Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Iran-made power plant parts replacing US models in SE Asia

Press TV – May 3, 2023

Spare parts manufactured by Iranian companies that are used in power plant maintenance services are replacing rival models from the US in electricity stations in Malaysia and Indonesia, according to an official in the Iranian Energy Ministry.

Abdolrasul Pishahang, who serves as CEO of Iran’s Thermal Power Plants Holding Company (TPPH), said on Wednesday that domestic firms had manufactured some 100,000 parts needed in servicing operations in Iran’s power plants in recent years.

Pishahang said Iranian-made parts are being supplied to power plants in the region and in Southeast Asia where countries previously relied on parts supplied by US companies.

“While responding to the domestic demand, these parts are exported to regional countries and are replacing US-made power plant parts in countries like Malaysia and Indonesia,” he was quoted as saying by ILNA news agency.

Iran has a relatively large electricity industry where dozens of thermal and gas power plants account for a bulk of the power generated in the country.

Total Iranian electricity generation capacity exceeded 90 gigawatts (GW) in October 2022 although Energy Ministry figures suggest production reached a record of nearly 66 GW in the peak demand time last summer.

Sanctions imposed by the US on Iran’s energy sector in 2018 caused the country to introduce measures to cut reliance on foreign suppliers for parts and equipment needed in its power plants.

TPPH’s Pishahang said some 34 new power plant units had been connected to Iran’s national power grid since August 2021.

May 3, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , | Leave a comment

“No Bricks, No Glass, No Cement” – What Net Zero 2050 Demands According to Government-Funded Report

BY CHRIS MORRISON | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | APRIL 28, 2023

No bricks, the walls and foundations made of compacted earth, cement made from clay and glass scavenged from demolition skips are just some of the construction changes needed to comply with Net Zero by 2050. The latest paper from Government-funded U.K. FIRES looks to “minimise new construction”, and notes the shape of the urban environment will change, allowing for “denser living and reduced transport needs”.

The latest U.K. FIRES paper seems to have slipped out quietly at the end of last year and has to date attracted little publicity. But the group, which comprises a number of academics led by Cambridge engineering professor Julian Allwood, made headlines around the world recently with previous work noting that all flying and shipping must stop by 2050, beef and lamb must be banned, and only 60% of energy will be available to cook food and heat homes. The group, which receives £5 million from Government sources,  is interesting because it bases its recommendations on the brutal, and many would argue honest, reality of absolute Net Zero. It does not assume that technological processes still to be perfected or even invented will somehow lead to minimal disturbance in comfortable industrialised lifestyles. It could be further argued that its continued existence and pronouncements are important, since they highlight the dishonesty and deceit that surrounds many other Net Zero promoters.

U.K. FIRES sees the future of construction based on stone, earth and timber, along with components “reused and repurposed” from demolition. Recycled steel, cement and bricks can be used, although this will be “constrained” – rationed might be a better word – by a supply of “non-emitting electricity under high demand”. Transformational construction changes will take longer to achieve, state the authors, but the U.K.’s ambitious target of a 45% reduction in emissions by 2030, “can only be achieved through reduced material demand”.

Building without bricks is an interesting suggestion and over two billion are currently produced each year. But bricks require high firing temperatures, and the enormous cost of Net Zero energy makes them uneconomic to produce. Cement also requires energy to make but it can be mixed with calcined clay. Nevertheless, calcined clay is also energy intensive and can only supplement 50% of Portland cement. “As a result, the mass low-cost consumption of concrete will no longer exist,” the authors note. Together, bricks and cement generate annual turnover of over £10 billion. Rammed earth, which can be used for foundation screeds and walls, is said to be a proven and potentially zero emission alternative, “which can utilise abundant local materials”.

Glass looks to be a complete no-no, with production requiring temperatures of 1,700°C and producing additional process emissions which cannot be avoided by electrification. Only recycled glass seems to be acceptable for the absolutist authors, so the need for complete circularity, “will somewhat constrain the supply of glass”. However, add the authors helpfully, this will “encourage direct re-use and reconditioning of glass panels from demolition sites”.

Steel is widely used in modern construction due to its large load-bearing properties. Around the world, recycled steel accounts for about a third of current production. To have zero emissions from producing steel relies on energy-intensive carbon capture and storage technology, which the authors observe, with their customary honesty, “is unlikely to be economical by 2050”. In the U.K., 85% of steel is already recycled, and it is explained that the Net Zero transition will heavily restrict its supply. Recycling of aluminium is said to be the “preferred zero emission compatible pathway”, and this will lead to “higher prices due to a restricted supply of the material”.

