT.
On the short-term natural gas market of the UEEX, participants placed bids on the intraday and day-ahead markets. In total, 36 deals were concluded with a total volume of 826 thousand cubic meters.
The gas markets started the week with a decline amid a sharp improvement in temperature forecasts for Europe and the UK by the end of February. In addition to the growth of wind power generation, this should limit the demand for gas in the electricity sector.
Geopolitical risk premiums were optimistic on Wednesday afternoon, when Iran temporarily closed part of the Strait of Hormuz, apparently in response to the increased US military presence in the Arabian Sea. Iranian news agencies reported that parts of the strait were closed for several hours (for the safety of navigation) to allow the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to conduct military exercises. As a result, gas prices strengthened across the curve in the last session on Thursday, with the Dutch M+1 contract rising by 16% in intraday trade, supported by renewed tensions between the US and Iran, which further increased geopolitical risk and contributed to the rapid conclusion of contracts. The price increase became gradually more muted further down the curve, and the impact largely disappeared starting with contracts for summer 2027. Possible delays in LNG deliveries, the development of trade agreements, and the expansion of the global economy should not be dismissed as factors that contribute to growth in the long run.
Warmer temperatures next week will support stock levels in EU gas storage facilities, which are currently 33% full, compared to the 5-year average of ~49%. The key countries in terms of storage capacity – Germany, France and the Netherlands – are also depleted at 23%, 23.6% and 14.3% respectively, with the Netherlands facing potentially complete depletion by the end of winter.
Future growth in U.S. LNG supplies continues to ease concerns. Golden Pass (US) is close to starting LNG production, having received 300 million cubic feet of gas on Wednesday, February 18; the market is pricing in the possibility of first shipments in early March. Importantly, this is one of the largest export terminals in the US, so every step towards commissioning has a significant impact on expectations of the LNG balance for Europe.
Imports of natural gas from the European direction averaged about 25.3 mcm per day and were unchanged from the previous week. Imports were present from all neighboring European countries. The main imports were from Poland. Exports from the customs warehouse amounted to about 1.3 mcm per day, in the direction of Moldova. Ukraine’s storage facilities contained 9.78 (-2.2%) bcm of natural gas. Withdrawals amounted to about 45 million cubic meters per day.
In 2025, Nova Post Europe doubled the number of branches in 16 European countries to 800, Nova Post Europe CEO Oleksandr Lysovets said in an interview with Forbes Ukraine.
“At some point, we realized that instead of chasing the number of countries, it was better to focus on deepening our presence in existing markets… We started by copying the Ukrainian model, but quickly realized that each market requires its own logic for entry and scaling,” he explained the change in growth strategy.
According to Lysovets, in 2025, the largest number of branches were opened in Poland (32), Moldova (25), Germany and Spain (24 each), and the total number of employees reached 1,670.
The CEO specified that most of the 800 service points are partner branches and PUDO (pick-up/drop-off) based on partner businesses.
“The company is actively shifting its focus towards partnerships: last year, 90% of new service points were partner ones. But in each country, we look at the existing infrastructure,” Lysovets noted, citing the example of Poland, where InPost operates with over 25,000 parcel terminals, so there is no point in building its own network there.
He also said that Moldova is the only country in Europe where the strategy involves building a full-fledged infrastructure of its own, replicating the model of Nova Poshta in Ukraine. In particular, in 2025, a full-fledged franchise was launched there, with 21 partner branches.
The CEO of Nova Post Europe emphasized that in 2025, the company tripled in size in Moldova. Currently, EUR 2 million is being invested in a new sorting hub, which will be five times larger than the previous one. In particular, this amount is planned to be used to expand the physical presence, which will include, among other things, the installation of 150 parcel terminals, the opening of 150 PUDOs, six own branches, and 60 partner branches.
“The goal is to provide maximum coverage and convenience for customers,” Lysovets emphasized in an interview.
According to him, at the end of the fourth quarter of 2025, Nova Post Europe became profitable in Poland, Moldova, the Czech Republic, and Latvia.
The company, which processed 13 million international shipments last year, plans to increase this volume by more than 30% in 2026 and maintain this pace until 2030. As the CEO noted, these plans will be supported by a new phase of European expansion with investments of over $5 million. In particular, there are plans to launch an automated line in the Czech Republic and a proprietary CSS in Germany.
“In Poland, we are investing $1.8 million in opening 300 partner mini-branches, which will allow us to quickly expand the network using our partners’ existing infrastructure for effective scaling,” Lisovets added.
According to him, the amount of investment in Spain will be about $0.64 million, which will be used to open 50 PUDOs and 86 partner mini-branches.
The CEO also noted that, on average, Ukrainians account for about 60% of Nova Post’s customers abroad, but in Moldova, they account for less than 1%.
In October 2025, company co-founder Volodymyr Poperechnyuk announced that the Nova group of companies, which includes the express delivery leader Nova Poshta and the financial service NovaPay (TM NovaPay), plans to grow fourfold in five years.
The CEO of Nova Post Europe, in turn, noted that fourfold growth is impossible only within the framework of traditional delivery, the existing customer base, or without updating the service package.
“It’s not just about growing existing volumes, but about expanding the market itself for the company through new products, services, and usage scenarios. We see huge room for scaling where we haven’t even begun to truly unleash our potential,” Lysovets emphasized.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, speaking on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference, said that “the door to dialogue in Ukraine is open, and all parties should strive to reach a comprehensive and lasting peace agreement and eliminate the root causes of the conflict,” and called on Europe to be more active in peace efforts, according to a correspondent for Interfax-Ukraine.
“The doors to dialogue have finally opened on the ‘Ukrainian crisis’ (Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine – IF-U). All interested parties should seize the opportunity to achieve a comprehensive, durable, and binding peace agreement, eliminate the root causes of the conflict, and ensure lasting peace and stability in Europe,” he said.
According to the Chinese foreign minister, Europe should not stand by and watch.
“Since the conflict broke out here in Europe, Europe has every right to participate in the negotiations at the appropriate time. Europe should not be on the menu, but at the negotiating table,” he said.
“Now we see that Europe has found the courage to negotiate with Russia. This is good, and we support it,” Wang Yi emphasized.
At the same time, in his opinion, dialogue should not be conducted for the sake of dialogue itself, and Europe should offer new ideas and new plans to resolve this issue.
” And in this process, we need to promote the creation of a more balanced, effective, and sustainable security architecture for Europe. Consequently, by doing so, we are addressing the root causes of the crisis and can prevent its recurrence. And to achieve sustainable and lasting peace, China, for its part, will fully support the peace process,” the foreign minister concluded.
He also clarified that China is not a party directly involved in the conflict, has no right to make a final decision, and is only facilitating peace talks.
Regarding relations between China and the EU, Wang Yi expressed his conviction that they should be partners, not systemic rivals or strategic competitors.
“But there are differences and disagreements between our two sides, for example, our social systems, our values, and our development models, but that is because we have different histories and cultures, and based on that, our peoples have different choices regarding the path of development. But that does not mean that we should become rivals or competitors,” the minister said.
He declared that it is more important for China and the EU to practice multilateralism, defend the authority of the UN, say “no” to unilateral practices, uphold free trade, and oppose bloc confrontation.
