Posted on 11/19/2019 7:34:15 PM PST by UMCRevMom@aol.com
As the impeachment inquiry hogs the spotlight in Washington, another drama in which Ukraine has a role is playing out more quietly -- and causing concern in Kyiv, which is watching warily as Russia brings its Nord Stream 2 pipeline closer to completion.
Members of the U.S. Congress appear unified on the need to stop Russian President Vladimir Putin's $11 billion project to deliver natural gas to Europe via a new pipeline beneath the Baltic Sea.
Bills that would impose sanctions on companies involved in Nord Stream 2 sailed through committees in the House of Representatives and the Senate last summer with overwhelming backing from both Democrats and Republicans.
Yet as Russia forges ahead with the pipeline's construction, little progress appears to have been made toward passage of Nord Stream 2 sanctions legislation by either chamber of Congress.
That is causing jitters in Kyiv, because completion of the pipeline from the eastern shore of the Baltic in Russia to Germany would enable Russia to reroute gas headed for Europe around Ukraine, eliminating billions of dollars in transit fees for Kyiv. It's also raising alarm among U.S. officials who say it would strengthen, enrich, and embolden Russia.
Senator Ted Cruz (Republican-Texas), who is among the more outspoken critics of Nord Stream 2, has said it will bolster Moscow's clout over the energy industry in Europe and put cash in the Kremlin's coffers, increasing the risk of military adventurism on Russia's part five years after it occupied Crimea and helped separatists seize part of eastern Ukraine.
More than 13,000 people have been killed and cash-strapped Ukraine continues to battle the Russia-backed separatists in the region known as the Donbas, which Senator Ron Johnson (Republican-Wisconsin) has called "ground zero" in the standoff between the Kremlin and Washington.
Some U.S. lawmakers and Ukrainian officials are worried that Congress, with much of its attention focused on impeachment inquiry, will not come to an agreement on sanctions legislation before the completion of the pipeline project, which is expected early in 2020.
"Time is running out to stop Nord Stream 2," Cruz said in a statement to RFE/RL in October. "In a few short months, Russia will have completed its natural gas pipeline – putting President [Vladimir] Putin in a position to further expand his military, exploit our European allies, and threaten U.S. energy security."
Doubling Germany's Imports
In the future, Nord Stream 2 could potentially double the amount of Russian gas imported by Germany, the European Union's largest economy.
The 1,230-kilometer-long pipeline -- which is owned by Nord Stream 2 AG, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Russia's Gapzrom -- is more than 80 percent completed. In October, after substantial deliberation, Denmark granted the company permission to lay part of the pipeline through its waters -- the last remaining regulatory hurdle to its completion.
In July, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee backed a bill co-sponsored by Cruz and Senator Jeanne Shaheen (Democrat-New Hampshire) to impose sanctions on vessels that help lay the pipeline.
Only a few companies in the world possess the technology to lay deep-sea pipelines and none of them is Russian, giving the bill its power to stop the project, Cruz said in September.
The committee's vote to approve the bill was 20-2, underscoring the overwhelming and bipartisan support for sanctions against the project in the Senate. The House Foreign Affairs Committee had passed a companion bill in June.
But they have yet to come to a floor vote in either chamber.
WATCH: Poland Says Russian Pipeline A 'Huge Threat' Embed share Poland Says Russian Pipeline A 'Huge Threat' Embed share
VIDEO [Poland Says Russian Pipeline A 'Huge Threat']
Members of Ukraine's parliament have sent several letters to top congressional leaders including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Democrat-California) and Bob Menendez of New Jersey, the leading Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee in the Republican-led Senate.
When asked at the end of October where he stood on the Nord Stream 2 sanctions bill, Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the Senate, told RFE/RL his party wanted legislation that imposes more penalties on the Kremlin. "Democrats are pushing for the toughest Russia sanctions bill possible that also addresses continued efforts by Putin and other foreign governments to interfere in U.S. elections and Russia's illegal occupation of Crimea," he said.
Schumer did not state what additional measures he wanted, but several bills floating around Congress include measures to impose sanctions on more people considered close to Putin as well as Russian banks and Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects.
"I am extremely afraid of this option of a wider sanctions bill," Oleksandr Kharchenko, a Kyiv-based energy consultant to the Ukrainian government who traveled to Washington last month to lobby for the bill, told RFE/RL. "We need the sanctions bill today, not in a few months, after it is completed."
Meanwhile, Russia has been lobbying lawmakers to stop new sanctions, including those aimed at the pipeline. Nord Stream 2 AG contends that the pipeline is needed to offset declining European natural-gas production.
However, Kharchenko said Ukraine's gas-transportation system had more free capacity than the entire Nord Stream 2 project.
Impeachment Inquiry
Any bill that passes Congress would need Trump's signature to become law.
The Republican president said in June that he would consider imposing sanctions targeting Nord Stream 2, adding that Germany should instead buy U.S. LNG.
