The Backdoor That Keeps Russian Oil Flowing into Europe
bloombergquint.com
bloombergquint.com
It would have been smart to invest in energy diversity before the war started. Too late for that now.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php...
So 74% of consumption is not households. What am I missing?
Translated: It doesn't matter if people freeze, to death or otherwise.
I guess you also don't mind food shortages, as long as they don't affect you personally.
Isn't it interesting how you admit that the lives of so many depend on natural resources they don't control?
But if burnt corpses start piling up in Brussels, I'll come back to this thread and admit to being wrong.
True, industrial users can't just start using something else instead of gas in their processes. And if they go out of business, that's production gone, supply chains gone, workplaces gone. Certainly not a good thing, but please – it's not elderly frozen to death by this Christmas.
My point being, it's not about individual heaters and house heating. That would be a solvable problem – an expense. However, making that expense is a different thing, since now you'd gotta convince your citizens that they must – not should, but must pay up in taxes for that solution to be enacted. And why? Because some other country got invaded and that pro-o-o-obably might cause something bad in the future for your country.
The other side of the coin being that some things are harder to solve: you can't import on a short notice a replacement for, say, chemical plants that need gas and everything that's connected to them.
Does this matter? The embargoes are putting up a heavy strain on the world's logistic supply chains. The price of everything that depends on logistics is going up, including things in theory not directly related to not-embargoed electric heaters.
Does the old man just not own enough clothes? If so, why would gas prices be the problem instead of his lack of clothes?
I'm not aware of EU wide polling around this theme, but look at page 7 of the latest Infratest-Dimap survey[0] for example. A majority of Germans want an oil boycott, even if that is forecast to bring a -3% negative effect on German GDP. The only population subgroup with a clear majority against a boycott are AfD supporters.
[0] https://www.infratest-dimap.de/fileadmin/user_upload/DT2204_...
Sadly most people I have suggested this to think I'm nuts. And Ireland isn't that cold.
> Sadly most people I have suggested this to think I'm nuts.
there's probably thousands of times more gas used to produce all the commodities you buy and use in your everyday life. so this strategy of individualist 'sacrifice' (vs. systemic change) is merely a fart in the wind.
It makes you feel better for having a moral high ground, sure. Objectively it's not that big of a change, while systemic social changes take time. For the most people, it feels like not in their lifetime.
I agree my individual action is not very relevant but I think a widespread adoption of such measures would have an impact on political thinking in Europe. Obviously that hasn't happened.
no it isn't.
does Germany produce the smartphones its citizens use? does it mine the rare earth minerals inside those phones? to pretend that we originate from inside of imaginary lines on a map and therefore should only be concerned with national issues is false. our world is one whole and we are all children of the same tribe.
Global North capitalists hoard science, send commoditized 'intellectual property' recipes for black boxed hardware to the Global South, collect rents on those recipes while not physically producing anything themselves... all while plundering the resources and labor/life-energy of people in the Global South.
this is a dirty rentierist black-box technological hellworld through and through. causing ecological and social damage and externalizing responsibility/costs is the name of the game here.
adding this as a source these highlights from a recent paper (especially the last point is relevant to this convo):
• Rich countries rely on a large net appropriation of resources from the global South.
• Drain from the South is worth over $10 trillion per year, in Northern prices.
• The South’s losses outstrip their aid receipts by a factor of 30.
• Unequal exchange is a major driver of underdevelopment and global inequality.
• The impact of excess resource consumption in the North is offshored to the South.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095937802...
The problem we have right now is: we literally don’t know what the consequences of going cold turkey would be. It’s very likely, that creature comfort would be _completely_ unaffected. The problem lies within the industry. And it’s unclear how elastic the demand there can even be. E.g. things like ceramic burners, it’s unclear whether you can reactivate them after you let them cool down or whether they’d burst. Same goes for nearly every intermediate stage in chemical processes and storages. It’s unclear if “pausing” production doesn’t also imply “rebuilding”. And depending on the elasticity of the demand (which will probably be surprisingly high, since these companies are _extremely_ well motivated to find solutions to a problem they hadn’t had before) it’s unclear how much gas we need (both in storage and by implication still buying from Russia).
We now have best-case scenarios talking about ~6% GDP loss max. But that assume practically no second order effects and is based on GDP numbers. Ie i wouldn’t be surprised, if that requires gas to go where there simply is no pipeline.
As I said in the beginning: The problem is we don’t know how things are interconnected. Yes by all means: if you feel comfortable with a lower room temperature then lower your temp. But these 1-2% things… we don’t have 30 of those. And they are extremely costly in terms of political capital
Seriously, what is it with far right groups and Russophilia ? One would think they'd be against the menacing nationalistic foreign power. Like the various quislings, it's funny how they square their nationalism with cooperation with another people's nationalism against their own's.
Or maybe it's simpler and it's just a matter of money. It's well documented Le Pen was saved by Russian loans, who knows if AfD aren't also on Russian payroll.
That being said: the problem is not necessarily gas-powered heating. The problem is an industry that is hugely dependant on gas, and - specific Ural-originated gas (yes, the factories can be modified to accept gas with a different chemical composition, but that takes time and money).
Absolutely not. American expansionism got us into the migrant crisis mess, but Russia invading Ukraine is 100% on Russia.
In Puttin's point of view, any new NATO member is yet another US territory to deploy weapons from.
Exactly this. NATO literally ignored Putin. We unfortunately found that the events a while ago were the straw that broke the camel's back. Putin is now angry, and ignoring what he thinks or wants turned out to be stupid.
> or wants.
I don't think not caring about the Ukraine situation is the right call either.
Did it really? NATO is now in a stronger position than ever.
No, Russian expansionism is.