Timber is also constrained by carbon emission production processes, and sustainable supply is limited by forests unable to rapidly match increased demand. The construction industry accounts for a seventh of all plastics used in the U.K., but needless to say, there are problems. Although plastics play a vital part in insulating buildings – plastic doors and windows can be sealed much more effectively than wood – the authors note that they will become “increasingly constrained and expensive to produce”.

At times, your correspondent might be accused of exaggerating the effects of Net Zero, a collectivist political agenda increasingly divorced from the reality of modern living. But phrases such as “economic and societal breakdown”, and “mediaeval mud huts within 30 years”, would appear to be increasingly justified. Look at what is actually being said and done. In the Brecon Beacons, a new college called Black Mountains (BMC) is promoting its new climate breakdown university degree. One short course offered by this seat of learning is ‘Composting Toilets‘. This will serve as a “high quality exemplar” that will inform the design and building of some of the “potential future facilities on the BMC campus”.

As well as learning, this new college is obviously a seat of great easement as it moves effortlessly to a Net Zero future. The World Economic Forum says you will eat bugs and own nothing – to this might be added that you will crap into a hole in the ground, and, of course, be happy.

April 30, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

Russian fuel exports surge despite sanctions – Bloomberg

RT | April 27, 2023

Russia is on course to record its highest seasonal export rate of petroleum products in seven years despite Western oil sanctions that took effect in February, Bloomberg reported on Wednesday, citing tanker tracking data from Vortexa.

According to the report, shipments of clean petroleum products, including diesel-type fuel, amounted to 1.9 million barrels a day during the first three weeks of April. If that rate continues for the remainder of the month, it will be the highest for this time of the year since at least 2016, calculations show.

The new data follows multi-year highs reached in March, when shipments were at their highest since the start of 2016.

Russian diesel-type fuel exports were targeted by an EU embargo on seaborne petroleum products that came into force in early February, along with a G7 price cap on the same products. In response, Moscow announced it will cut output by 500,000 barrels a day between March and December.

Despite the sanctions, data shows that Russia has successfully redirected fuel shipments. Most of the country’s petroleum products in April have been shipped to Türkiye as well as North African countries, including Morocco, Tunisia, and Libya.

Russia has also boosted exports to South American countries, most notably Brazil. According to a recent report by Reuters, Russia’s share of Brazilian diesel fuel imports is set to reach 53% in April, compared to just 0.2% a year ago.

April 27, 2023 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

Who gains from a forever war in Ukraine?

BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR  | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | APRIL 26, 2023 

The newly elected president of the Czech Republic Petr Pavel is an unusual European politician. He is the second president in his country with a military background but the first without political experience. 

He never saw combat duty and is an arm chair military strategist but lionised as a “senior NATO leader” — whatever that may mean. The high noon of Pavel’s professional career in the military was reached in 1993 when while serving in the UN Protection Force in Bosnia, he led a team of 29 soldiers to evacuate a French military outpost under siege by Serbian soldiers, which he executed after overcoming obstacles that slowed down the operation such as fallen trees which his soldiers had to remove from the road. France decorated Pavel. 

At any rate, the 61-year old soldier-politician has hit the road running when barely 7 weeks into his new job as head of state, Pavel threw a curve ball claiming China cannot be a reliable mediator between Russia and Ukraine due to Beijing’s secret craving for “more war.”  

Pavel assessed that China gets cheap oil, gas, and other resources from Moscow in exchange for promises of “partnership” and its interest lies in prolonging the status quo “because it can push Russia to a number of concessions.” 

These remarks could have been dismissed as those of a greenhorn but for his fame as a “senior NATO leader” and the Czech Republic’s reputation as a chattel and cats-paw of Washington. Hence the big question: What is the Biden administration up to? 

The obvious thing will be that Pavel’s remark on “cheap” oil and gas from Russia to China is a gross simplification of a complicated story. Europe was receiving Russian gas and oil for decades at low prices on the basis of long-term contracts until the EU, under American pressure, took the idiotic decision to sanction Russia.

Whereupon, Russia turned to other markets, principally Asian, China being one of them. The rest is history. What’s the point of sitting upon the ground and telling sad stories?

Europeans should feel worried that even after the war ends, once Russia diversifies its export markets, they may never again get “cheap” Russian gas. (By the way, China is not the only beneficiary, as Europeans who continue to buy Russian oil and petroleum products from Indian companies at much higher prices would know!) 

Pavel spoke in the context of the expected announcement by Joe Biden seeking the presidency once again in 2024. One hugely consequential part of Biden’s announcement on Tuesday is that the prospect of the Ukraine war ending between now and 2024 November elections in the US can now be deemed as practically nil. 

