Belgium Braces for Standoff with Engie Over Nuclear Takeover

Belgium is heading toward a historic confrontation with French energy giant Engie as the government of Prime Minister Bart De Wever pushes forward with plans to nationalize the country’s entire nuclear fleet — a dramatic reversal of two decades of phase-out policy that could reshape the nation’s energy future.

The standoff, described as a “bras de fer” by the Belgian daily La Libre Belgique, centers on negotiations over the takeover of seven nuclear reactors, their associated personnel, subsidiaries, and liabilities. The outcome will have profound implications for Belgium’s energy independence, electricity costs, and industrial competitiveness.

A Historic Reversal

Belgium’s nuclear trajectory has undergone a remarkable transformation. A 2003 law mandated the complete shutdown of all seven reactors — Doel 1-4 near Antwerp and Tihange 1-3 near Liège — by the end of 2025. Parliament formally repealed that law in May 2025, and the centre-right coalition that took office under De Wever in January 2025 has made nuclear expansion a cornerstone of its energy agenda.

The previous De Croo administration had already secured a last-minute 10-year extension for the two newest reactors, Doel 4 and Tihange 3, finalized in March 2025. That deal created a 50/50 joint venture with Engie and transferred nuclear waste liabilities to the state in exchange for a €15 billion lump-sum payment from the French group.

But the De Wever government went far further. On April 30, 2026, the Belgian state and Engie signed a Letter of Intent (LOI) setting the framework for exclusive negotiations for the state to acquire all of Engie’s and Electrabel’s nuclear activities in Belgium. The scope covers all seven reactors, personnel, subsidiaries, and all associated assets and liabilities — including decommissioning and dismantling obligations.

The Negotiating Position

Engie CEO Catherine MacGregor has made clear that the group is eager to exit Belgian nuclear power. In an interview with L’Echo, she expressed desire for a “complete transfer, of assets as well as obligations, under financially neutral conditions” for the company. For Engie, nuclear no longer fits a corporate strategy that has pivoted toward renewables, battery storage, and regulated infrastructure.

Energy Minister Mathieu Bihet, the point person on negotiations, has framed the takeover as essential for Belgium’s long-term energy future. “By doing so, the Belgian Government is taking responsibility for Belgium’s long-term energy future, with the objective of building a financially and economically viable activity that supports security of supply, climate objectives, industrial resilience and socio-economic prosperity,” Bihet said in a press release.

Prime Minister De Wever has been characteristically blunt, calling the original phase-out “the stupidity of the century” and framing the nuclear takeover as a matter of national sovereignty.

Expert Reactions

The nationalization plan has drawn sharply divided reactions. Damien Ernst, a prominent energy professor at the University of Liège, strongly supports the move. “Yes, it was necessary to nationalize nuclear power,” Ernst told 21news.be. “Nuclear is fundamentally a state energy because the time constants of a nuclear project are over a century: 15 years of development for a reactor, 80 years of operation, and 15 years for dismantling. We have wasted too much time in recent years trying to work with a private partner.”

Aimen Horch, president of the Green Party (Ecolo/Groen), offered a starkly different view, calling the plan “an irresponsible waste of billions” spent on “dilapidated nuclear reactors.” The far-right Vlaams Belang, meanwhile, welcomed the move as giving “finally a perspective” on the nuclear future, though it noted the lack of clarity on the price tag.

The Financial Stakes

No financial details of the proposed transaction have been released publicly. The LOI stipulates that the deal “should not unduly affect, neither adversely nor positively, the overall financial position of Engie and Electrabel.” But the costs could be enormous.

New nuclear construction remains extraordinarily expensive: a single large 1.6 GW reactor costs an estimated €8-11 billion, and two new plants totaling 4 GW could run €25-35 billion. Small modular reactors (SMRs) are not expected to be commercially available in Belgium until approximately 2040, at an estimated €3-5 billion each.

A detailed analysis by La Libre Belgique noted that the most sensitive point is whether decommissioning and waste management liabilities are transferred under favorable conditions. If not, the burden on public finances — and ultimately on Belgian taxpayers — could become very heavy.

What Happens Next

The government and Engie aim to finalize heads of terms by October 1, 2026. The LOI is non-binding, and any final transaction requires regulatory approval, including from the Federal Agency for Nuclear Control (FANC).

In the meantime, all ongoing decommissioning and dismantling work at shut-down nuclear plants has been suspended to preserve options for the Belgian state. This includes Tihange 1, which was closed in September 2025, and other recently shuttered reactors.

Looking further ahead, the government’s programme calls for maintaining at least 4 GW of nuclear capacity long-term, exploring further life extensions potentially to 2045, restarting closed reactors where feasible, and developing new capacity including SMRs. A Tractebel report has identified two locations — the existing Doel site and Chertal in Liège province — as most suitable for new large reactors.

François Mathieu, the La Libre Belgique editorialist who framed the standoff, offered a cautionary note: “Wanting to regain control does not absolve one from knowing how to negotiate.” The coming months will determine whether Belgium’s gamble on nuclear sovereignty pays off — or becomes a costly lesson in the limits of state power in energy markets.