U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham has made a bold statement that could shift Europe’s energy balance. In a post on X, the lawmaker warned Hungary and Slovakia that continuing to buy Russian oil would not go unpunished. His words rang like an alarm bell at a moment when nearly the entire European Union has already wound down imports of Russian energy, yet a few countries still cling to old pipelines.
Lindsey Graham, a long-time advocate of a hard line against Moscow, declared that “Trump is right to demand that Europe stop buying Russian oil.” He noted that today only Hungary and Slovakia continue purchases through the Druzhba pipeline, adding: “If they don’t take the initiative and help us put an end to this bloody carnage, consequences must and will follow.” His remarks align with Donald Trump’s administration, which has been actively pushing the idea of an energy blockade against Russia. Washington sees restrictions on imports as one of the key ways to cut off financial flows to Moscow, which, in its view, fuel the war against Ukraine.
Over the past two years, Europe has sharply reduced its dependence on Russian oil and gas: quotas were introduced in some countries, alternative suppliers were found, and renewable energy projects expanded. But Hungary and Slovakia face a tougher situation—their infrastructure is historically tied to Soviet-era pipelines, while alternative routes demand massive investment. This vulnerability leaves their political position deeply conflicted. On one hand, both are members of the EU and NATO, sharing collective obligations. On the other, their energy security is still tied directly to Russian crude. It is precisely at this fault line that Graham’s threat landed.
What stands out is the senator’s refusal to spell out exactly what measures might be taken. His words can be interpreted broadly—from sanctions against companies and banks handling Russian oil transactions, to diplomatic pressure or a revision of trade conditions. This vagueness leaves room for speculation, amplifying the psychological impact of his statement. Some analysts link Graham’s remarks to draft bills in Congress that would impose secondary sanctions on countries continuing to buy Russian oil. If passed, these could bring real economic losses to Hungary and Slovakia unless they change course.
The position of these two countries resembles the last islands in a sea of political storms. Almost all of Europe has already shifted toward energy independence from Moscow, and Hungary and Slovakia remain the “bottleneck” through which Russian oil still reaches the EU. For Budapest and Bratislava, cutting off Russian supplies could mean sharp price hikes, the costly overhaul of refineries, and a search for new long-term partners. Yet with pressure from allies mounting, delay is becoming less and less feasible.
If the U.S. moves from words to action, one can expect: the expansion of secondary sanctions against companies and banks tied to Russian oil deals; pressure within the EU, including threats to freeze European funds or political initiatives; accelerated infrastructure upgrades to connect Hungary and Slovakia to alternative supply routes; and political isolation within the bloc if they continue to resist the common course.
Lindsey Graham’s statement was not just an emotional outburst but part of a calculated strategy: Washington wants to close the last loopholes through which Russia still receives oil revenues from Europe. For Hungary and Slovakia, this is not only a question of foreign policy but also a test of their willingness to pay the price for security. Their choice will show whether they are ready to sacrifice short-term interests for long-term stability—or risk standing apart, facing mounting pressure and the looming threat of sanctions.
