|
Originally Posted by Skybird
Well, without irony indeed, I do not have much more to say than what I already said.
The EU accepted for various reasons to find itself in a position of weakness (which is the translation of "dependance"). The Ukraine provokes Russia, Russia tries to discipline the Ukraine, but the Ukraine provokes more. Gazprom has debts of over 36 billion in the West and cannot afford to waste it's trade item: gas, for below 200 dollars per unit, while the market price is in the range of 400+ and needs to be payed by european nations as well. The Kreml uses gas in its constant conflict with the Ukraine, which goes beyond gas. Kreml and Gazprom are two separate actors with different interests, but they are coordinating their efforts against the Ukaine, the kreml has interests in the field of state fiances and global strategic influence, Gazprom the the business field and regarding financial profits and paying off it'S debts. The Ukraine is in a poor economic situation, and wants to blackmail europe to accept it's membership to protect against the big demon, Russia. It also does not want to adress the ICF or the WB over ledning money, for it wants to get its needed candies for free and without the usual obligations these international institutions dictatde to those depending on their credits.
And like in Georgia, I am convinced that the americans also masisvely encourage the Ukraine to provoke Russia, for two reasons: first to lecture Europe about their dependance from Russian gas and make them giving up their policies allowing that for environmental reasons, and support for the global warming faction, and second to increase American influence aginst Russia and stir the pot so that in the conflict the Ukraine gets pushed into the EU and NATO, means: into the american sphere of influence, and at the cost of Russia. The US are an invisible player in this conflict, but they are the fourth player on the field nevertheless, and they play it very tough. Tjhe bill is payed by southeuropeans, the EU, the Ukraine, and of course Russia. the political damage for the Ukraine is the biggest, followed by the hurt EU that is witnessing the ashes of it's naive energy policy. Beside financial damage to Gazprom not earning incomes, the damage for Russia is limited and can be lived with. It even may fuel the Russian intention for a Baltic sea pipeline to bypass unloved ukraine, delete Ukraine's transit fees and by that increase pressure on them, and make it more tempting for the EU to accept a state of even greater depedance from russian gas. For all these three reasons, America is strictly against this northern pipeline, and wants to keep their Ukrainean card in the game. If the US does not want anything in the European part of it'S global strategy, then it's a fall in the EU's and NATO's interest into the Ukraine, it would be a major setback for the US' own ambitions to keep Russia under pressure.
|