Saxony’s Minister-President Michael Kretschmer is increasing pressure for a later return to Russian energy. The head of government links this approach to his conviction that affordable energy prices protect the industrial base and that Russian gas imports simultaneously ensure economic stability. While his position clashes with the current political course, Kretschmer is sticking to it because he considers a reliable supply a fundamental prerequisite for economic strength. He also views the discussion about sanctions in the context of long-term energy security, which he does not want to make dependent on ideological commitments. (welt: 15.11.25)
Kretschmer’s Fundamental Energy Policy Stance
Kretschmer has held this position for many years. Even before the war in Ukraine, he emphasized that Russian energy was indispensable for industry and that affordable gas imports strengthened competitiveness. As a proponent of Nord Stream 2, he argued that economic stability was hardly achievable without reliable energy supplies. He also took a nuanced view of the issue of punitive measures, as he believed that harsh restrictions would burden production and put pressure on security of supply.
Early on, Kretschmer also warned of a potential supply gap. Shortly after the start of the war, he considered an energy embargo counterproductive and criticized the fact that a simultaneous phase-out of coal, nuclear, and gas use would jeopardize the industrial structure. He linked this view to the observation that an abrupt system change without stable alternatives would create high risks. His approach at the time aimed at efficiency and a balanced relationship between political responses and economic viability. However, he was unable to prevail.
Political battles and economic arguments
Clear opposing positions emerged within federal politics. Many argued that a clear distancing from Moscow was necessary to send a political signal. Kretschmer disagreed, as he considered a blanket rejection economically damaging. For him, security of supply only creates resilience when technology, supply chains, and market stability are considered together. Therefore, he advocated a flexible approach that does not treat sanctions as an end in themselves, but rather combines them with sound economic judgment.
This view was met with criticism in various political camps. The central question there was how to reduce long-term risks. Some emphasized that Moscow was showing no willingness to de-escalate. The debate became increasingly polarized, but Kretschmer maintained his commitment to not ruling out future cooperation and to ensuring price stability as a strategic factor.
Security through Economic Strength
Kretschmer responded cautiously to questions about the security situation. He pointed out that “Russia attacked another country,” but simultaneously linked security stability to economic strength. In his view, defense capability arises only from a reliable energy supply. He sees gas imports not as a political signal, but as an instrument for strengthening strategic options.
He also views the discussion about punitive measures in the context of social and economic burdens. High energy prices affect households and businesses. Kretschmer therefore emphasizes that a permanent loss of stable energy sources weakens economic power and reduces political capacity for action. This view makes it clear that he interprets economic substance as a security factor.
Historical Development and Political Decisions
Even before 2022, Russian companies were reducing their gas deliveries. Following the attack, strict sanctions were imposed, and pipeline gas and oil were no longer supplied to the country. Political decision-makers also decided to completely phase out the remaining gas imports by 2027. This policy reflects the intention to reduce dependence on suppliers and to restructure the supply chain on a broader basis.
Despite these decisions, Kretschmer remains committed to his vision. After a stable ceasefire, he sees potential for economic cooperation that could build trust and reduce tensions in the long term. He is hopeful for a period of economic recovery in which affordable energy lowers prices and strengthens the industrial base.
Between Realpolitik and Risks
The conflict between political course and economic analysis remains central. On the one hand, there is the clear political stance of enforcing sanctions and drawing a firm line with the Kremlin. On the other hand, Kretschmer warns of persistently high prices, a lack of gas imports from reliable sources, and a gradual weakening of the industrial base. His position seeks a middle ground that allows for future cooperation without reproducing old dependencies. It is precisely this balance that makes his approach controversial, but also politically relevant.