Debunking von der Leyen’s criticism of “Europe dropping nuclear energy”

At the recent Paris nuclear energy summit on 10 March, a striking and somewhat weird moment occurred that has sparked debate across Europe. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, a prominent advocate for a sustainable and secure energy future, directly blamed “Europe” for abandoning nuclear energy – a move she now considers a strategic mistake that has significantly compromised Europe’s energy resilience.

What makes this stance particularly noteworthy is that Europe’s problems are largely the result of Germany’s government to drop nuclear energy – and increase its reliance on Russian gas. Incidentally, von der Leyen was a minister in the German government at the time Berlin made its controversial decision to phase out nuclear power.

The clash between von der Leyen’s past role and her current critique also highlights the balancing act between her two terms as Commission chief, as she now steers policies dismantling priorities she championed during her past term.

The Paris summit brought together representatives from 40 countries, including the United States and China, to promote civilian nuclear energy as a clean alternative amid fossil fuel risks highlighted by the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran, while Russia stays away over its invasion of Ukraine.

Blaming Fukushima

Von der Leyen also criticised Germany’s nuclear policy, saying that Germany’s decision to shut down its nuclear plants after the Fukushima disaster in 2011 was a mistake, one that has left the country, and by extension Europe, more dependent on imported fossil fuels, especially natural gas and oil.

She argued that the phase-out has hindered Europe’s ability to meet its climate goals while also jeopardizing energy security amid geopolitical tensions, particularly in light of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent disruptions to energy supplies.

Flop-flop

The paradox lies in von der Leyen’s own political history. She served as Germany’s Minister of Defence from 2013 to 2019 and was part of Angela Merkel’s cabinet during the period when the decision was made to shutter nuclear plants. At that time, the German government prioritized safety concerns following the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, which led to widespread public opposition to nuclear power. Merkel’s government committed to closing all nuclear reactors by 2022, emphasizing the transition toward renewables and safety. Many in Germany and across Europe supported this move, viewing nuclear energy as risky and outdated.

In her current role as the EU’s top official, von der Leyen has obviously shifted her stance. She now argues that abandoning nuclear power was a strategic error, one that Europe cannot afford as it faces mounting energy insecurity, rising costs, and urgent climate commitments. Her comments reveal an evolving perspective, one that recognizes nuclear energy as a vital component of a diversified, low-carbon energy mix capable of providing stable, reliable power. Her critique underscores the recognition that the decision made in Germany, while politically popular at the time, has had far-reaching consequences that Europe is only now beginning to grapple with.

The consequences of Germany’s nuclear phase-out

Germany’s decision to shut down its nuclear reactors was driven by safety concerns. The government’s policy was to decommission all nuclear plants by 2022, with a transition toward renewable energy sources like wind and solar, but also by using gas as base load, to balance the energy mix. Yet, the decision’s impact has become increasingly clear in recent years.

Today, nuclear energy’s share of Europe’s electricity generation has plummeted from about one-third in 1990 to roughly 15%. Germany’s nuclear plants, which once contributed a significant portion of the country’s low-carbon electricity, are now offline, leaving a gap that has been difficult to fill entirely with renewables alone. The reliance on fossil fuels, particularly natural gas, has surged, especially since the 2014 annexation of Crimea and the ensuing conflict in Ukraine. As Europe’s dependence on Russian gas grew, so too did the vulnerabilities of its energy infrastructure.

Recent energy crises, marked by skyrocketing prices and supply shortages, has underscored that renewables, while vital, are not yet sufficient on their own to provide a stable energy supply. The intermittency of wind and solar means that backup sources, ideally low-carbon and reliable, are essential. Nuclear power, with its ability to deliver continuous, stable electricity, is increasingly being recognized as an important part of the solution. Speaking about energy crises, the current one is possibly the most difficult to manage – and to predict.

Sources: Reuters, Le Monde, AFP

Caption: (L-R) French President Emmanuel Macron, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Rafael Grossi attend the IAEA Nuclear Energy Summit in Paris, France, 10 March 2026. EPA/ABDUL SABOOR / POOL MAXPPP OUT