The only way it can happen otherwise is if the US outright wins the war and candidate Biden claims victory. But the reaction from Moscow shows that what is in the cards is an escalation in Ukraine that is fraught with great risk of a direct conflict between Russia and the US.

Top Kremlin officials came out on Tuesday with a spate of statements on an impending showdown with the Biden administration. The Russian media disclosed that Russia’s new state-of-the-art Armata T-14 main battle tank has been deployed on the Ukrainian front lines. 

Moscow anticipates large scale US interference in Russia’s internal politics to create conditions that would undermine the country’s stability, as part of a grand design to trigger a break-up of the Russian Federation, as had happened to the former Soviet Union. (here)

Moscow estimates that the Biden administration will try hard to bring about a regime change in the Kremlin. Above all, Moscow no longer rules out that the US escalation in Ukraine may aim to create conditions posing grave threat to the Russian state. ( here) 

The former president Dmitry Medvedev vividly spoke of such a scenario warning explicitly that Russia may be compelled to resort to first use of nuclear arms if its existence is threatened, underscoring that paragraph 19 of the country’s nuclear doctrine states that nuclear weapons “can be used when aggression is carried out against Russia with the use of other types of weapons that endanger the very existence of the state. It is essentially the use of nuclear weapons in response to such actions. Our potential adversaries should not underestimate this.” 

Specifically, with reference to Biden’s mental health and failing faculties, Medvedev also tweeted: “Biden has made the decision, after all. A daring geezer. In place of the American military, I would immediately make a fake trunk with false nuclear codes in case he wins, so as to avoid fatal consequences.” 

On the other hand, the spectre that haunts the Biden administration is that Europe cannot easily extricate itself from its relationship with China and it is the interests of Old Europe’s economic heartlands that will ultimately determine EU policy.

Make no mistake, just 3 countries of Old Europe — France, Italy and Germany —  account for more than a half of EU’s GDP and they also happen to be China’s largest trading partners in the EU. Amidst the brouhaha over French President Emmanuel Macron’s recent endorsement of a close industrial relationship with China, what has gone unnoticed is that German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is on the same page as Macron. Equally so with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni. The European industry is also loathe to lose China as a privileged trading partner, after having lost Britain and Russia. 

New Europeans like Pavel may have different priorities, being the strongest trans-atlanticists in the EU, but East Europe makes up just 10% of the EU’s GDP and does not speak for the EU, despite the media hype its leaders have lately enjoyed as “frontline states”, due to Anglo-American patronage.         

Suffice to say, there is trepidation in the American mind as to whether the EU will follow the US into a confrontational position with China in the coming months, or would strive to become more independent of the US, with all the consequences that would ensue. Equally, from the viewpoint of Old Europe, the gnawing doubt is whether a future US administration would want to align with Europe even if Europe were to align with the US. 

On balance, it is difficult to visualise the EU fully aligning with the US in an all-out conflict with China over Taiwan, agree to freeze Chinese official reserves as it did last year with Russia, and stop investing in China.

The EU economy is simply not built for cold-war style relations, as it has become too dependent on global supply chains. All things taken into account, therefore, the strong likelihood is that the pro-China lobby in Germany will win this debate. In fact, in the process, the Franco-German alliance may be rekindled, too.  

Pavel’s demonisation of China as an evil spirit stalking Europe can be put in perspective. His is a surrogate voice mouthing Biden’s angst that as the Ukrainian military is comprehensively ground down in the battlefields by the Russian forces in the months ahead, Europe may join hands with China to bring the war to an end. 

April 26, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia responds to Western asset seizure

RT | April 26, 2023

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday signed a decree establishing a mechanism for temporarily taking over foreign assets. In its first practical application, the Federal Property Management Agency was put in control of Russian subsidiaries of Fortum and Uniper, energy companies based in Finland and Germany, respectively.

The decree allows for temporary state takeover of assets deemed to be “of paramount importance for the stable functioning of the Russian energy sector,” the agency said in a statement. Germany’s Uniper SE held a 83% stake in Russian energy generation and distribution company Unipro, while a Finnish state-owned company Fortum Oyj controlled over 98% of its local subsidiary, with a total power generation capacity of 11,2 and 4.7 gigawatts respectively.

The move will “ensure the uninterrupted operation of companies significant for the national economy and eliminate the risks of the political position of a number of unfriendly countries influencing” the security of Russia.

Original owners are considered to have temporarily lost control of the property, but not forfeited it outright. The measure “helps preserve the investment climate in Russia and reduce the outflow of capital from the country,” the agency added.