NATO expansion is among the many (some mutually contradictory) excuses Russia has give for it's expansionism.
How could one overcome this in a short period of time without shutting down the whole economy? These aren't "comforts", they are necessities.
A sudden stop would have a bigger effect that just losing money.
The pandemic already showed that.
This can only be solved in the long run and not in the short term.
But I doubt that will happen because this wouldn't need questioning the principles of capitalism.
Totalitarianism and capitalism always worked well together.
The most totalitarian states were the most anti-capitalist.
Capitalism means tolerating the emergence of independent centers of economic power, which is a threat to totalitarian control. That is why the PRC has been arresting wealthy tech founder-CEOs in China.
Cheap labor is easier to get in totalitarian states, that's why China is the workbench of the world and that's why the FRG let produce in the GDR and even gave it credits so that the production could continue.
I think you're technically right, but what you're implying is not. States following all kinds of economic systems work well together. For example, Venezuela works well with Russia and China, and is a fully socialist state.
And while you are right about capitalist states benefiting from the cheap labor of totalitarian states, capitalist states benefit even more from the capital skilled work forces from other capitalist states.
I'm sure the CIA would be surprised to hear that.
Do you believe invading militaries should not be opposed?
Or do you see the Russian military as the good guy here?
If they are doing something bad, should they avoid punishment?
So, which categories can we apply? In the end, much like standard crime, there can be only one: Are they following the standards set by international law, or are they not? And that we cannot honestly answer as of now. Consider these basic questions:
1. Is the Russian military responsible for the decision to wage what we in the west consider a "war of aggression" against Ukraine? To parse that question lightly more pointed: Has every member of the Russian forces currently engaged in the Ukraine theatre signed off the decision to invade?
2. Is the Russian military collectively responsible for any action the Russian military and/or the Russian political leadership takes?
3. Can we be certain that all the information we get is truthful, especially when it comes to information that would suggest Russian military war crimes?
4. Which amount of civilian casualties is "acceptable" before it becomes a punishable war crime? When "we" kill civilians, "we" call it "collateral damage". At which point does collateral damage become a war crime?
5. Is the Ukraine war illegitimate? When considering this question, please take into account that we may have several gaps in our understanding of the situation, and that we tend to wave away Russian sources as "enemy propaganda".
If they are breaking international law, the decision makers in the Russian political leadership and military should be judged and potentially punished by an international court of law. Unfortunately, that only works as long as they are a member of that court (or are thoroughly defeated), and Russia isn't - much like the US - (and is unlikely to be defeated).
you would tell the Americans to continue the bombing in Yemen?
Because of people like you, with moral relativism.
And truly the Nazis basically won WW2 given Operation Paperclip and all the massacres the US oversaw afterwards in Vietnam, Iraq, Afganistan, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, etc.
Sure we might not speaking German or wearing swastikas, but the American Eagle is currently financing genocide (let's use Yemen as the example here) and the only media attention we can seem to get is for Ukraine because their aggressor is our geopolitical enemy
I'm all for the sanctions against Russia before someone accuses me of whataboutism. However, I would like to see stronger international standards, as well as an ICC joined by the US. That requires the US to allow for international oversight and not have a Hague invasion clause. Are Americans willing to be held to the same standard as their enemies? If not just say might makes right and remove this pretense that it's about war crimes or human rights
Do you think the Ukrainians feel differently?
What a disgusting point of view.
"I don't like those countries and they're angry with me".
I guess that puts any invasion as justifiable.
Try that in US, what will happen? Nothing.
Russia (and China) are big countries and dangerous ones because ruled not by the rule of law but by a will of rulers and oligarchs. And now we have opportunity to stop at least one of them.
have you been to the US and/or UK? what do you make of the capitalist owned and capitalist controlled media?
> Russia (and China) are big countries and dangerous ones because ruled not by the rule of law but by a will of rulers and oligarchs.
ah cool, so they don't have weird things like FISA courts and a huge national security apparatus (sort of like this CIA thing), and army, which together coups countries and assassinates leaders? [1]
> And now we have opportunity to stop at least one of them.
who is this 'we' you speak of? [2]
[1] https://jacobinmag.com/2020/11/washington-bullets-cia-coups-...
You may be surprised to learn how irrelevant the corporate media is now, very low viewership counts, and a flourishing alternative media ecosystem, where everyone can believe what they want.
This diversity of information sources has its echo-chamber downside, but no one is being imprisoned because of their views like in Russia or China.
there's also this Youtuber who got a 'home visit' from the US govt. for 'anti-American sentiments' on his channel: https://www.reddit.com/r/BreadTube/comments/k2wt7j/youtube_a...
alienation growing everywhere (parallel with increasing inquality) means capitalist realism is everywhere, so yeah, maybe the censorship and encroachment on free speech is less visible, but that's also because our imagination has been shot meaning we can't easily imagine and write about/describe alternatives. remember Thatcher's "there is no alternative" (TINA), Fukuyama's 'end of history', etc.? many in the working class now struggle to see our chains.
Change it - to try that “about US” and “be in” Yemen, Pakistan, Egypt, etc. Then see what happens to the individual! Guess?
Even this comment of yours reeks of hypocrisy. You are totally focused on “what happens to people in the US” and as long as that’s fine all is hunky dory.
In your comment you’ve totally not even touched upon what “USA has been doing outside USA - to other countries - usually the developing and underdeveloped countries”. Because that is “well.. you know… you know..”.
> by the rule of law
Which fucking law? Whose rule? Whose rule of law?
Entire fucking colonialism was a “legal endeavour”, in fact essentially a “civilising” the “natives” expedition that the kind white world took upon itself with great pains to do in the name of God and the King. Is that kind of rule of law you’re talking about? Because that kind of thinking never went anywhere during nid 1900s. It’s right there.
