The knock-on effects of the conflict now whipping through the Middle East are awakening ghosts of crises past that shook the European Union.
Seven months into Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, launched in February 2022, the President of the European Commission stood at her podium in the European Parliament and accused Russia of manipulating the EU's energy market.
They prefer to flare the gas than to deliver it, proclaimed Ursula von der Leyen, as spiralling energy prices hit consumers across the continent. This market is not functioning anymore.
This is a war on our energy, a war on our economy, a war on our values and a war on our future, she declared, insisting that Europe was already pivoting away from Russian gas and toward more dependable partners such as the US and Norway.
But fast forward four years and you find deep energy-linked frustration in the heart of Europe once again.
We swore we'd learn. We promised things would change but here we are, a highly frustrated European diplomat told me. He asked for anonymity so as to be able to speak openly.
The focus of his teeth grinding was Europe's growing energy shock, triggered by the burning conflict in the Middle East and threatening to dominate a summit of European leaders in Brussels on Thursday.
Instead of concentrating on much-needed long-term plans - about how to make Europe more competitive in this increasingly volatile world, [European] prime ministers and presidents are now in a panic over [energy] prices, worried about angry voters and scrambling for short-term solutions.
Just like the crisis after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Different conflict. Same European divisions; same dilemmas over energy. We can't keep going round in these circles. Something's got to give.
You'd be hard-pressed to find a policy-maker in Europe who didn't agree with that last statement.
But can Europe - whether that be the whole continent or even just the 27 member states of the EU, with their diverse range of industries, energy requirements, and perspectives on renewables - really secure its own energy?
A lot has changed since 2022, when Europe decided to phase out its reliance on Russian gas, oil, and coal and become more energy independent, following Moscow's widespread assault on Ukraine.
Considering the EU's slow-moving reputation, the bloc moved swiftly once it decided to cut ties with Russian energy suppliers. Now only 2% of its oil imports come from Russia, flowing to Moscow-friendly Hungary and Slovakia alone. The EU plans an end to all Russian gas imports - including LNG by next year.
Quite a turnaround from before Russia's invasion of Ukraine when Russia supplied an estimated 55% of German natural gas imports for example, fueling its energy-hungry industries, especially chemicals and car manufacturing.
Europe is facing a growing energy shock, triggered by the conflict in the Middle East. As energy prices skyrocketed in 2022 in reaction to Russia's invasion and the energy standoff between Russia and Europe, many countries, like Italy and the UK, felt forced to help consumers and businesses pay their bills. Coming so soon after the economic shock of the Covid-19 pandemic, already cash-strapped governments really felt the squeeze.
Diversification became the buzzword in Brussels corridors. The EU decided it would never again allow itself to be so dependent on a single energy supplier.
But four years later, the dependency is still there, even though there is more than one supplier. Europe now heavily relies on Norway and the US for its energy. Simply taking Russia out of the equation hasn't solved the continent's issue with energy security.
President Trump's US has become one lynchpin in Europe's energy provisions, replacing Russia. Europe made a rapid shift from Russian pipeline gas to liquified natural gas (LNG) in 2022. This continent is now the world's largest LNG importer and the biggest single LNG supplier (to a tune of 57% of total LNG imports to the EU) is the US.
Energy-hungry Germany gets as much as 96% of its LNG from the US now. This dependence might explain why the German Chancellor Friedrich Merz remained silent when he sat next to Trump in the White House two weeks ago, as the US president berated and threatened to impose a trade embargo on Spain, because it had not allowed him to use military bases on its territory to launch attacks on Iran.
Since returning to the White House just over a year ago, Trump has used economic leverage and Europe's desperation for the US to help find a sustainable peace in Ukraine, to lean on the EU to commit to buying more expensive US LNG.
But it's actually not at all clear that either EU energy demands or US exports can support the scale envisioned in the deal, which is currently being debated in the European parliament.
And European reliance on LNG makes it extremely vulnerable to global price volatility in times of crisis, as we now see in the Gulf. The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world's most important shipping routes, and its most vital oil transit choke point. Around 20% of global oil supply passes through it. The Strait has been effectively blocked by Iran, except for a handful of vessels carrying Iranian oil to India and China, since Israel and the US attacked Tehran on 28 February.