The decree also establishes a legal framework that enables the Kremlin to take over more foreign assets should other countries seize Russian private or government property in their jurisdictions, or threaten national, energy, or economic security of Russia.

Germany and Poland have so far seized an estimated $22 billion in assets belonging just to two Russian companies, Gazprom and Rosneft, according to media estimates. In June 2022, Berlin took over Gazprom Germania GmbH. In November, Warsaw confiscated Gazprom’s 48% stake in the EuRoPol GAZ joint venture, owners of the Polish portion of the Yamal-Europe pipeline.

The Polish subsidiary of Novatek, which dealt in liquefied natural gas and other hydrocarbons, was also seized. Its assets were put up for sale earlier this month.

In September last year, Germany seized Rosneft’s stake in three major oil refineries, accounting for 12% of the country’s total refining capacity. Rosneft’s complaints against the move were dismissed by German courts. A law enacted by the Bundestag on April 20 may allow outright expropriation of Russian assets by Germany.

The US government has sought to seize Russian state and private assets frozen under the Ukraine-related sanctions and turn them over to the government in Kiev, a move that critics have said would change the very nature of sanctions from an instrument of pressure to purely punitive.

April 25, 2023 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | Leave a comment

Finland’s Military Spending Soars to Cold War Levels as It Joins NATO

By Igor Kuznetsov – Sputnik – 25.04.2023

Having formally joined NATO earlier this month, Finland has recorded its highest year-on-year spike in defense spending since 1962, the height of the Cold War.

Finland, which shares the longest border with Russia in Europe at 1,300 kilometers, recorded the most drastic spending boost in the EU (36 percent), underpinned by a number of costly purchases, such as a new fleet of 64 F-35 fighter jets from US weapons company Lockheed Martin. The 10-billion-euro procurement was billed as the single largest splurge in the Nordic country’s history.

During the late Cold War-era, Finland spent approximately 1.9 percent of its GDP on defense, yet saw its spending plummet in the subsequent years and reach its lowest in 2001 at 1.1 percent of GDP. Barely two years earlier, the defense expenditure still stood at a meager 1.3 percent of GDP. However, last year alone, Finland’s outgoing five-party government led by the Social Democrats agreed to add more than 2 billion euros ($2.2 billion) in defense spending, citing hostilities in Ukraine as a pretext.

In doing so, Finland notably eclipsed its fellow European nations, such as Lithuania, Sweden and Poland, which saw the next biggest spikes in their defense budgets at 27 percent, 12 percent and 11 percent, respectively.

As a new-fledged NATO member, Finland has emerged as one of the top military spenders in the alliance, spending about 2 percent of GDP. In 2022, only the US (3.5 percent of GDP), Poland (2.4 percent), Estonia (2.3 percent) and the UK (2.1 percent) spent more on defense per capita than Finland. Despite NATO’s spending goal of 2 percent, many nations fall well below this target. For instance, Finland’s neighbor Norway had a spending level of just 1.55 percent. Its neighbor Sweden, with which it filed a joint NATO bid only to part ways later on, has pledged to reach the bloc’s target of military spending “as soon as possible,” whereas Denmark seeks to reach NATO’s target within a decade, by 2033.

Meanwhile, global military expenditure rose to a record high last year amid the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, which spurred European nations and, broadly, the West, into reaching spending levels unseen since the Cold War. European military spending alone shot up 13 percent last year.

According to an estimate by researchers from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), last year’s total global military spending rose by 3.7 percent in real terms to $2.24 trillion. SIPRI stressed that the hike rests on multi-year plans to boost spending from several governments, which is why it is reasonable to expect military expenditure in Central and Western Europe to keep rising in the years to come.

April 25, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

G7’s desire to further embargo Russia a sign of desperation

By Ahmed Adel | April 24, 2023

According to a Japanese government source, the Group of Seven (G7) members are considering an almost complete ban on exports to Russia. However, such a move only demonstrates the desperate position that the G7 finds itself in because its already existing sanctions regime has not only failed to deter Moscow from its military operation in Ukraine, but has boomeranged and hit the economies of the Group much more severely than Russia.

Although G7 countries have stopped exporting luxury goods and equipment related to the military sector to Russia, the source said the latest plan could expand the trade embargo to used cars, tires, cosmetic items, and clothing. Again, these are non-essential items that can very easily be sourced from other markets.

There is credence to this source when considering that Japan will host the G7 summit on May 19-21 in Hiroshima. The centre of discussions will primarily focus on expanding support to Ukraine and strengthening sanctions on Russia, something that Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK, and the US will approve.