Well, then I guess Russia also decided to sell Ukraine some “freedom”. Oh, that sounds horrible? But why so?
The US is unlikely to invade Poland in order to displace the polish people with Americans. To some degree a war over oil resources feel much less threatening to countries than a war for lebensraum, especially for countries which don't have a lot of oil resources. Every nation however has land, and thus every nation is a target when a country like Russia is after territory. This is a big reason why a lot of countries around Russia is currently increasing their military budgets, loosing more money on that then any losses to the economy from not buying conflict resources from Russia. If you are pumping your money into the military, it makes economical sense to not fund the military threat you are defending against.
And here people make it look like a weekend outing with some pals - hey, you should have called Jack out because he unnecessarily yelled at me! Yeah!
And because there’s clear difference of outrage when brown, yellow, black lives are bombed into oblivion, burnt into tar, whisked away into nothingness from sovereign territories without any accountability and repercussions compared to when the war is right inside Europe. Yeah, that’s real. But you all can’t see that. Why? Because it has been given a catchy name “Global War on Terror”? By the way, this is not a thing of past. It is still going on. Full throttle.
Others see that. Have been seeing for decades. Have seen the f..ing cold war and its farce as well.
So why GP asks? That’s why GP asks that’s everybody is bad here and calling Russia out bad will mean calling others’ actions/deeds good while possibly shooting themselves in the foot.
> Do you believe invading militaries should not be opposed?
Yes, should be. “Every” invading army should be. Every! Colonial powers should pay. Aggressors should atone, reimburse. In an ideal utopia inhabited only by pure flower children and silver snowflakes all this would happen maybe.
Not your or someone’s selective outrage!
Bit does it happen? No.
In the real world that doesn’t happen, it hasn’t happened, and hence many countries and entities are “not stupid enough” to catch a flying arrow in someone else’s yard in their own hinds. However heinous or a bad bully that archer is. Because as I said that’s the better of two bad options for many.
of course. and OP answered with the same answer.
please stop strawmanning, the joke is on you for not accepting the evidence. try to open your eyes to the murderous hypocrisy and deep-rooted racism of Global North/Western imperialism.
https://jacobinmag.com/2020/06/jakarta-method-vincent-bevins...
Similarly, everybody hates imperialism, and Putin's war is still wrong. It doesn't change what actions we must take to stop Putin.
With the exception of using chemical weapon (agent orange) and napalm, you gonna have to extrapolate and provide source for your claim.
Or as Wikipedia puts it: "United States war crimes - This list is incomplete; you can help by adding missing items."
no no no ... you cant blame US like that. It's pure as driven snow. It's champion of democracy. Pristine. Flawless.
The whole iraq invasion resulted in 7k civilian deaths. Pretty sure the russians are topping that in ukraine. For comparison, another case of shock and awe in recent history was done by russians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Grozny_(1994%E2%80%9... which resulted in the death of approx 6% of the civilian population in Grozny. Its not like Syria or Afghanistan was conducted any different, so this is what we can expect.
Sources other than american tv provide vastly different numbers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War
The current Ukraine civilian death count is only up to 1.5k so far [3], so Russia's got a lot of catching up to do before it can compete with what's happening in Iraq (though I truly hope it doesn't).
[0]: https://www.iraqbodycount.org/
[1]: https://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War#Ira...
[3]: https://www.ohchr.org/en/news/2022/04/ukraine-civilian-casua...
The Iraq Body Count project (IBC) documented a higher number of civilian deaths up to the end of the major combat phase (May 1, 2003). In a 2005 report,[86] using updated information, the IBC reported that 7,299 civilians are documented to have been killed, primarily by U.S. air and ground forces.
Civil war instigated by US and arming the insurgents similar to how they armed the Mujhadeen and the ISIS and Ukraine....
As garbage as "they're next to us and have some shared history" is for a reason to try to conquer someone, it's still a hundred times better than invading a country on the other side of the planet, turning it in to a war zone for a decade/decades, then leaving when you got bored is.
oh ok. We will have to disregard those?
Sure champion of democracy worldwide. sure.
The emperor is without clothes and the senile old leader is stuttering out nonsense while rabidly protecting his son's assets in Ukraine.
But whatever helps you sleep in peace at night.
Because then you'll notice a few things: a its acknowledgement of certain USA war crimes and b that its tongue in cheek.
Although also c and d too its always a good idea to provide sources for any claim (especially heinous acts) and most people associate war crimes with human-by-human acts such as mass rape, genocide and forceful relocation, which I'm genuinely interested in knowing if USA has done such act.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_February_2003_anti-war_prot...
I was too young to remember the war in Vietnam but my older colleagues told me the general feeling was very much anti-war, and they had to do pretty hardcore stuff in order to avoid being drafted.
If US did something wrong how does it relate to Russia or China doing similar wrong things?
Stop them whatever means necessary.
In other words, please cripple your already struggling economies because of a war that you had nothing to do with. Sure, your citizens might have to freeze or starve but this is absolutely necessary to support the current thing. Oh, and please keep buying Saudi and Emirati oil and please keep selling them weapons to bomb Yemen. Anything else would be whataboutism.
The U.S. did invade Iraq, using the authority granted in U.N. resolution 678. That was not a crime either, because it was carried out legally.
Saying it was legal and not an invasion, because the client regime invited them, is like saying the Soviet Union never invaded Afghanistan, because they were also invited and it was ‘legal’.
They were crimes, the two biggest crimes since WW2
While Afghanistan was a Soviet client state before the Soviet-Afghan war, that War started with a successful decapitation strike by the USSR against the Afghan regime, so it’s not really analogous to the US war in South Vietnam.
