The Trump peace pipelines framework: a renewed threat to Western Balkan decarbonisation

Most Western Balkan countries are known for their heavy coal use and slow decarbonisation, but the region has at least one advantage compared to its EU neighbours: low or no gas dependence.

In 2024, fossil gas still made up 20.6% of the EU’s gross available energy. But in the Western Balkans, most gas-dependent countries are Serbia (14.3%) and North Macedonia (11.6%). In Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), gas makes up less than 3% of energy, with Albania, Montenegro and Kosovo not connected to international gas infrastructure. This is a strength to capitalise on, not a disadvantage to be remedied.

The United States has for years lobbied southeast European governments to build new import infrastructure like the Greece to North Macedonia interconnector, LNG terminals in Montenegro and Albania and the southern gas interconnection between Croatia and BiH. And for a long time, EU policy encouraged them, promoting gasification even in the gas-free countries. 

But as the EU gradually moves away from promoting gas, US policy has doubled down on it. Fossil gas projects are no longer eligible for priority status under the Energy Community Treaty or for EU funding in the region, but overt US pressure on the Western Balkan governments to build new gas pipelines has ramped up during Trump’s second mandate.

At the Three Seas Initiative Summit in Dubrovnik in April, all eyes were on the inter-governmental agreement between BiH and Croatia on the southern gas interconnection, which hit the headlines due to the appointment of a Trump-linked company, AAFS, as project promoter. 

AAFS was only founded in 2025, its ownership structure is not public, it has no track record and is represented by lawyers who campaigned on Trump’s behalf to overturn the 2020 U.S. election results. A special law appointing AAFS was passed in record time by the Federation of BiH Parliament in April 2026, bypassing the mandatory tender and concession-granting procedures, and allowing AAFS to use public land without paying expropriation fees.   

At the Dubrovnik summit, the U.S. government also announced a vaguely-defined ‘Trump peace pipelines framework’, which aims to ‘advance strategic energy infrastructure projects across Central and Eastern Europe, expanding the region’s capacity to import U.S. LNG’. The U.S. has also initiated a series of agreements with Western Balkan governments, and the government’s May 2025 Report to Congress on United States Policy to Promote Regional Stability and Prosperity in the Western Balkans clearly prioritises gas infrastructure and sales. 

New import infrastructure could triple the countries’ consumption – or become stranded assets

The fact that Europe is in its second oil and gas crisis this decade seems to have escaped the region’s governments, who are actively planning gas pipelines, power plants and LNG terminals that could collectively triple their 2023 gas consumption. These would either entrap the countries in costly dependence on US LNG imports, or end up as stranded assets.

Albania relies on hydropower and solar for its electricity, as the two floating oil-fired units moored at Vlora since 2022 barely generate any power. The Trans Adriatic Pipeline passes through the country to Italy, but so far no exit point has been built on Albanian territory. Yet Albania plans to transition towards fossil fuels.

It is planning at least two gas power plants – at Roskovec and Vlora – an LNG terminal, and a distribution system in Korca. Works started earlier this year at Roskovec despite permitting irregularities and a lack of financing. And in April, Albania signed a 20-year framework agreement to buy US LNG – worth no less than USD 6 billion – and a memorandum to develop the Vlora plant.

Bosnia and Herzegovina mainly uses gas to heat Sarajevo, but in the last two years the Federation entity’s ambitions have grown. Its government is mainly concentrating on the southern gas interconnection, but has also revived plans for two more pipelines from Croatia, added 85 kilometres to the southern gas interconnection plans, and started planning three gas power plants.

The Republika Srpska entity has made no secret of its plans to keep using Russian gas and building a new pipeline from Serbia. But it has recently signed an agreement for a pipeline within Republika Srpska, from Šepak to Novi Grad, that would connect to the old existing import pipeline.

Kosovo is the only country in the region whose energy strategy rightly rules out building a gas pipeline. But even there, the government has left open the option of teaming up with a neighbouring country to build a gas power plant.

Montenegro’s national spatial plan, after massive controversy around plans for a U.S.-backed LNG terminal at Bar, does not include the terminal or associated power plant. But after its adoption, in September 2025, the Prime Minister signed a memorandum with Japan’s JERA for a feasibility study for an LNG terminal and power plants. A planned US-Montenegro agreement has already met with strong resistance from civil society and people living near the planned LNG terminal.

North Macedonia announced the start of works on the gas interconnector from Greece last year, although expropriation is not yet completed and several legal issues are outstanding. It also plans to build at least two more gas power plants, and in 2025 signed a memorandum with Turkiye’s Kazancı Holding to build unspecified gas plants and distribution grids. In April 2026, the government signed a memorandum with the U.S. for ‘improving the security’ of the gas supply, and in June, a grant agreement was signed with the World Bank to support the preparation of project documentation for the planned gas power plant at Bitola.  

Serbia’s difficulty in securing its gas supply has not put its government off steadily expanding the country’s gas network, and signing an agreement with Azerbaijan for a 500 megawatt gas power plant in Niš. It also plans a new plant in Novi Sad. The World Bank is also considering financing for a gas project that includes new pipelines within Serbia.

In addition to long-term infrastructure lock-in and the climate impacts of gas, these plans don’t make economic sense. None of them have up-to-date, public feasibility studies, and they would end up either as stranded assets or heavily subsidised by taxpayers. Permitting, expropriation and construction could easily take a decade and the infrastructure alone would cost billions, even before the costs of gas are included. Even if some of the planned projects do not go ahead, the region does not have money, human capacity or time to waste on such costly distractions.

Will the U.S. put its money where its mouth is?

Previous U.S. efforts to push gas in southeast Europe were limited by its lack of willingness to pay for infrastructure construction. However, with the EU halting such funding, it remains to be seen whether the U.S. will use domestic sources like the Development Finance Corporation, or multilateral banks where it has strong influence, to finance gas build-out. The recent announcements of potential World Bank financing for two gas projects do not bode well, and suggest that the latter may already be happening.

The way forward

The Western Balkan countries can still avoid high levels of gas dependence if we act now. Appropriately-sited solar and wind generation, supported by existing hydropower, strong grid connections and battery storage, is much more cost-effective for electricity generation, while heat pumps, geothermal, and ambient or leftover heat avoid import dependence for heating and cooling. Instead of falling into the decades-old trap of gas dependence, Western Balkan governments finally need to increase energy efficiency and focus on electrification of the heat and transport sectors.