the old continent, from Qatar, the U.S., Israel, and so on.  But the politically best and probably cheapest source will be shale gas. As during the old Cold War, the struggle is taking place country by country.  I pointed out that the new map of the two blocks is not identical to that of the old Cold War.  At nominally NATO country like Bulgaria sided with Russia and the Czech Republic may follow suit.  A Western country like France is also in that camp, at least for now.  By contrast, Poland is firmly in the energy independence camp as is Ukraine, which is neither a member of NATO, nor of the European Union. Another similarity is in methodology: The Russian/Gazprom methods for stirring and financing local environmentalist opposition to shale gas exploitation resemble their method for encouraging and supporting the anti-nuclear movements during the 1980ies.  They build broad coalitions that include members that are not directed from Moscow and finance the movements indirectly. 2. US energy giant Exxon halted its search for shale gas in Poland last June, with the spokesperson saying that there had been "no demonstrated sustained commercial hydrocarbon flow rates" and that the company had completed its exploration work in Poland. Thus, it seems that having shale gas deposit does not automatically equate with commercial profitability. If we add to this the genuine public concerns over the impact of hydraulic fracturing, the sensitivity of the European electorate to the "green argument", and the fact that in the