> North Vietnam was the aggressor.
No. North vietnam were liberators helping their fellow vietnamese in the south ( viet cong ) expel a foreign occupier.
> The U.S. did invade Iraq, using the authority granted in U.N. resolution 678.
How sneaky of you. That was the 1st iraq war. What about the 2nd iraq war?
The Vietnamese wanted independence and the refusal of France and later the the intervention of the US into the Vietnamese internal politics led the Vietnamese people to turn to the Communist party as the party of independence.
The very same thing happened a few years earlier in Cuba.
But the Communist parties were not "liberators", as both the Vietnamese and the Cuban peoples discovered very quickly. But the French (obviously) and the US weren't either.
Vietnam is a nice country... for tourists. People there are not free at all. Nor are Cubans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_the_Iraq_War
The United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, declared explicitly for the first time last night that the US-led war on Iraq was illegal.
All the middle east wars by US including the millions murdered, raped, tortured by US was illegal according to UN.
But "WHY IS RUSSIA SO AGGRESIVE?"
These rules get real slippery real fast
These rules get real slippery real fast. If your entire position is based on a slanted reading of some minor detail of obscure legalese, don't be surprised when evil people use the legalese against you
The UN explicitly stated that the invasion was illegal. I even remember the chief inspector declaring that he should have gone back to fishing instead of wasting time because the US had already decided to invade Iraq on false pretenses.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_the_Iraq_War "The invasion of Iraq was neither in self-defense against armed attack nor sanctioned by UN Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force by member states and thus constituted the crime of war of aggression, according to the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) in Geneva"
Remember "freedom fries"?
The war hysteria was as rabid then as it is now for "pro ukraine" bullshit of arming both sides and letting blood spill.
Amazing mental gymnastics white washing the millions of people murdered by US in desperate search for their oil.
Yes, lots of hypocrisy to go all around—its called human nature. But what Russia is doing TODAY is just plane evil, and what other countries have done and will probably do again does not make Russian action any less evil.
Really?? approximately half a million children died in Iraq. Russian soldiers take the brunt of civilians throwing objects and molotov cocktails at them and try to stop them by standing on the roads.
You think Iraqi civilians could have blockaded US army by standing on the road?
It's human nature when Russia does it (and what Russia is doing is abhorrent and disgusting) and when US does it, its brushed under the carpet as champion of democracy
So i suppose it is the same here, EU are way too dependent on fossil fuel from Russia, stopping everything right now = some families won't have energy to heat their homes, very important these days since EU got hit with a cold wave
Also stopping everything right now mean no way to get the food industry to run properly and farmers to secure their production for next year
People die in Ukraine, so but let's not add more death on top of them because of cold and famine
https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/ukraine-sets-ne...
Also, would the war stop if Ukraine takes a nuclear option and blows up the pipeline? Unlikely, I'd say. But that's a good way to jeopardize the future in N years, throwing away economic and political leverage like that. The war would go away – but so would the income and power.
Again, I can't speak for Ukraine, but I think their policy position is clear. It's not like the Ukrainians are saying, "Russian oil is great! Everybody buy it now!"
If it was so, then Ukranians themselves would have stopped the very profitable gas transit.
Since the start of Putin's criminal invasion of Ukraine, the EU has paid 35 billion euros to Russia and send about 1 billion € of weapons.
The UK sent plenty of weapons, certainly because the Tories had to prove that they have not been corrupted by Russian oligarchs' money - which they were. London has been nicknamed "the Laundry" by Russian oligarchs.
The US has sent plenty as well.
Stopping the imports of oil and gas would be a huge blow for the Russian economy. The EU is working on it, but the dependency is very high.
So the EU ought to act more decently towards Ukraine and provide all the weapons and training they need. I consider that volunteers among professional soldiers should be allowed to take a sabbatical and go - by their owns means and without weapons - to Ukraine. In the end, they will retrieve the weapons they are used to.
We need to do more for Ukraine. The dependency on the Russian has and oil makes that need even more pressing.
Tens of thousand professional soldiers from the EU would make a difference.
Note: The volunteers going on their own, it implies that they won't be paid. So private citizens would have to compensate them: they have families to sustain. I'm pretty sure that money wouldn't be a problem. But it has to remain a private decision, nothing involving the states.
By the way, OTAN is a defensive alliance. It doesn't forbid a member to decide to send troops on the Ukrainian front. The US won't and shouldn't. That's an European war. Having the US support (weapons, logistics, intelligence) is already a huge help.
As a French citizen, I feel that our duty as a democracy is to officially sends troops to Ukraine. Putin needs to be stopped.
I don't believe in a second of a nuclear escalation, escape on one matter: Crimea. It's an Ukrainian territory but Russians may go bersek if we retake it. But let's kick Putin out of Dombass and Transnistria.
But, if reelected, Macron is far too concerned by French large investments in Russia ; and its far-right opponent, Le Pen, share many views with Putin (and has yet to reimburse 12 millions of euros lent by a Russian bank for her 2017 campaign).
Small useless nitpick, it's called NATO in English.
> I don't believe in a second of a nuclear escalation, escape on one matter: Crimea. It's an Ukrainian territory but Russians may go bersek if we retake it. But let's kick Putin out of Dombass and Transnistria.
It's a matter of water - strategic access to the Black sea, and actually having water in Crimea for food and drinking.
I don't think "leave Putin with just Crimea" works either, it's long term unsustainable. Potable water access issues are always ugly, and often lead to instability, like the conflicts that happen in the Palestine region (most of them, at least partially water related), or the current issues plaging Egypt and Ethiopia (disputes over the use of the Nile's water). Russia is not a rich country and can't do the equivalent of the Berlin airlift to relive Crimea of water issues if, say, the North Crimean Canal closes again.
