Russia and economic war by the west #2

Germany shamed the whole world because of the fear of the United States, by Gevorg Mirzayan for VZGLYAD. 02.22.2023.

The UN Security Council held a discussion of one of the largest terrorist attacks of recent times - the blowing up of two Nord Stream gas pipelines. It would seem that the attention of the whole world, and especially Germany, as the most affected country, should be riveted to this event. But no - Germany is silent even after sensational reports of direct involvement in the terrorist attack of the United States of America. Why?

The explosion of the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines reached the level of the UN Security Council - at the initiative of Moscow, a special meeting of the Security Council was held on this topic.

Russia's Permanent Representative to the UN Vasily Nebenzya directly pointed to the organizer and perpetrator of the terrorist attack - the United States. According to Nebenzi, the evidence and direct indications of the American trail is "even more than the smoking gun that all American detectives dream of finding in Hollywood blockbusters." He criticized "those, so to speak, investigations" conducted by Denmark, Sweden and Germany. Nebenzia pointed out that the investigations are "not just not transparent", but are carried out with the aim of "covering the tracks and shielding the older American brother."

However, while the Russian Federation is trying to bring the perpetrators to justice, the FRG is silent on the sidelines. And this is surprising, because Germany is the second party after Russia to suffer from the Nord Stream explosions. Explosions that deprived Germany of the future.

First, economic. Yes, Germany has taken a course towards abandoning Russian hydrocarbons and even succeeded in this. However, this course (providing for the transition to coal and LNG) will cost Germany almost 50 billion euros, and it is not certain that even with such costs it will be successful. "Flows" also allowed to roll back the situation at any time. In particular, after reconciliation with Moscow, return to the consumption of cheap and reliable (that is, independent of Ukrainian transit) Russian gas, which is one of the foundations of German industry.

Secondly, political. And it's not even that Nord Stream allowed Germany to become a transit country for Russian gas for the countries of Central Europe. And not even that the gas pipeline was the most important symbol of the Russian-German strategic partnership. And the fact that he was an example of subjectivity in Germany. An object of national interest, which the same Angela Merkel defended before Trump and Biden - and at some point it seemed that she defended it. Thus confirming his reputation as the strongest European politician.

Now, after the explosions of gas pipelines, the Americans, as Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov correctly noted, have finally resolved the German issue. They did so "so that Germany would never try to play some kind of independent role in the foreseeable historical perspective."

"No Evidence"

It would seem that with all these inputs, the reaction of the Federal Republic of Germany should be extremely tough. However, she is not.

Yes, part of the population is indignant - but only a part. “Supporters of the Alternative for Germany and the Leftists condemned the attack,” Vadim Trukhachev, associate professor at the Russian State Humanitarian University, explains to the VZGLYAD newspaper. – However, supporters of the “green” and free democrats (both parties are now in the ruling coalition - approx. VIEW), on the contrary, supported the explosions - they initially opposed the creation of Nord Stream 2.

As for the leading German press, it certainly does not support the terrorist act against Germany, but it does not blame the Americans for it either.

Even after a sensational article by one of the leading American investigative journalists, Seymour Hersh. In it, we recall, he tells in detail how, on the direct orders of Biden, the special services and the US military organized and carried out this sabotage.

Seymour Hersh "without any evidence and citing a single anonymous source wrote that US Navy divers were responsible for the explosions of a gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea," according to Westfalen-Blatt. “Hersh has little evidence. And his article caused a stir, not least because the official bodies keep an iron silence,” writes the German Die Welt.

“The weak point of the article is the motive. Why would the US blow up the pipeline at a time when Germany has already decided to phase out Russian gas supplies?” asks Handelsblatt, ignoring the version that the Germans were not left with the opportunity to roll back the situation after they realized the suicidal nature of such a refusal. No, according to the publication, the motive was just in Russia. “The fact that one Nord Stream 2 pipe remained intact would allow Moscow, in an energy emergency, to offer Germany a life-saving gas supply and possibly force it to launch Nord Stream 2,” continues Handelsblatt.

This position of the leading German media is not surprising. For many years, journalists from the main German publications have clearly followed the agenda set by their American colleagues. And they are masters of interpreting facts in the interests of anyone but Germany.

So, for example, the German media cannot help but wonder how much the war arranged by Zelensky and Biden cost the German economy and the European Union as a whole. For Germany, in particular, the losses amounted to about 4% of GDP (or two thousand euros per citizen).