Trump has shown reluctance in the past to impose additional sanctions on Russia, but the effort to put broader measures in place along with those targeting Nord Stream 2 comes at a tricky time for the president in terms of policy involving Ukraine and Russia, and he may feel pressure to show support for Kyiv.
Democrats, who hold a majority in the House, are leading an impeachment inquiry that focuses on whether Trump withheld military assistance to Ukraine in order to pressure the government of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to conduct investigations potentially targeting U.S. Democrats and in particular former Vice President Joe Biden, a front-runner for the party's nomination to challenge Trump for the presidency in November 2020.
In August, outgoing Ukrainian parliament speaker Andriy Parubiy in August addressed a letter to Pelosi asking her to bring the Nord Stream 2 bill to the floor.
"The parliament of Ukraine, representing the people of Ukraine, respectfully ask you to prioritize this legislation and allow the full House to vote," the letter stated.
Representative Marcy Kaptur (Democrat-Ohio), co-chair of the House's Ukraine Caucus, told RFE/RL that she would like to see broader sanctions against Russia, but said that it is "vital that Congress act quickly to prevent the imminent completion of the pipeline."
Two people familiar with the discussions said that if Congress did not expect to agree on new legislation imposing broader sanctions on Russia by the end of the year, it could include the Nord Stream 2 bill into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
The two people asked not to be named as they said it could hurt their relations with lawmakers.
While the NDAA specifies the annual budget and expenditures of the U.S. Defense Department, legislators often attach nondefense bills to it because it is almost certain to be passed before the end of the year.
John Herbst, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine who heads the Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council, a Washington-based think tank, said it would be a "shame" if delays related to negotiations on a larger sanctions bill result in Nord Stream 2 being completed.
It is indeed legitimate commerce and I don't know where Cruz gets the idea we have the right to stop it.
That being said, if the Krauts prefer to buy natgas from the Russians instead of the U.S., then let them pay for their own national defense (there is the connection). Ingratitude should have consequences.
the Germans certainly won’t miss the IS forces.
That is an ignorant statement. The effect of the U.S. bases on the local economies is no small thing. And if the Krauts had to spend the money it would take for a serious national defense, it would most certainly cut into their socialist spending budgets.
But really, when it comes down to it, it's been 75 years. Isn't it time to leave anyway?
I am fully aware of the effects of foreign troops on local economies but there are more side to it. According to polls more Germans are opposing the US presence than of people who are for it. Would you like to have foreign troops on American soil to have a few extra bucks off supporting them and to save of your own defence expenditure?
The reality is no country wants foreign troops. And in case of Germany all their enemies are domestic.
My point is the Krauts will miss the Amis financially — a lot. But I personally think we need to get out of Germany. It is doubtful they will be a military threat for many, many years. They’ve been thoroughly neutered and are totally devoid of the kind of warrior spirit that has traditionally animated the German people.
And being responsible for themselves just might make them grow up.
That’s legit point.
Follow the money. I bet there are some palms being greased.
Oh, that big 1982 Siberian explosion?
Fort Worth Star-Telegram / The New York Times | 2/3/04 | William Safire
Posted on 02/03/2004 9:13:42 PM PST by Valin
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1071087/posts
So, let me get this straight.
Ukraine has more NG (or is it OIL) reserves than what can be transported via Nord Stream2?
Germany can buy our NG instead of Nord Stream 2? IOWs Germany, a NATO Ally, can stop this whole thing now by buying NG from us?
Seems to me then, that we should forget the sanctions crap with Russia, and convince Germany to buy from us, and have the rest of NATO support that.
Deep state continues to attack Putin and tries to prop up the natural gas thieves in the Ukraine.
How long has the Yankee government been maintaining a string of military bases in the South? Like the Muzzies to Europe, they are now trying to overwhelm Southern sentiment by sending immigrants from the north into the Southland.
Let Cruz put sanctions on Germany over it. It would be a riot:)
There are LNG terminals in Europe to sell US gas there. Why do you need to stop NS2? Put a good price on LNG, deliver it in quantity and the market is yours. Although there is a shortage of NG on East Coast. Maybe it makes sense to start there.
I’m confused. Please explain:
(1) Why does Russia NOT have the right to build a pipeline under the Baltic Sea — far from Ukraine? And why must Congress pass ‘sanctions’ over it?
(2) What the heck does any of this have to do with the United States? We have our own massive gas reserves. If Europe does not, and needs to import it, isn’t that EUROPE’S problem?
Plus the thought of pipelines give them nightmares?
This is not our problem. We have the deep state trying to remove President Trump, and we care about what is happening in Europe? Europe is in the process of destroying itself via 3rd world invaders. Russia is the least of its problems.
You have to wonder what kind of foreign money and/or deals politicians are getting when they “care” so much about these countries that have nothing to do with US interests.
Degenerate Europe is better off under Russian domination - signed a European born immigrant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.