I had no idea of the water dimension of the Crimean issue. Btw, just to be clear, I'm not at all at ease with the very idea of leaving Crimea to Putin: it's an Ukrainian territory.
Indeed, the water issue would inevitably lead to a new conflict later.
I'm very afraid of the possibility that the democracies have not sent enough weapons to Ukraine for the coming operations. I doubt Russians will make the same mistakes again. Obviously, they are taking their time to reorganize ; I guess that also give time to Ukrainians to prepare and to move the newly delivered weapons to the front.
I also brace for a very possible victory of the far-right candidate to the French throne - since we French basically elect a temporary monarch with very large powers without the decent level of checks and balance. That candidate would a new Orban among the EU and NATO. She is a typical populist, but Macron is, to be fair, the lesson-giving super bright guy which policies favor the bourgeoisie and the wealthy.
It's a nightmare, really.
what about USA stop importing oil from Russia?
they increased their imports since the crisis
While western propaganda may hype about all the crippling sanctions against Russia, and Russian propaganda might to try to reassure everyone that the sanctions do not hurt because of the counter measures they have taken, the political reality in between is that Europe does not currently want Russia as a failed state next door. It is simply not prepared right now to deal with the repercussions. And the US also knows that sanctions cannot achieve their full goals of totally crippling the Russian economy while Russia has support from China and India and other smaller emerging economies. If the US sanctions China and India, as they are legally required to, it would lead to the consolidation of the world's largest market (China and India) with Russia. That is something that both Russia and China really want (something like BRICS, but not just on paper) but what US & Europe do fear.
Not sure how preventing half of Europe's economy grinding to a halt and Joe citizen freezing their butt off because of natural gas supply running out can be characterized as "corporates finding loopholes"
On the other hand what can russia do with the money? If they need components from other countries they are largely cut off from access. If they don't need foreign components then they don't need money they can print it.
I think certain sanctions will hit others harder than russia and will actually put leverage in the hand of russia. Without gas steel and glass producer risk of losing their melting tanks, ehat will directly effect weapons production.
A strong strike also makes it less likely for Russia to be able to adapt fast enough using loopholes like these.
https://globallnghub.com/report-presentation/natural-gas-dem...
Sure, Russia will capitulate in a matter of months in the face of economic sanctions. Just like Iraq, Iran, Cuba and North Korea did. Oh, wait.
And that's just for the people and the hope they'll rise up. The Russian economy is also very dependent on imports of high quality stuffs they can't replace. Including their main income source, natural resources ( they use Western tech for sensors and whatnot around extracting and transporting oil, gas, etc.).
The idea that Russians will rise up because they can't access YouTube is wishful thinking. Stalin was objectively worse. But he still managed to die in office without ever having to face a real uprising.
While there might be a degradation in efficiency, it's not like Russia will be unable to keep extracting natural resources without Western assistance. Iraq under Saddam Hussein was able to keep selling oil despite the sanctions.
Russian aircraft industry still remains very capable. It's not unimaginable that they'll be able to keep the planes they stole flying for a while. Sure, there might be crashes like with Iran. But it's not like Russian regime particular cares about the lives of Russian citizens.
Last I checked iPhones were made in China. Sure, Apple might decide not to sell them in Russia but that still leaves perfectly serviceable smartphones from the likes of Xaomi, Huawei and Oppo.
Iran somehow manages to keep pumping oil and gas despite the sanctions.
While there will be obvious loss of productivity, let's stop pretending that the sanctions will somehow grind the Russian economy to a halt or that they will induce regime change.
The funny thing is, they can't even attept to give them back, the airspace of "the rightfull owners" is closed to Russia.
And accepting any sort of materials/capital from Russia is frowned upon now.
They build their own.
> iPhones or high precision sensors from China.
China itself won't do it, but I forsee that less savoury third parties are probably very interested in partaking this potential highly profitable triangular trade route.
No they don't. The only airliner they build is the small Sukhoi SSJ-10, which uses French engines and a ton of Western avionics and systems.
Irkut MC-21? Most of the actual aircraft don't need to be big to be effective. Russia actually has a small population for it's size.
They actually (well, not anymore) build a substantial ammount of Ukranian aircraft as well, most of the Ukraine Antonov aircraft was more or less actually manufactured in Russia.
Rolling blackouts everywhere throughout Europe and in the next winter everyone freezes?
BUT those who live in classic badly/non insulated homes (vast majority of the population, and vast majority of those who can afford new homes and EVs, have no choice than revolt in a new French Revolution, hoping to do better than the first witch means avoiding putting a new élite in chief like the old one, or exactly the old one with different puppets/public face or starve to death. That not counting a "small" fact like the industry energy needs, since even with nuclear not everything is electric and not everything can be electric in a short time period.
The strike of sanctions actually is AGAINST EU interest, far less against Russian interest. The USA/UK want to destroy EU since they know EU was approaching Russia, since that's our best interest [1], and they know the next war in Asia will impede them to keep EU under their boots. A small suggestion: read Klaus Schwab, Mark Carney books for knowing their agenda and Antony Sutton's books to know a bit of history. You'll discovering that you fight/cheering for your own enemy, even if you are from USA. I'm not joking, really.
[1] we have the tech but not space nor natural resources, Russia have natural resources, space and a solid enough country to be a fair partner not a dictatorial one like the USA/UK (together since these days are not two countries but a similar élite that act with equal targets against any population, their one included) and a near partner, Europe by nature till the Urals.
What's your plan? Produce fertilizers without gas + without animals since the Green New deal dislike meat? Produce the electric revolution without energy? BTW strategic reserves are for emergencies, using them without a plan to replenish them means consume anything and remain without anything and no plan.