Although Europe does not buy much oil or LNG from the Middle East, both commodities are global markets: any blockage of the Strait of Hormuz - now or in the future - can provoke price spikes affecting Europe, regardless of its limited physical imports.
The sudden scarcity of supply, plus uncertainty about how long the current crisis will last, saw oil prices spike about 8% percent and the European gas price about 20% on the morning of 2 March.
This choice between Russian energy and global market volatility is a very bad choice for Europe, Dan Marks, a specialist in energy security at the defence think tank, the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi), told me.
He says Europe will still manage to secure energy supplies in the current crisis, despite the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz because the wealthy continent can out-pay other regions in a crisis. But the problem is cost and competitiveness.
Long-term, he says, Europe needs to think about how to better build energy stockpiles and reduce or reorganize energy consumption to attain more control over sudden supply changes, like we're seeing now.
Marks also warns that continued European reliance on outside actors, like the US, for crucial energy supplies throws up wildcards often not considered.
What if Trump suddenly decided to keep energy supplies for US domestic consumption only, in an attempt to reduce petrol prices in the US or as a way to punish European countries for not immediately sending warships to the Strait of Hormuz to keep the waterway open, as he demanded this week?
Marks also raises the possibility of the US suffering terrible storms or fires in the future, destroying LNG terminals.
It's a layering of risk. There are no easy answers here.
Even the increased use of gas from democratic ally Norway comes with challenges. Norway is now the EU's largest gas supplier, essentially taking the place of Russia, providing a third of the bloc's annual gas consumption and half of the UK's.
Norway has also made clear that it is already operating close to maximum output. This presents a dilemma for the EU because increasing supply would require new exploration and investment.
Oslo suggests the EU is shooting itself in the foot with plans to put an end to oil and gas development in the European Arctic as part of a push to mitigate climate change. It points out that Russia has huge plans to expand liquefied natural gas production in the Russian Arctic.
The hunt for short-term answers will dominate Thursday's EU summit. There is deep concern among a number of leaders that spiraling energy and possible inflationary rises, coupled with possible refugee influxes to Europe on the back of the growing Middle East crisis, will alienate voters and play into the hands of populist nationalist politicians on the right and left of the European political spectrum.
It is crucial that we reduce the cost impact [from the Iran war], Ursula von der Leyen said this week in the run-up to the summit. We must deliver relief now… [We need] a comprehensive look at how to reduce people's energy bills.
Outside the bloc, the UK government has also been coming under pressure to help support households with rising energy costs. Last week, British Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves said that Treasury officials were reexamining preparatory work undertaken during the 2022 Russia-Ukraine energy shock.
EU governments have also asked the European Commission to accelerate the expansion of electrification across the bloc, while keeping costs under control. They are aware that China is already far ahead in this process.
It is true that as the world's biggest oil importer, it has been hit by the de facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz. But Beijing has long pursued an energy security strategy designed exactly for moments like this. At its core is electrification: shifting more of the economy away from direct oil and gas consumption. The aim is to reduce exposure to volatile oil and gas markets vulnerable to geopolitical disruption.
But unlike in China, in the EU, division is everywhere. Supporters and opponents of Green policies and alternative energy supplies are all using the Iran war to support their distinct point of view, for example. Belgium's Prime Minister, Bart De Wever shocked many this weekend, including members of his own coalition government, calling for the EU to normalize relations with Russia to regain access to cheap energy.
It is common sense, he asserted. In private, European leaders tell me I am right, but no one dares say it out loud.
Ultimately, the EU defers to the European Court of Justice to ensure the bloc's single market works properly. And the UK doesn't accept that.
So, will the Iran war prove a turning point in Europe achieving - or at least making significant strides - in attaining better energy security? Every time there's an oil and gas crisis, everyone thinks it's a turning point, says Marks.
Think back to the 1970s and 80s and US congress looking at reducing dependency and energy consumption. Now it's 2026 and lo and behold, there's another gas crisis and we're just as exposed as ever we were.
There is no denying that this is a significant moment. EU leaders meeting in Brussels are more than aware of that. The question is whether they will have the unity, or the courage, to change much.