The problem for G7 member countries is that if they decide to introduce a complete embargo on the export of products to Russia, they will end up hurting their own industries more as they cut out a major market and allow rivals from China, India and elsewhere to fill the void. For this reason, many Western politicians still fear that a move by the G7 will lead to a harsh reaction from companies that continue to trade with Russia, and more alarmingly, retaliatory sanctions by Moscow.

In addition, from a technical point of view, it is very complicated to implement a total ban on exports to Russia. Russia’s bilateral trade with the European Union in 2021 reached €257 billion, with €158 billion of those being Russian exports to the bloc. Although this has obviously dropped since the Russian military operation began, many problems will still emerge. Despite billions of dollars being slashed from bilateral trade, we are still speaking about tens of billions of dollars, something that is not abstract but is backed by jobs and livelihoods.

It is also unlikely that large economies outside of the G7, such as China, India, Brazil, and South Africa, would join the embargo. This means that it is impossible to impose a global embargo on Russia. In addition, the G7 cannot expect Russia to continue selling its oil and other export goods without receiving payment.

Finally, from a legal perspective, the decision needs to be ratified at the UN level, where Russia and China will vote down such an idea. Therefore, the G7 member countries are just making a cynical attempt to weaken and destroy the Russian economy to supplant a competitor and preserve the unipolar world order.

Importantly, if the G7 imposes a near complete embargo, it will be Europe that will suffer the most and not the US since it is the least dependent on trade relations with Russia. In general, Moscow and Washington do not have deep economic ties, unlike Europe. Western European countries are already in a bad economic situation, and since the introduction of sanctions, they have experienced more damage and inconvenience.

For example, high-tech European products intended for Russia will now lose a major client and they will not so easily find a new one. This situation will lead to European companies having to reduce production, thus leading to lower profits and workers being laid off. Even worse for the West, as already said, is that Russia will not be left without necessary products because they can be purchased from many other countries.

For his part though, Japanese Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry, Yasutoshi Nishimura, refused to comment on the possibility of a complete ban on the export of products to Russia at a press conference in Tokyo. He noted that this issue concerns “diplomatic negotiations.”

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has invited Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to join the G7 summit via online stream. In a communique released on April 18, the G7 foreign ministers committed their countries to intensifying sanctions imposed on Russia since the military operation began last year. The foreign ministers demanded Russian forces to immediately and unconditionally withdraw, something which obviously will not happen since it is Moscow, and not the West, in a position of strength.

They also vowed to counter sanctions by Moscow and warned of the “severe costs” that third parties could face if they do not stop providing assistance for Russia’s war effort. However, this is an empty threat as it will be impossible for the G7 to impose a “severe cost” on the likes of China, India, Brazil, South Africa and many others, particularly since their own cooperation is deepening.

Therefore, the G7’s desire to embargo Russia even further will not only humiliatingly fail as all the previous sanction packages have, but is also a demonstration on the desperation they are experiencing in face of Russia’s success in the military operation and rebounding the West’s economic war.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

April 24, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Orbán says the US cannot push Hungary into war – the rest of Europe would be wise to follow his policy

BY THOMAS BROOKE | REMIX NEWS | APRIL 20, 2023

The relentless criticism by the Biden administration towards the incumbent Hungarian government is entirely disproportionate and unjustified, and does little to separate the current U.S. regime from the malign superpowers it seeks to distance itself from. Hungary’s leader recognizes this and is putting his own country’s interests ahead of those of the United States, a stance that Europe would be wise to follow.

Despite pressure from the U.S., Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said his country cannot be pushed into joining the war on the side of Ukraine.

“The United States has not given up its plan to squeeze everyone, including Hungary, into a war alliance, to go with the crowd,” Orbán told a press conference last week.

“But I have made it clear several times, and Hungarian diplomacy has also expressed this, that the will of the Hungarian people is clear, and our knowledge of history is quite solid, so we will not allow this.

“We will not allow them to squeeze us into a war. We will not send any weapons, and we will not be involved in a conflict that is not our war,” the Hungarian premier added.

Orbán made the remarks amid growing tension with the U.S. Recent disparaging remarks by David Pressman, Biden’s top diplomat in Budapest, have been dismissive of a country which, whilst remaining on many issues a conforming ally to the United States, has had the audacity to form its own view on matters unfolding on its doorstep, and opted not to become entirely subservient to U.S. interests when the two countries have vastly different worldviews and face inherently different geopolitical threats

“We have concerns about the continued eagerness of Hungarian leaders to expand and deepen ties with the Russian Federation, despite Russia’s ongoing brutal aggression against Ukraine and threat to transatlantic security,” Pressman told a news conference in Budapest last week after criticizing the Hungarian government for retaining its stake in Russia’s International Investment Bank (IBB) upon which the U.S. government imposed sanctions last week.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán berated the shortsightedness of the U.S. decision on state radio, explaining that the Russian-controlled financial institution based in Budapest “could have played a serious role in developing Central European economies,” and expressed concern that the United States simply doesn’t understand the geopolitical climate and should stop acting like it does.