I've built my new house few years ago, well insulated, with p.v. etc I do not own EVs because so far a far from being a good idea but when neoliberals will push, because they'll do, gasoline to 4 euros/liter than an EV will be needed and I can recharge it, but industries can't and I do not produce such systems in my garage. While vast majority of population can't even afford a new home.
When I posted my first comment, numbers in the link, I expected at least some of the answers to be in the vein of "lol no, we've been caught with our pants down, see this [source], we would have horrible shortages of X Y months before even the next winter", or maybe "ok, looks like we'll make it up to Z date[source], but that's quite the risk to take !"
But nope, it's mostly been what looks like posturing about how I'm in denial of how the economy needs energy to run or something, even though I've explicitly based my first post on those considerations ! Really disappointed about HN here... (Jancovici, anyone ?)
Climate change is evidently an emergency and evidently the Green New Deal public answers are not answers, their green color is dollar green not spring-grass ones. Actual shortage are probably 30% due to climate change, the rest due to artificial speculations and maneuvers to push "World Government" [1] green deal/great reset. But try to analyze it: from what they published so far if you want a realistic scenario you need to kill around 4 billion of humans, pushing too many more in extreme poverty. Did you really want numbers?
Yet again, why do you assume that I'm guilty of this ? I didn't ask for precise numbers, and you're throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
I'm talking about the (new) Russian invasion of Ukraine being an emergency.
(And the issues of overpopulation/pollution/depletion of natural resources aren't new - King Hubbert predicted in 1956 that US oil production would peak between 1965 and 1970 - and it did in 1970 - and it's not like he pulled those numbers out of his ass, but he based them on known numbers about production rates and discovery trends. And these topics were discussed quite extensively in the 70's, before we decided that we didn't care about the future - if anything, a forced reduction of EU reliance on hydrocarbons is also a good way to finally prepare us to the inevitable shortages that we're going to face anyway in the next decades.)
Ukrainian war for instance is an emergency in certain terms:
- first for the people living there, on both sides, and that's more a tragedy than an emergency but not a new tragedy, it's start formally in 2013-14;
- secondly for countries that depend on Ukrainian and Russian's grains and poultry like Turkey, Middle-est in general, large part of Africa etc, that's new, but that's not a thing can be solved without ANNIHILATING NATO witch means that the EU en-mass say: we are out, we are interesting in entering CSTO and EAEU as partners, something not going to happen seen actual élites and mean population;
- an emergency because it's the first start of WWIII, witch is a tragedy by itself, and a special one since we have nukes and some in the NATO area think they can be used as offensive means not just as a last resort suicide since the '60s. Again the sole way to stop that is erasing neoliberals, not something going to happen;
- climate change is another tragedy, but not something can be changes by us in little time, we can only adapt, and Green New Deal is not really a way to adapt, it's just a way to replicate a Chinese society in the west, some tech aspects are good of course, but they can't work on scale and more important they can't work if not managed by States NOT by public-private criminal associations, pardon, partnerships, another things that can't be politically fixed soon;
- resources are a big issue that will bring all to war, as always, again not something solvable.
So what? So the sole rational choice I see, seen the mean population, is try to protect ourselves individually, hoping the new "20+years nazi-fasists regimes at war" will not last more than the old ones and that at the end when enough population revolt we still have means not only to revolt but to live correcting the errors of WWII revolts witch means annihilating not just the public puppets but the puppet masters.
Oh, BTW there is NO EU preparation to reduce the reliance on fossils, there is just a push toward impoverishing again and destroying again Europe switching from Russian sold resources to USA sold ones. If you really read the actual state of thing and you try very simple mental calculus that's the sole conclusion you can draw. Even if we start to put all industrial power in p.v. and eolic now we can't really reduce reliance on fossils for decades. We can't really run on p.v. or eolic for industry so without nuclear only fossils remain. As they remain for aviation. The logic path for EU is keeping buying Russian fossils (as it happen) but with a public trial and lifetime sentences to those in EU Energy and EU Commission who choose to transform an inter-State public market in a financial one in Holland, with Dutch TTf etc. clearly saying that now energy sector is back to the public and all managers and politicians involved will discover how hard Democratic justice can be. In the practical side pushing renewables, relocalization, etc BUT nothing done by the private under public-private partnerships. And pushing fusion research with ONLY public bodies involved.
I can't really know how terrible is the actual situations but in any case the sole hope for humans is changing capitalism, not in the Schwab-ian way but in a classic European democratic way, with so hard actions against neoliberals that no one for a century will even though a night to imitate them again.
...The US forced RU to attack Ukraine because EU might get a benefit from RU resources...
Let's just ignore Russian media and actions showing they are executing a full on genocide in Ukraine.
About EU: we do have the most advanced tech of the world, but we do not have natural resources, the nearest, developed and vast potential partner is the Russian Federation, witch is geographically Europe till the Urals (so Moscow and most developed areas included) and we share a vast border, so no third party geopolitical tension can endanger our supply chain. In the last decades Russian Federation have try to offer the olive branch few times [2] but NATO (USA/UK) pressures stop them. In the meantime Russians have made the EuroAsiatic Union (EAEU) and we can complete it, commerce was flourishing etc.
