According to a Reuters report dated 8 October 2026, senior US and Russian officials, including US Special Envoy Jared Kushner and Kirill Dmitriev, a close adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin, have discussed the possibility of involving a US investor in the Nord Stream pipelines, which transported natural gas to Germany before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The report noted that although the extent to which Nord Stream was addressed in recent contacts remains unclear, the issue continues to be on the agenda. Kushner views commercial cooperation as an important element in achieving peace. A potential agreement could enable US investors to profit from energy flows to Europe following the war.[i]
However, the involvement of a US investor in the pipelines alone may not be sufficient to resume natural gas deliveries. The European Union’s (EU) energy policies, sanctions targeting Nord Stream, and Russia’s role in natural gas supplies will also determine how the process may unfold. These conditions raise the question of what a potential change in ownership would mean for Europe’s energy security.
Nord Stream 1, which connects Russia to Germany via the Baltic Sea, became operational in 2011 and transported significant volumes of natural gas to Europe. Nord Stream 2, built along the same route to increase transportation capacity, was completed in September 2021,[ii] but never became operational, as Germany suspended the certification process in February 2022 following the outbreak of the war in Ukraine. The explosions affecting the pipelines in September 2022 subsequently led to substantial methane leaks, raising serious environmental concerns.[iii]
While no gas is currently being transported through the Nord Stream pipelines, Europe’s natural gas supply structure has changed significantly compared with the period when Nord Stream 1 was operational. According to the European Commission, Russia’s use of Europe’s dependence on Russian gas as a means of political pressure has highlighted the importance of diversifying supply sources. Russia’s share of the EU’s total natural gas imports fell from 45% in 2021 to 12% in 2025, while Norway accounted for 31%, the United States for 26%, and Azerbaijan for 4% in the same year. [iv]
Under these circumstances, it remains unclear to what extent European countries would be willing to return to Russian gas, even if a US investor became involved in Nord Stream. The German government, for its part, does not want Nord Stream to resume operations and has stated that government approval would be required for such a move. Poland and the Baltic states also oppose re-establishing energy ties with Russia.[v] These positions indicate that a potential investment agreement alone would not be sufficient to resume natural gas deliveries to Europe.
In addition to Europe’s position, the physical condition of the pipelines must also be assessed. The explosions in September 2022 damaged three of the four pipelines, leaving only one pipeline belonging to Nord Stream 2 intact.[vi] Therefore, in the event of a potential restart, it would be necessary to clarify which pipeline could be used, what repairs the damaged sections would require, and how safety assessments would be conducted. Addressing the environmental concerns arising from methane leaks also remains an important part of this process. Consequently, even if an investment agreement were reached, the physical conditions required to resume the use of the pipelines might need to be assessed separately.
In addition, the terms under which a US investor would become involved in the project raise questions of ownership and control. Gazprom owns 51% of the company operating Nord Stream 1, while the remaining 49% is held by two German, one Dutch, and one French energy company. Gazprom is the sole shareholder of the company operating Nord Stream 2.[vii] Therefore, these differing ownership structures could give rise to conflicts of interest and ownership-related disputes between existing shareholders and potential investors over which company’s shares would be transferred and in what proportion, the level of control the investor would exercise over the pipelines, and its role in decision-making processes.
Although it remains uncertain whether Europe would return to Russian gas, a potential US investment in Nord Stream could have both economic and geopolitical rationales. First, acquiring a stake in the project could generate profits for a US investor if Russian gas deliveries to Europe were to resume. However, the return of Russian gas could reduce demand for US liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. Therefore, while the investment might benefit a particular investor, it might not benefit the US natural gas sector to the same extent. Second, if an increase in Russian gas deliveries to Europe cannot be prevented following the war, US control over Nord Stream could provide Washington with a geopolitical advantage.[viii]
However, a potential US investor also faces legal obstacles, as US sanctions targeting Nord Stream 2 remain in place.[ix] The EU, meanwhile, prohibits EU operators from engaging in transactions related to the completion, operation, maintenance, or use of the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 pipelines.[x] Therefore, a US investor acquiring a stake in Nord Stream would not automatically gain control over the pipelines, nor would such an investment automatically remove US sanctions. It also remains uncertain whether such a partnership would alter Washington’s geopolitical approach to the project. The investor’s degree of influence over decision-making would depend on the terms of a potential agreement, while the progress of the investment would depend on whether the necessary authorisations were obtained from the US side.
Even if Russia and the United States reach an agreement on these issues, the resumption of pipeline operations would depend on overcoming the EU’s existing restrictions and obtaining Germany’s approval. While the German government opposes reopening the pipelines, it remains unclear to what extent Washington would support the resumption of gas deliveries.
In conclusion, depending on the terms of a potential agreement, the involvement of a US investor in Nord Stream could generate commercial returns for the investor, grant it a say in decision-making processes, and reshape the project’s ownership structure and commercial prospects. However, while investors remain interested in post-war opportunities, governments must take sanctions, political conditions, and energy security into account. Therefore, the future of Nord Stream will depend not only on reaching an agreement on ownership and control, but also on meeting the legal and political requirements in Europe and addressing energy security concerns related to Russian gas.
[i] John O’Donnell, Gram Slattery ve David Gauthier-Villars, “US, Russia explore gas sale to Europe amid Ukraine war, say sources”, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-russia-explore-gas-sale-europe-amid-ukraine-war-say-sources-2026-10-08/, (Date of Access: 11.10.2026).
[ii] Vladimir Soldatkin, “Russia completes Nord Stream 2 construction, gas flows yet to start”, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/russias-gazprom-says-it-has-completed-nord-stream-2-construction-2021-09-10/, (Date of Access: 11.10.2026).
[iii] Tine Deines, “Nord Stream”, EBSCO, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/social-sciences-and-humanities/nord-stream/, (Date of Access: 11.10.2026).
[iv] Directorate-General for Energy, “In focus: EU energy security explained”, European Commision, https://energy.ec.europa.eu/news/focus-eu-energy-security-explained-2026-04-20_en, (Date of Access: 11.10.2026).
[v] O’Donnell, Slattery ve Gauthier-Villars, a.g.m.
[vi] Nina Chestney ve Christoph Steitz, “Explainer: Gas pipeline Nord Stream’s long way back to Europe”, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/gas-pipeline-nord-streams-long-way-back-europe-2025-03-07/, (Date of Access: 11.10.2026).
[vii] Lasse Boehm, “Russia’s war on Ukraine: Implications for EU energy supply”, Epthinktank, https://epthinktank.eu/2022/03/01/russias-war-on-ukraine-implications-for-eu-energy-supply/, (Date of Access: 11.10.2026).
[viii] Sergey Vakulenko, “Could the U.S. and Russia Strike a Deal to Restart Nord Stream 2?”, Carnegie Endowment, https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/politika/2025/04/russia-usa-europe-gas-trade, (Date of Access: 11.10.2026).
[ix] Ibid.
[x] “Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 Transaction Ban”, European Commission, https://finance.ec.europa.eu/document/download/1556440f-0c75-4177-bdb3-fe1f1620b4e2_en?filename=faqs-sanctions-russia-nord-stream_en.pdf, (Date of Access: 11.10.2026).
