Posted on 12/19/2019 12:51:44 AM PST by NorseViking
Declared by the us Congress the sanctions against the "Nord stream — 2" pipeline has caused a sudden and unanimous condemnation on part of the officials of Germany and the German public. First responded the foreign Minister of Germany Heiko Maas, who categorically rejected foreign intervention and sanctions. According to him, the energy policy of Europe is determined in Europe and not in USA. The decision of the Congress was criticized by the Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel. She said in the Bundestag that the German government does not accept the extraterritorial sanctions.
The governor on coastal Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania Manuela Sweig said that sanctions are intended to push into the European market the inferior overpriced US shale gas produced by environmentally dangerous method of fracking. The entire German press actively quoted a statement by the press Secretary of Russian President Dmitry Peskov who openly accused the US lawmakers of violating international law and unfair competition.
According to the politicians and specialists, despite the American sanctions, the gas pipeline "Nord stream — 2" will be built, though with probable delays. The remaining 200 miles can be laid in the next 30 days — even before the sanctions act will enter into force. The work of Swiss-Dutch pipelayer "Ollis" (Allseas) is threatened by US sanctions the most.
Another and more serious complication for Germany is the imminent shortage of gasoline and aviation fuel because the nation's major oil refinery in Schwedt (Brandenburg) belongs to a Russian energy giant Rosneft targeted by US sanctions as well.
(Excerpt) Read more at inosmi.ru ...
See post 18.
No, there was no “non-payment” by Ukraine, but the gas got shut off when Ukraine protested against arbitrary rate-raising by Russia.
I’m very sensitive to anti-US sentiment by both Germany and Russia, particularly in the economic sphere, and there is a lot of anti-US propaganda in the air in both of those countries. Historically, any cooperation between them has been a precursor to war.
My #19 was the response to it.
Direct links to responsible consumer countries especially bypassing deadbeat clients withdrawing gas indended for paying customers are the way to avoid blackouts.
Same 2009 event. Who would be stupid enough to double down on stupid? Answer: The Germans.
“” “” No, there was no “non-payment” by Ukraine, but the gas got shut off when Ukraine protested against arbitrary rate-raising by Russia.”” “”
That is what Ukraine is saying.
“” “” Historically, any cooperation between them has been a precursor to war.”” “”
Who are they going to war against and over what?
“” “” I’m very sensitive to anti-US sentiment by both Germany and Russia, particularly in the economic sphere, and there is a lot of anti-US propaganda in the air in both of those countries. “” “”
Congress is working overtime to produce more bad blood.
Once again Poland has LNG terminal and free to buy from US at +50% the Russian rate. They might add another +50% for transit fees and pump it to Ukraine at twice the price.
Germany thinks otherwise and you should respect it. And by the way Germany is linked to Polish and Baltic LNG terminal and has its own too. Beat the Russian price and it is all yours.
Now this is excellent reporting!
You can deny history all you want, but history remains prophecy. I urge you to look deeper into it.
If you’d read your links correctly non-payments were the cases. Belarus itself admitted it didn’t pay over 6 months to the tune of $460 million in 2006.
Try to do it with your utility company and we will see how long your utility company would let you get away with it.
‘Arbitrary price hikes’ are all in the contracts. The customers negotiate discounts but it works only as long as they keep paying. Once they breach contract they are expected to pay up-front and at higher base price.
I have read it. It doesn’t consist any facts against Russia.
I understand what you mean but in doesn’t mean involved countries don’t have any legit interests.
One of the reasons for WWII was that Germany and Japan felt treated unfairly.
And further, Germany screwed themselves on energy policy with the rash shutdown of all their nuclear plants in the wake of Fukushima. Part of this was driven by the influence of their Greens.
I’ve said for a long time that you can’t run a modern civilization on wind and solar, and Germany has proved it. Instances of energy poverty, with people struggling pay to heat their dwellings, are a thing.
NS2 is a natural follow on to attempt to improve the situation created by their previous bad policy.
But the Why NATO? discussion must be had. If Germany is safe enough with respect to Russia to become highly energy dependent on them, how does this jive with the need for a mutual defense structure like NATO built around defending against a Russian attack? For Germans to act as if the US move is just ugly Americans getting involved in something we have no business in is completely absurd.
If you give credence to the aggressors’ “reasons”, you haven’t thought things out very carefully. The ideology behind those aggressors has to be scrutinized: any socialist will complain that those that they regard as “bourgeoisie” are treating them unfairly, and the ideology behind Imperial Japan had elements of socialism as well as similarities with Islamic expansionism.
See my previous. NATO and our large costs for involvement therein changes the political calculus. This isn’t, say, Spain and Italy looking to put in a pipeline that bypasses France (forgetting that they’d have no reason to).
In 2017 about half of Germans strongly supported NATO. In April this year only 22%. There are similar numbers for UK. In France only 9% support NATO.
It is nice that you know history but modern Russia is not an aggressor. And Russia is barely an aggressor too.
Russia=Germany.
President Trump expressed his frustration with German Chancellor Angela Merkel over NS2 pipeline saying” We’re supposed to protect you from Russia, but Germany is making pipeline deals with Russia. You tell me if that’s appropriate. Explain that.”
Which is fine. Historically ignorant, but fine. A result of modern Leftist education and domination of the news, I suppose. But to say this is purely a commercial decision over which the US should have no say is absurd, given NATO still exists.
For France, the UK, and the rest of NATO minus Germany, dismantling of NATO also comes with the risk of the US no longer having a significant presence in the country that started 2 major wars in <25 years, 3 in 70 if you count the Franco-Prussian. NATO wasn’t just about stopping the Russians.
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.