Now? Just for Ukraine read the OSCE report about who have started the war, who are the criminal (well the most criminal, at least) and where arms came from: https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/e/7/233896.pdf also if you really follow the news you'll easy discover that vast majority of war crime reported on medias are classify as fake in few days, by western sources, like Italian TV showing a cut-scene from the game War Thunder stating that's the bombardment of Kiev, crying mothers sold as Ukrainian (true) omitting that's not a 2022 picture but one from 2014 of Russian-speaking Ukrainians mothers after Euromaidan nazi massacre so "one the other side" or the pregnant influencer "forced to live the maternity by the bomb" that declare just few days after that Azov nazis force her and other to leave because they took the hospital for military reasons etc. Oh, I've no doubt that there are crimes on both sides, that happen in all wars, but definitively the genocide I see is of Russian-speaking Ukrainians by nazi militia armed by NATO, and no I'm not a Putin fan. BTW just demand yourself why bomb a hospital, a theater etc if that's not used for military reasons, missiles have a price, an error can always happen, a systematic bombing means wasted gears so a nonsense.
I'm a nephew of decorated Italian Partisans from WWII I was trained from my childhood to spot nazis with and without uniforms, and these days I realize that Putin is a dictator, but the USA and UK are worst dictatorship then him, also against their own people interests, and being European my interest is on the opposite side of the front because my interest if form a real EU, not just a monetary one, a Democratic one, not a Barnum circle, having cheap and abundant Russian resources not skyrocketing prices before the war because EU neoliberals, son of those who have created original nazi and fascist regimes, want big profits against their own people interests, my interest is a Russian Federation detached from China because China need a war just to have food for it's enormous population and USA/UK need a war to counter China because loosing South America and the see dominance for them means being destroyed and unable to continue their cleptocratic policies so my interest is left the hitting each others while EU+EAEU remain aside an profit.
No conspiracy theory there just history, geopolitics and basic simple reasoning instead of slavishly and acritical trust of propaganda, from all sides.
[1] for instance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/cold... https://www.thehistorypress.co.uk/articles/operation-unthink...
then
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Dropshot http://www.allworldwars.com/Dropshot%20-%20American%20Plan%2... https://www.thesun.co.uk/living/2268796/a-declassified-milit...
[2] http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/65899 then https://www.politico.eu/article/angela-merkel-urges-vladimir... then https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20210625-eu-leaders-rejec... followed by https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2021/06/25/kremlin-regrets-eu... and slightly before https://tass.com/politics/1342189
Even though we rarely had a war where the side that is in the wrong was so clear cut ! And it's not like this war hasn't been ongoing for the last 8 years ! (And we still don't have any concrete proof that, say, the CIA was (directly) behind the Maidan massacre - in an age of WikiLeaks/Snowden (!!) - I mean, if Macron had ordered to open fire on the Gilet Jaunes manifestations killing a hundred, I would hope that a coup would have shortly followed, regardless of whether a significant fraction of the protesters were CIA agents !)
I guess it's some combination of "the enemy of my enemy of my friend", and the sheer lack of interest in most (?) EU media (but especially the French one?) in the ex-URSS, resulting in a lack of competent specialists, resulting in an astounding lack of understanding of the situation, after which Russian propaganda was quick to fill the resulting void (especially noticeable in the "alternative" medias like Agoravox since 2014).
Did you think OSCE publish Russian propaganda? The Atlantic Council? Rand corp? Because those are my cited sources... Beside that I'm not worried by USA propaganda but by propaganda in general and by the vast mass of vulnerable people that ingest it acritically: thanks to propaganda we already have had two world war, I think they was enough...
> Even though we rarely had a war where the side that is in the wrong was so clear cut !
Wars are done for interests, needs, not on moral basis there is no right or wrong side, just interest on one and another and also other sides. Best EU interest is the Russian side, best China and USA interest is keeping that war a long as possible to on one (USA/UK) side demolish a resurgent EU that was about to left NATO oppression and on the other (China) push Russian resources and military tech to China, witch means they'll be ready for WWIII in just few years.
> And it's not like this war hasn't been ongoing for the last 8 years !
OSCE report? It's from an EU official body, hard to say it's Russian propaganda... Or another example https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/ukraine-s... just to add another I do not cite before. Or you prefer the Russie.NEI.Visions in English from the French IFRI to cite another definitively not putinian body? BTW you can find sources from The Diplomat, Foreign Policies and various others of the same kind, all you need is a honest web search...
> And we still don't have any concrete proof that, say, the CIA was (directly) behind the Maidan massacre
We have phone interceptions but it does not matter at all a single episode, what it matter is the macro level, witch means NATO expansion, NATO creation of nazi forces not even just in Ukraine but in all western EU, and not today but in few decades (did you remember op. Stay Behind, Aldo Moro killing etc? To cite some historical and well documented ones). We can't know the truth about a specific episode even if someone say it. We can instead know the global truth because at macro scale nothing can be really hidden for long.
> resulting in an astounding lack of understanding of the situation
I suggest you to try the mirror test: how can you say that you have a clear understatement while those who think different are caught in Russian propaganda? How many reasonably official source of information you have read, looked for? I mean public institutions not generic press of any kind and any country. How much you followed in the timeline the news stream? How much you know about Ukraine, just in history terms (did you actual Ukraine was a Soviet-made country from 1954?), did you know who manage Ukrainian infrastructures especially oil&gas ones? (hint: USA, UK and Holland companies, like for Kazakhstan). Try to honestly reflect on those aspects. Than tell your conclusion.
Oh, in evilness terms, did you remember the Iraq invasion based on claimed lies from some USA and UK élites about the Saddam mass destruction weapons that do not exists? Or the Afghanistan invasion based on the false claim they protect bin laden? Or the France ops in Libya when Qaddafi start to touch France-controlled CFA? Or Syria? Just to cite actual ones, but we can also came back to famous propaganda-made wars like Guatemala, the last strike of Eduard Bernays for the United Fruit co, those of Chiquita bananas between the rest.
Putin's side is even more tied to fascists (even and especially across EU !) than the Ukrainian side...