US Ambassador Pressman would push Hungary into war

The intention of Joe Biden’s man in Budapest is to drag Hungary into the conflict in Ukraine, writes József K. Horváth for the Magyar Hírlap newspaper

The Hungarian government withdrew its membership of the IBB the day after the sanctions were imposed, with Orbán stating the U.S. action had rendered the bank’s operations impossible.

“It can’t serve its function,” Orbán said. “We decided that under these circumstances, Hungary’s participation in the bank’s further work has become pointless.”

It’s not the first time the Hungarian government has been frustrated by decisions made in far-away Washington without an understanding of the nuanced consequences for the region.

U.S. government officials have regularly criticized the Hungarian administration for not following suit with the U.S. approach to the conflict in Ukraine, criticism which the Hungarian premier considers to be misguided.

“When I hear about nuclear weapons, or that a Western European country is taking depleted uranium weapons to Ukraine, I think of Chernobyl,” Orbán said while referring to Britain’s decision to send depleted uranium tank ammunition to Ukrainian forces.

“An American would never think of this, but we know that if something happens in Ukraine it’s best if people don’t go out into the streets, so we know what happened then.

“Or if in America they hear that someone died on the Ukrainian-Russian front, they obviously sympathize because it’s a loss, but it is not the same feeling as ours, because I immediately think that the person who died could be a Hungarian person from Transcarpathia.

“Everything that happens there becomes a part of our lives that very day.

“The dimension of the Americans is quite different, so I say that we rightly expect the United States to take note of Hungary’s special situation, its proximity to Ukraine, and to understand that we are therefore on the side of peace and want to stay there.”

Given the continued animosity from the U.S. towards the Orbán administration, it could be assumed that Hungary was an active belligerent nation in the conflict, and yet Budapest has complied with every anti-Russian sanction approved by the European Union, despite voicing its opposition to these actions.

“We have never agreed with sanctions, but we do not dispute anyone’s right, including the United States to impose sanctions if they see fit. We acknowledge these sanctions and roll with them,” Orbán said recently.

Hungary has welcomed tens of thousands of Ukrainian refugees and provided humanitarian aid to Kyiv and the affected areas, and it has denounced the Russian invasion of Ukraine from day one.

As is its right, Budapest has maintained its neutrality with regard to military intervention and assistance, and has refused to change its stance despite U.S. protestations.

Orbán added that his administration is mature enough to retain the longstanding Hungarian-U.S. alliance despite a difference in approach to the conflict in Ukraine.

“The American-Hungarian friendship must endure this difference of opinion,” he stated last week.

Whether Joe Biden and his politically-appointed diplomat in Budapest is willing to accept a difference of opinion and move on remains to be seen.

However, if the recent anti-Russian poster campaigns dotted across Hungary with the support of the U.S. embassy are anything to go by, it is difficult to see a reconciliation in the immediate future between the two countries, at least not while Joe Biden’s Democrats remain in the White House.

April 23, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Russia-China border region sees surge in investment

RT | April 23, 2023

Ukraine-related Western sanctions against Russia have failed to stop the flow of investment in the country’s far-eastern Khabarovsk Region, bordering on China, Governor Mikhail Degtyarev said this week.

According to the official, a total of 26 new investment projects worth 133 billion rubles ($1.6 billion) were launched in the area in 2022, including a large-scale infrastructure project to build the Pacific Railroad.

“It is comparable to the historical construction of the BAM (Baikal–Amur Mainline railway). It is the first private railroad in Russia to have a length of 500 kilometers. In a short period of time, we have already built 100 kilometers,” Degtyarev stated.

Local projects launched in 2022 include a mining and processing plant at the Kutyn gold deposit in the Tuguro-Chumikansky district, and also the Solnechnaya tin ore processing station. A copper and tin producing plant in the Solnechny district is also nearing completion. The region has also started the development of the Malmyzhsky copper deposit.

Degtyarev also noted that the region last year successfully introduced a simplified procedure for granting land to businesses without them having to bid for import substitution projects, particularly in agriculture, which also drew investors to the area. This year the opportunity was extended to individual entrepreneurs and legal entities involved in import substitution, who can buy a land plot for these purposes for the symbolic sum of 1 ruble.

In his earlier interview, Degtyarev noted that Khabarovsk has been actively boosting cooperation with neighboring China over the past several months, with trade between the region and the Asian powerhouse up 31%, and cargo turnover up by 106% year-on-year as of the end of 2022.