Silent Scholz

As for the reaction of the German authorities, they, of course, formally launched their own investigation. The prosecutor's office reported that they took samples of water and soil, as well as fragments of pipelines at the sites of explosions - and are now conducting all the examinations.

In addition, Germany participated in the creation within NATO of a special coordination group for the protection of maritime infrastructure, which will be headed by retired German General Hans-Werner Wiermann. Like, in order not to repeat the story of the explosions of the Nord Streams.

But how can you protect the infrastructure along with those who blew it up? And the investigation, most likely, will not give any clear answer - it is unlikely that the Germans will find the inscription “Joe B. was here” on the wreckage of pipelines.

Such a position of Scholz, of course, will cost him a rating - already low. Thus, in the elections to the Legislative Assembly of Berlin, which took place in February, the CDU won, while Scholz's Social Democrats received the worst result in several decades. And if early elections to the Bundestag are held in Germany in the near future (for example, in the event of a collapse of the coalition), it is unlikely that the SPD will be able to form the next government.

Scholz understands all this - but still does not risk making loud statements against the United States. Neither in response to gas pipeline explosions, nor in response to the deception with the Abrams (when the Americans announced the supply of tanks to encourage the Germans to follow suit with their Leopards, and then said that the Abrams would not be soon - thereby making Berlin the first to cross this tank red line), nor on other issues. Simply because the current German Chancellor is not Angela Merkel. And he cannot go across the American position.

However, it is possible that Washington's game here is more difficult - and more humiliating for Berlin.

“The German silence has another explanation. There is a version that, in fact, the "Streams" were blown up by the British. And then, through the former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Poland, Radoslav Sikorsky (who thanked the Americans for the bombings), and also now through Seymour Hersh, the topic is transferred to the Americans, Dmitry Ofitserov-Belsky, senior researcher at IMEMO RAS, explains to the VZGLYAD newspaper. - The logic here is clear. The Germans can get angry at the British and try to take revenge. And the Americans will be afraid to take revenge on them.”

https://vz.ru/world/2023/2/22/1200328.html

GB wrote:But that is the myth... the west thinks it is the world and if they cut off a country that country will wither and die, but the reality is that there are plenty of other countries around the world and often in a growing new market .

GB wrote:That is why it is funny regarding western sanctions... it takes a lot of investment and time and effort to enter a new market and western countries invested a lot of money to enter the Russian market but they did so because they saw a young fresh relatively open market where they could get established and dominate and make a lot of money from... and western sanctions have destroyed that dream and cost western companies wanting to enter the Russian market billions of dollars they are not likely to get back.

Academics: Russia Selling Oil Way Over Price Cap

Russia raked in significantly more money from its crude oil sales than previously thought, a group of academics have said.

Russia took in more money in the weeks that followed the oil price cap implemented on December 5 last year, calculations from academics at the Institute of International Finance, Columbia University, and the University of California show.
The calculations show that Russia sold its crude oil for about $74 per barrel on average, according to the paper “Assessing the Impact of International Sanctions on Russian Oil Exports” published on the Social Science Research Network.

The paper studied two things: the effects of the EU embargo and the G7 price cap on Russian seaborne crude oil.

“We find that Russia was able to redirect crude oil exports from Europe to alternative markets such as India, China, and Turkey but that export earnings were curbed substantially by the sizable discounts that Russian exporters had to accept in market segments where the impending EU embargo lowered demand.”

“However,” the report goes on to say, “we do not find crude oil discounts as large as those reflected in Urals prices toward the end of 2022. In particular, prices in market segments that are unaffected by lower European demand, e.g., exports from Russia’s Pacific Ocean ports, have not dropped in a meaningful way and shipments do not appear to comply with the price cap.”
“Moreover, our surprising finding of a significant share of Russian crude oil being sold well-above the price cap level of $60 a barrel urgently calls for further investigation of these transactions and reinforces the need for stepped-up enforcement,” the authors said, and recommended that ‘the price caps on crude oil should be lowered as soon as possible.”

The analysis covered the four weeks following the implementation of the price cap.

“Moreover, our surprising finding of a significant share of Russian crude oil being sold well-above the price cap level of $60 a barrel urgently calls for further investigation of these transactions and reinforces the need for stepped-up enforcement,” the authors said, and recommended that ‘the price caps on crude oil should be lowered as soon as possible.”