I have a much better understanding than your average West European because I was born in Russia, am fluent in Russian, and have family roughly split between Russia and Ukraine (and for what that's worth, had a grandfather that actually fought Nazis - I can't really believe it, but I'm now glad that he didn't live to 2014 and to see this insanity).
And now I'm going to have to cut this discussion short because I have to try to reach my Ukrainian relatives again, which I'm having a hard time to, because cellphones have trouble working from bomb shelters, and they're even being shelled during the day these days.
Of course, that's does not means Putin isn't similarly a dictator, the the blackbird is black like the crow of course but actually Russians aren't ready for Democracy so unfortunately they haven't much choice. Back in the past when bolsheviks overthrown the Mensheviks (thanks to Kaiser money, via Sweden) was already clear that seeds of Democracy were not enough, for Russian Federation Putin now it's the sole option, the other one will being back to a new and correct Soviet Union but that's an utopia so they can just try to be back as an empire. That's is.
Similarly most EU citizens are pushed again toward nazi ideas, we are around the thirst 20-30 years of 1900, a new world war is "needed" and many civilians will be killed, NOT much by Russian army, far more by militia armed by the same cancers of humanity that crafted nazi-fascism before.
BTW I'm Italian but I have some Russian and Ukrainian friends with various political ideas, and some news: if you imaging that "cellphones have trouble working from bomb shelters" you are just spread propaganda for a very simple reason: Russian targets are unknown to us, but Russian strategy is not: they do not bomb anything like USA in the WWII or NATO thereafter, they want a country or part of it, not ruins, when they bomb hospitals they bomb military targets occupied by Azov, C14, Pravy Sektor, Svoboda, ... not because that's what their press say but because bombs are not cheap and they haven't the USA military-industry complex nourished by wars and reconstructions thereafter, so an error can happen, but nothing more than that for mere practical reasons. Bomb shelters beside these days does not exists anymore than in the USA and some abandoned in Swiss. They came from WWII kind of mass-bombing not today's one.
So please do not consider that a sterile polemics or a personal attack but from what you write I can be wrong of course, but I suspect you have absolutely no knowledge of what's going on in Ukraine nor in EU. That's perfectly legit, you probably just "trust the system", accepting propaganda press not that different than soviet Pravda, as reality, but on HN typically there are a cohort of people who look under the tree, no one is immune to propaganda, no one can really know the truth but dissecting news enough to understand what's real and what's manufactured at a certain level is easy.
I get the message both directly & via archive.ph
But after those 2 weeks, I have lost faith. Everything seems to be a charade and the next round of sanctions get applied after 1) some oligarch is exposed, or 2) some major war crime news comes out. I am sure we can go another 100 rounds of sanctions. Quite sad.
No? Huh, I wonder why. Maybe it's their bullet sucking vacuum tanks that rebuild hospitals and schools. Or the democracy building aircraft carriers and the polio curing laser guided payloads they are so proud of.
Freedom. Democracy. Values.
Even though the Russian has been against the war since at least 2015, when I first met him, I should totally cut my ties with him and actively try to sabotage his life because that's what I've been told by the good guys across the Atlantic because their actions are not self serving at all.
Man, do I need moral guidance
So even if they can’t go and grab the oil, they could force the issue: you buy this pretend-not-Russian oil, very well, next time someone pay you in dollars, we take a 75% cut.
But in the current climate, they would like to agree that ahead of time with Europeans who are right now dependant on Russia hydrocarbons for dear life.
And, no, it cannot confiscate the oil and, even if it would, most of the energy comes to Europe in the form of natural gas, which is moved by pipeline. So, yes, the US can stop that by bombing Austria or Poland.
It's obviously a bad place to be in, strategically, for Europe to be somewhat reliant on Russian fuels. But you should note that current sanctions are already far more costly for EU countries than for the US: https://www.ifw-kiel.de/fileadmin/_processed_/f/2/csm_mi2022...
For Latvia, it's 64x more expensive. Even for Germany, it's factor 10.
It’s always about choosing short term gain over long term thinking. Can’t wait to see when global warming really starts to hurt.
Now that the world has witnessed them using the dollar as a weapon to deny other countries their sovereignity, they (China, India, Iran, Africa) will be working 24/7 to build an alternative payment system.
And a good day it will be too.
Have you heard of the Sprately islands?
How disconnected from both reality and humanity can someone be?
Freeze for Freedom!
Starve for Freedom!
Also noteworthy is, that people seem to believe the sanctions are harming the people of Russia, or its economy, more than it harms Europe or the rest of the world. ... lol
Anyone thinking these sanctions are a good idea is completely wacko, out of this world. Politicians shit on us people for bullshit reasons with predictable outcomes, none of which are harming Russia (economy/people/government) significantly.
I guessed I missed the memo. Which countries are on this list?
Belarus? It's already a Russian puppet state.
Georgia? Been there, done that.
The Turkic states? They don't really fit into the Rus ethnostate mythos.
The Baltics? They are already in NATO.
Who knows except the man himself. That's the problem right there.
Belarus? Why not make it official?
Georgia? Maybe they deserve another round?
Baltics? It'll be interesting to see how much effort NATO puts in over those. Certainly not nukes. Can turn them into rubble to prove a point, if nothing else.
What about Hungary and Poland?
Also, aren't you forgetting a couple of countries, scroll up on Google Maps...
But you do know that there is a list?
And after being routed by the Ukrainians, the assumption is that Russia will then invade not just former Soviet republics but also other countries? That's an interesting take.
> But you do know that there is a list?
Well obviously I can't know, and it's not the point. The point is, with how things have developed, you have to assume that there is a list. It's hard to know who exactly would be on it, but you can make some good guesses who probably aren't.