The region also continues working on the Russo-Chinese joint trans-border development territory on Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island, where both Russian and Chinese companies can be residents. They will receive significant benefits for export-import operations, making the territory a de facto free-trade zone.

“We are seeing a turn to the East. There is growth in cargo turnover, growth in industrial production as a whole, and growth in the gross regional product. The Eastern part of the country is now pulling the economy, because the Western regions, unfortunately, faced treacherous sanctions and the collapse of logistics chains,” the official stated.

April 23, 2023 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

NATO Expansion versus OPEC+ Oil Shock

By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – 19.04.2023

Finland’s inclusion in, and the consequent expansion of, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), has supposedly brought much joy to the Western world supposedly fighting Russia for the protection of democracy and human rights. The real purpose of this fight, as we already know, is to preserve the West – mainly, the US-led – dominated post-Second World War world order, which assumed the shape of unilateral US hegemony after the fall of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. With Russia – and China – delivering the hitherto clearest shock to this unilateral hegemony of the US, the latter is doing all it can to win more and more allies to augment its position against a very formidable threat. NATO’s expansion is one of the many steps the West – again, mainly the US – has recently taken to preserve the world order. But the ongoing Russia-Ukraine (NATO) military conflict has changed the world in many significant ways. For one thing, NATO’s expansion notwithstanding, the US cannot possibly even hope to successfully “isolate” Russia globally. As far as China is concerned, the US can neither “decouple” from China without facing a heavy cost, nor will be doing so without geopolitical consequences.

More than anything else, the recent decision of the OPEC+ countries to cut their production levels – and consequently raise oil prices – shows that the world’s most powerful oil producers continue to stand with Russia. This unanimous decision is not just an economic matter. In fact, the ability of the OPEC countries to reject US pressure and follow an autonomous approach – and support Russia – shows how these countries are actually following the Russian and Chinese vision of a multipolar world where countries – or blocks – can act according to their own national interests and without compromising them to appease the US. For the US hegemony, this irresistible drift toward multipolarity is much more damaging for its future than the expansion of NATO. NATO’s expansion means the organisation now has one more country with no significant military power from within Europe as its member, but the consolidation of alternative – and counter-hegemonic – power blocks outside of Europe/NATO means a fast shrinking space across the rest of the world for the US and its allies to force advantageous foreign policy outcomes.

Now, whereas the decision to cut oil production is going to hurt the US and its allies in Europe already facing an economic crunch and a cost of living crisis, the decision also shows an acute indifference to how it will hurt the Biden administration directly both geopolitically and domestically.

Consider this: since the start of the Russia-Ukraine (NATO) conflict, the US has been selling expensive oil to Europe. In March, the US oil sales to Europe hit an all-time high. But this enhanced supply has also led to about a 50 per cent increase in prices. Now, with OPEC deciding to cut its production and raise oil prices, Washington’s European allies – and indeed consumers in the US itself – will now be buying even more expensive oil and gas, which could add to the cost of living crisis they’re already facing.

Domestically, therefore, the Biden administration’s decision to force Europe to cut back their sale of Russian oil and/or put a price cap and thus start an economic war against Russia will become even more sensitive. Politically speaking, the Biden administration’s policy to release oil regularly from the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve in attempts to micromanage the oil prices and keep them abnormally low in the interests of American consumers will become even more difficult to implement in the next few weeks.

For the Biden administration – which is jubilant over NATO’s expansion – its decreasing inability to permanently micromanage oil prices coincides with the start of what many see as Donald Trump’s aggressive presidential campaign.

There are, as such two shocks. The fact that Russia has OPEC on its side means the US and NATO have so far failed to defeat Russia in any meaningful sense at all. Joe Biden cannot claim a victory over Russia for his re-election due next year. On the other hand, Washington’s inability to influence OPEC means drastic foreign policy failure, indicating a Russian success. In geopolitical terms, the OPEC+ move came after a meeting between Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak and Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman in Riyadh on March 16 that focused on oil market cooperation. Therefore, it is widely seen as the tightening of the bond between Russia and Saudi Arabia.

The failure to manage the cost of living crisis and the fact that the Biden administration has lost allies, such as Saudi Arabia, combine to become very crucial rallying points for an assertive Donald Trump, who is already framing hurdles against his come-back in terms of the Biden administration’s “conspiracy” to have him convicted and eventually arrested.

Within Europe, this oil shock will complicate domestic politics and foreign policy even further. Recent large-scale protests in France against pension reform or the widespread strikes in Britain for higher wages will become a recurrent scene. Replication of such protests across Europe could force many of the European countries to reconsider the extent of their support for the US war on Russia (and China).

