English : Geopolitical risk has emerged as one of the defining pressures on energy systems in the 2020s, yet its relationship with long-run energy transition performance remains contested. This paper analyzes how geopolitical risk shapes energy transition outcomes, and what structural factors determine transition progress alongside it. Drawing on a mixed-methods design combining qualitative case study analysis with quantitative panel econometric modeling, the study applies four regression models -estimated using Pooled OLS, Fixed Effects, and Random Effects estimators -to two outcome variables: the World Economic Forum’s Energy Transition Index and Eurostat’s Renewable Energy Share. The Caldara-Iacoviello Geopolitical Risk Index serves as the main predictor, complemented by GDP per capita, R&D expenditure, regulatory quality, and CO₂ emissions per capita as structural controls. Two case studies (i) the Russia-Ukraine war and (ii) the escalating Middle East conflict, including the 2026 US-Israel attack against Iran, illustrate the real-world mechanisms through which geopolitical shocks affect European energy markets and policy. The findings reveal that geopolitical risk carries a meaningful signal in simple models, but its effect is channeled through and conditional on a country’s structural characteristics – particularly its wealth and innovation capacity. Once these are controlled for, the independent effect of geopolitical risk becomes statistically insignificant, while R&D expenditure, GDP per capita, and CO₂ emissions per capita emerge as the most robust and consistent drivers of transition performance. These results suggest that while geopolitical shocks can catalyse political will, sustained transition progress depends on the structural foundations that allow countries to act on that will, with important implications for EU-level policy design.