The oil shock delivered by Russia and Saudi Arabia, therefore, outweighs the shock the US expected to deliver to Russia via NATO’s expansion – which is unlikely to have any effect on the ground in Ukraine, and which Russia has other means to counter.

Salman Rafi Sheikh is a research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs.

April 21, 2023 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , | Leave a comment

US to double its ‘defense’ budget

By Drago Bosnic | April 21, 2023

Back in late March, top American General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the United States of America would be doubling its military budget in case the Kiev regime was defeated by Russia. At the time, Milley claimed that “not supporting Ukraine now would lead to a massive increase in future defense budgets”. He also added that “it would lead to a global conflict that has been avoided since World War II ended”.

“If that rules-based order, which is in its 80th year, if that goes out the window, then be very careful,” Milley said while testifying before the US Congress on March 23, further adding: “We’ll be doubling our defense budgets at that point because that will introduce not an era of great power competition. That’ll begin an era of great power conflict. And that’ll be extraordinarily dangerous for the whole world.”

Firstly, it should be noted that Milley’s remark about the so-called “rules-based (world) order” supposedly lasting 80 years is completely misplaced. The geopolitical situation in the last three decades has merely been a shadow of the post-WWII global order. With the US conducting virtually incessant aggression against the entire world, any notion that there are actual rules that equally apply to everyone is beyond laughable. However, his claim that Washington DC would need to double its “defense” spending is much more serious and consequential. Ironically, he’s threatening to do that while “warning” about a looming global conflict, one which is solely caused by the US itself, as it’s the only country on the planet with an openly stated strategy of “full spectrum dominance”.

Milley testified before the House Appropriations Committee-Defense on the next year’s DoD (Department of Defense) budget, alongside Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. The figure for the Pentagon officially stands at $842 billion, $69 billion more than the $773 billion the military requested for 2023. However, the total spending on national “defense”, including work on nuclear weapons (officially under the jurisdiction of the Department of Energy), pushes that up to $886 billion. This is without including the so-called “aid” for the Kiev regime, which stood at approximately $113 billion at the beginning of 2023. However, the updated figure is now getting closer to $150 billion and there’s no indication that it will stop growing any time soon.

General Milley has repeatedly described the conflict in Ukraine as “an important national interest” and “fundamental to the United States, to Europe and to global security”. It could be argued that it’s neither of those things, as the world, the EU and the US itself all have more pressing concerns. Unfortunately, this notion is extremely unlikely to lead to any peaceful settlement, especially as the US Military Industrial Complex (MIC) keeps getting its windfall. While some members of Congress have consistently been skeptical about the “aid” for the Kiev regime, the majority still have a strong preference for the official narrative. The skeptics usually cite “the US and Kiev regime’s failure to more clearly define their strategic goals” as the primary reason for the lack of “more adamant support”.

This clearly indicates that the only “strategic goal” is to keep the war going for as long as possible, which also explains the repeated calls for the perpetual increase of the Pentagon’s budget. However, Milley’s call for doubling it is a major escalation and it’s unclear how exactly Washington DC is planning to achieve such a monumental task. Global military spending for 2022 was around $2.1 trillion, meaning that the US is already at over 40% of the world’s total with its current budget. Doubling it, even over the next several years (also taking into account other superpowers would certainly respond to it) could push that figure close to 60%. In terms of the US federal budget, it would also require further cuts to investment in healthcare, infrastructure, education, etc.

As the military currently spends approximately 15% of the entire US federal budget, obviously, doubling it would mean the percentage would go up to (or even over) 30%. Such figures are quite close to what the former Soviet Union was spending in terms of its overall budget, which was one of the major factors that contributed to its unfortunate dismantlement. On the other hand, it also forces others to drastically increase their own military spending. If China were to follow suit, its military budget would then be close to $500 billion, with Russia’s military budget approaching $200 billion. This would cause a military spending “death spiral” that would be extremely difficult (if possible at all) to control, leading the world into an unprecedented arms race.

However, this “new” Cold War could potentially be far more dangerous than the “old” one, as there would be approximately half a dozen superpowers and great powers competing for influence and a bigger geopolitical footprint. On the other hand, if the rest of the world refuses to respond in kind, such a massive increase in US military spending would only push the multipolar world into greater integration, as it would be the only way to counter US aggression without doubling their own military budgets. Either way, the US is left with a choice – further escalate, not only with Russia, but the rest of the world as well, or find an off-ramp. Otherwise, its inflation will surge so much that the “doubling” of the Pentagon’s budget will happen on its own.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

April 21, 2023 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »