Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

German Farmers Set To Lose Up to 3 Million Tonnes of Harvest Due to EU Ukraine-Related Sanctions

Samizdat – 29.05.2022

The European Union is currently working on a new wave of sanctions that might further limit fertiliser imports from Russia and Belarus despite the looming agricultural crisis that may affect millions.

German farmers are sounding the alarm over a potential contraction in their output and further price increases this year caused by the EU’s sanctions against Russia and Belarus, Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten has reported.

EU sanctions imposed in the context of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine limit fertiliser imports, namely potassium chloride and potash fertilisers, which many European farmers rely upon.

German farmers expect that this year’s output may be 3 million tonnes less than previous years as a result of current measures. The fertiliser shortage will hit grain crops particularly heavily as countries already fear shortages in their global supplies due to the conflict in Ukraine and difficulties in maritime trading routes.

Another aftermath of the EU’s Ukraine-related sanctions targeting fertilisers may be the growth of consumer food prices, the German news outlet warned. In 2021, Europe imported 4.6 million tonnes of a total 13 million of fertilisers from Belarus and Russia. With shipments from these countries limited by April’s sanctions package, the supply shortage is set to raise already high fertiliser prices – and as such consumer prices – even more, farmers warned.

Boosting local fertiliser production in the EU and elsewhere in hopes of reducing prices is also scheduled to confront challenges posed by western sanctions, as manufacturing requires large power consumption and cheap energy sources, both areas which have been impacted by the Ukraine-related measures.

Despite these difficulties, EU countries continue to seek to do away with Russian gas even amid prospects of surging energy prices and unemployment. For his part, Germany’s Minister of Labour and Social Affairs Hubertus Heil has gone on the record as stating that an immediate ban on Russian gas will lead to a notable reduction of jobs in Germany. Heil has called to avoid such an outcome.

EU countries are currently discussing their sixth package of sanctions against Russia and Belarus. With many member-states already experiencing negative economic results from earlier packages, the EU is struggling to negotiate conditions on banning or limiting oil imports from Russia due to the opposition of several countries within the bloc. The new sanctions package also reportedly includes proposals on further limiting fertiliser imports from Russian and Belarusian chemical companies, even as the threat of global hunger and the lack of grain and crops looms.

May 29, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Poland Wants Billions From Brussels to Support Ukrainian Refugees

Samizdat – 28.05.2022

Over 3.6 million Ukrainians, equivalent to nearly 10 percent of Ukraine’s population, have fled to Poland in recent months, with millions more making their way to Russia, Romania, Germany, Hungary, Moldova, the Czech Republic, and other nations to escape the crisis in their home country.

Poland will need billions of additional euros from the European Union to help support the millions of Ukrainian refugees in the country, Deputy Minister of the Interior Pawel Szefernaker has indicated.

“From the very start we said that the aid we provide costs in the billions, not millions of euros. The European Union’s aid for countries which help refugees should also be counted in the billions – just as it was in the case of Turkey or Greece between 2015-2016”, Szefernaker said, speaking to the Polish Press Agency (PAP) on Saturday.

The official, who is tasked with coordinating Poland’s response to the refugee crisis, complained that the European Commission has yet to transfer any funds to assist the Polish government via its Recovery Assistance for Cohesion and the Territories of Europe (REACT-EU) programme. The fund was topped up with 3.4 billion euros to help members absorb Ukrainian refugees in April by the European Parliament, and is expected to be allocated to EU countries bordering Ukraine, as well as those whose refugee intake is greater than one percent of their total population.

PAP says Warsaw is expected to receive a 144.6 million euro payout from a 400 million euro tranche of funding allocated to five countries, including Poland, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic for refugee assistance. However, even that money has not yet been delivered, with an EC spokesperson saying the European Commission will discuss subsidy agreements with Warsaw “in the coming weeks.”

Szefernaker suggested a separate, new fund needs to be established by the EU to deal with the financial burden. “The measures referred to by the European Commission are not additional measures. These are resources shifted from various other funds that were already in the European Union’s budget”, he said.

The official noted that 95 percent of the remaining funds given to Poland by Brussels were committed to various other investments, and could not be redirected to help refugees.
Over 42 billion euros were earmarked for Poland from the bloc’s REACT cash pile last year, but was frozen over the Polish government’s intransigence on “LGBT-free” zones – municipalities where LGBT “propaganda” marches and other events are banned.

Poland has long been a net beneficiary when it comes to contributions to the EU budget, getting billions more euros than it pays into the bloc, which is funded mainly by Germany, France, Italy, and, until 2020, Britain.

Poland spent years battling Brussels in the mid-late 2010s over EU demands that the country take in refugees from Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, and other countries turned into failed states by US and NATO interventions, with the European Commission finally dropping its “refugee quotas” initiative in 2020 amid Polish, Hungarian, and Czech intransigence.

When the Ukraine crisis exploded in February, Warsaw rushed to accept millions of Ukrainians with open arms, on top of millions more already working and living in the country. Since the 2014 Euromaidan coup, over two million Ukrainians have taken up roles in sectors of the Polish economy, ranging from construction and agriculture to logistics and housework, with Polish businessmen valuing them as a source of cheap but skilled labour.

May 28, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , | Leave a comment

The World Bank’s Impractical Electric Car Clap-Trap

Net Zero Watch | May 26, 2022

At a World Bank event in April, former chief economist Lord Nicholas Stern called for a global ban on the manufacture and sale of combustion engine vehicles. At COP26, a coalition of multilateral development banks signed a joint statement announcing their intentions to ‘increase the level of private capital mobilised’ to fight climate change. Activists were infuriated that it omitted divestments from funding fossil fuels. Both the World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank have faced industry pressure to stop investing in internal combustion engine vehicles by 2025. Sixty-eight percent of transport investment by the World Bank involves combustion engines. But perhaps the World Bank has not floored the accelerator on EVs yet because they recognise roadblocks keep the wheel out of reach for working families.

The UK Government insists that combustion engine vehicles will be banned from production, importing, and sale by 2030. But a global semiconductor shortage has produced a projected nine percent slump in electric vehicle sales in the UK. Motorists are modelled to save £700 on fuel for making the switch to EVs. However, road pricing and tolls have been proposed to replace Treasury revenue once fuel duty becomes obsolete. Therefore, the gap between petrol and electric car running costs may close. Electricity costs could even eclipse fuel prices, should the renewables generating electricity fail.

There are also infrastructure impediments to overcome. The ban would require 400,000 charging points to be installed across the UK by 2030, up from the only 35,000 that were in place as of last year. Many rural areas remain ‘charging blackspots’, inaccessible for EVs on long journeys. Annual installation must increase ten-fold to meet the Department for Transport’s promise that ‘drivers will never be further than thirty miles from a rapid charging station’.

Even if charger targets are met, streets could be lined with cars charging for up to twelve hours at a time. This issue will be exacerbated in cities. ‘Generation Rent’ faces housing price rises of 14.3 percent; the fastest for seventeen years. Their reliance on being packed and stacked into high-rise apartments means a third and rising of the population have no access to private off-street parking. 24.6 percent of vehicles are parked on streets overnight. A report published by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) modelled electric car ownership will increase traffic congestion eleven percent by 2050.  Combined with charging station scarcity, congestion could become chronic — with motorists jousting for parking and charging spaces, and charging stoppages slowing delivery times for various courier services. This constitutes quite the regression from the convenient five-minute-stop at your local petrol garage.

All of this is presuming that the cars themselves can be manufactured to meet demand. Making electric cars requires six times the minerals as combustion engine vehicles: needing thirty times as the lithium, nickel, and other metals currently in circulation. The UK must expand battery production capacity by ninety times the present amount to keep pace. But absent abundant domestic resources, Britain remains heavily dependent on our geostrategic rivals for the raw materials used in EV and battery manufacture.

Britain imports over 2200 tonnes of lithium every year. Recent sanctions on Russia affected Britain’s top import: $12 billion of annual metal imports. Nickel prices saw a short-squeeze, with prices increasing 250 percent to over $100,000 a tonne. Both metals are instrumental in EV battery manufacturing.

Meanwhile, China controls eighty percent of global annual battery production capacity, sixty percent of global graphite production, sixty five percent of nickel refining, and eighty percent of cobalt refining. This is because China’s Belt & Road Initiative has annexed more than a third of global precious metals deposits: including forty rare ore deposits in Zimbabwe, the ‘white goldrush’ of lithium under Argentinian salt-flats, and $1 trillion in lithium reserves in Afghanistan.

There is mounting evidence that the only way out of our rare metals shortage is to mine asteroids in outer space. Elon Musk’s rocket-measuring contest against Jeff Bezos and Richard Branston may be an interstellar gold rush to become Earth’s first trillionaire. But until these mad scientists invent safe passage to the stars, the rest of us will keep driving petrol cars.

But instead of abandoning infeasible commitments to the abolition of transport emissions within the next eight years eco-authoritarians use these shortages as an excuse to restrict energy consumption and abolish car ownership.

In addition to the usual anti-motorist platitudes by the cycling lobby, some have taken to advocating ride-share apps as a reason to ‘give up owning a vehicle’. These rent-only alternatives have the downside of making your means of mobility contingent on the kindness of strangers. Ride-sharing is a convenient addition to the transport economy. However, if car ownership were displaced wholesale by public transport and hire-cars, there are dire concerns for civil liberties. Say the wrong thing about the environment, and governments, or the increasing number of companies adopting environmental credit scores, can deplatform from anything except walking. Consumer choice must be a core principle of free societies — and that includes your right to buy and drive a petrol car.

EVs also render homeowners vulnerable to arbitrary power outages. Green Party Baroness Natalie Bennett has suggested that electric cars can be used as driveway backup generators, should renewables fail to meet consumer demand. The National Grid and Octopus Energy are piloting a policy which drains EV batteries of energy during generation droughts. Even if all of Britain’s cars became electric overnight, and full storage capacity could be returned to the grid without losses, it would still fall short of the deepest energy deficit by eighty-seven percent. This precedent is not only impractical: it means that the state can drain your EV’s battery flat, and enforce a travel lockdown anytime it pleases. If they can’t confiscate your car, the government can remotely deactivate your home charging point anytime they like.

Electric cars are, incontrovertibly, a great idea in theory. But those wanting everyone to drive electric won’t get anywhere fast by banning the combustion engine — all they will achieve is pricing all but a privileged few out of car ownership entirely. That would be politically suicidal; my apolitical plumber recently told me, ‘I’ve never been to a protest, but if they try to take my car, you’ll see me in the streets.’ If the World Bank and British government follow through on their plan to ban the combustion engine, they may well have riots on their hands. They must abandon the planned petrol car ban, or risk terrible consequences.

May 26, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | | Leave a comment

Americans are Increasingly Wary of US Efforts to Harm Russia Causing Economic Damage in America

By Adam Dick | Ron Paul Institute | May 26, 2022

On March 8, President Joe Biden declared, in a speech announcing a ban on imports of Russian oil and gas, that these and other actions taken by the United States government “to inflict further pain on [Russia President Vladimir Putin]” would “cost us as well, in the United States.”
­
Since then, the US government’s economic sanctions on Russia — as well as spending, military training, intelligence sharing, and weapons transfers to attack the Russian military — have increased as the economic conditions in America have declined. Some of that economic decline is a result of the actions against Russia, as Biden suggested would be the case. Other parts of the decline have other causes.
­
New poling results from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research indicate that Americans are increasingly wary of incurring economic costs in America due to efforts to inflict pain on Putin or, as the poll puts it, “sanctioning Russia.” In fact, despite the nonstop hate Russia propaganda in the big money media, the polling indicates the majority of Americans are now opposed to harming the American economy to advance the anti-Russia crusade that Biden and most US Congress members have been pushing.
­
Support among polled individuals for “sanctioning Russia as effectively as possible, even if it damages the US economy” dropped from 55 percent on March 22 to 51 percent on April 22 to 45 percent on May 22. Meanwhile, support for the contrary position of “limiting damage to the US economy, even if it means sanctions on Russia are less effective” rose each month from 42 percent to 45 percent to 51 percent.
­
Americans seem to be increasingly viewing fighting Russia as not worth the cost Biden mentioned in his March 8 speech. Will many politicians in Washington, DC soon come around as well?
­
More about the poll results may be read here in a Tuesday Associated Press article by Nomaan Merchant and Hannah Fingerhut.

Copyright © 2022 by RonPaul Institute

May 26, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Hungary will order large, mainly multinational, corporations to hand over “extra profits”

Samizdat | May 25, 2022

Hungary intends to fund the military and social safety programs by taxing banks, insurance companies, airlines, energy and telecom utilities and others, Prime Minister Viktor Orban announced on Wednesday.

It is his first action under a state of emergency that Budapest has just enacted, citing the conflict in neighboring Ukraine.

“We ask and we expect that those who made extra profit in this time of war help the people and contribute to the national defense budget,” Orban said in a video posted on Facebook.

In a follow-up post, Orban said that a “drastic increase in prices” was due to the ongoing conflict and the “sanctions policy in Brussels,” while “banks and large multinational companies” are reaping extra profits thanks to rising interest rates.

To fund the military and social safety networks, the Hungarian government has set up two funds, and will “require banks, insurers, major trade chains, energy and retail companies, telecommunications companies and airlines to deposit a large portion of their extra profits” there.

This regime will be in effect for the rest of 2022 and 2023, Orban added.

Budapest announced the state of emergency on Tuesday, just hours after Orban’s new cabinet was sworn in. The Hungarian parliament quickly approved a constitutional amendment allowing emergencies to be declared in case of war in a neighboring country – in this case, Ukraine.

Orban’s extra-profit tax affects mainly multinational companies. According to Bloomberg News, it will help shore up Budapest’s budget due to a de facto EU embargo. Brussels had imposed a funding freeze against Orban’s government following his landslide victory in last month’s election, citing “rule of law concerns.”

The funding freeze regulations were adopted by the EU administration in order to pressure the governments in Hungary and Poland to follow the policies of Brussels when it came to immigration, judiciary, LGBT issues and other matters in which Budapest and Warsaw have dissented.

May 26, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

EU seeks to criminalize sanctions evasion

Samizdat | May 25, 2022

The European Commission has insisted that breaching EU sanctions must be made a crime and that it was especially important to ensure strict adherence to the restrictions against Russia amid the Ukraine conflict.

“The European Commission is proposing to add the violation of EU restrictive measures to the list of EU crimes,” the bloc’s executive body said in a press release on Wednesday.

Such a step taken at the level of the EU should make it easier to investigate, prosecute and punish the violation of sanctions in all 27 members states, it pointed out.

The commission has singled out some of the potential criminal offenses, such as activities that seek to circumvent sanctions, including concealing assets, failing to freeze funds subject to restriction, and engaging in prohibited trade, such as importing or exporting goods covered by trade bans.

Brussels also put forward new, more stringent rules on asset recovery and confiscation, which should also contribute to compliance with the EU’s measures “to ensure that crime does not pay by depriving criminals of their ill-gotten gains and limiting their capacity to commit further crimes.”

According to the initiative, once such behavior is criminalized violating sanctions could also become grounds for the seizure of assets.

“EU sanctions must be respected and those trying to go around them punished… As a Union we stand up for our values and we must make those who keep Putin’s war machine running pay the price,” said Vera Jourova, the commissioner for values and transparency.

The commission added that it will present a legislative proposal after all of the member states agree on its current initiatives.

Russian became the most sanctioned country in the world after the EU, US and other nations imposed several rounds of harsh restrictions in response to its military offensive in Ukraine.

Among other measures, the foreign assets of Russia’s central bank were frozen, and a wide array of foreign businesses stopped dealing with the country.

The EU is currently discussing a sixth package of sanctions, which could include turning away from Russian oil. However, this faces opposition from some members, particularly Hungary, which compared the proposed curbs to “an atomic bomb.”

May 25, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Russia makes move on foreign firms leaving the country

Samizdat | May 25, 2022

Lawmakers have approved a bill allowing Moscow to introduce control over foreign companies’ assets in Russia if their owners have ceased activities in the country “for no apparent economic reasons.” The legislation passed in the first reading in the Russian State Duma on Tuesday.

The bill applies to companies in which foreign equities account for 25% or more if they are of ‘major’ significance for the Russian economy. They could be the only supplier of ‘critically important industries’, produce goods of prime necessity, or be a local economic mainstay.

The legislation is primarily aimed at firms that have left Russia and decided to do so “based on the anti-Russian sentiments in Europe and the US,” a statement published by the State Duma says.

External control could only be imposed by a court for a period of up to 18 months, the bill says. The measure could then be lifted before the scheduled date if shareholders that together own more than 50% of the stock file a request with the Russian authorities and remove the causes that led to the court decision.

A court would be able to impose external control over a company’s assets for a number of reasons, including supply-side shocks, key supply chain breaches, as well as job slashing and “actions or inaction” that could lead to casualties or technogenic disasters.

Moscow has been mulling the seizure of foreign assets for months after many foreign companies halted operations in the country over the fighting in Ukraine. Consumer protection groups such as the Public Consumer Initiative (OPI) have been calling for the measure to be introduced against the likes of Apple, IKEA, Microsoft, IBM, Shell, McDonald’s, Volkswagen, Porsche, Toyota, H&M, and others.

Under the proposed bill, external management would not mean full nationalization. Foreign owners would have the opportunity to get their assets back and resume operations in Russia, or sell their shares.

May 25, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Can nuclear power achieve net-zero carbon?

By Donn Dears | Power For USA | May 20, 2022

Three steps are required to determine the number of new nuclear power plants needed to achieve net-zero carbon by 2050.

Step 1

Step one determines the number of new nuclear power plants needed to replace all the electricity generated by fossil fuels in 2021.

Today, there are 94 nuclear power plants in operation which generate 18.9% of the 4,116 billion kWh consumed in the United States. 

The amount of electricity generated by fossil fuels in 2021 is 2,512 billion kWh, which is arrived at by subtracting renewables and nuclear from the total.

Step one, therefore, is to establish the number of new nuclear plants needed to replace the 2,512 billion kWh generated by fossil fuels. On average, each existing nuclear plant generates 8.3 billion kWh in 2021.

  • Number of new nuclear power plants to replace fossil fuels = 304

Step 2

Step two is to determine how many new nuclear power plants are needed to supply the electricity needed when all light vehicles are battery-powered, and homes use electricity for heating rather than natural gas. The national renewable energy lab (NREL) has determined that total electricity consumption will double when all light vehicles are BEVs and homes rely on electricity for heating. Hydro can’t be doubled, and without increasing other renewables the additional electricity needed to be generated by nuclear will equal the amount generated by all methods in 2021, i.e., 4,116 billion kWh.

  • Number of new nuclear power plants  to double electricity consumption by 2050 = 497

Step 3

Step three is to determine the number of new nuclear power plants that will be needed to generate the electricity required to produce enough hydrogen to make steel and cement that meet net-zero carbon requirements. ( Cement will also require carbon capture and sequestration to be fully net-zero carbon.) There’s little reliable data on using hydrogen in the making of cement, while there is considerable data for using hydrogen in the making of steel. The estimate shown here for the number of additional nuclear plants is based on the amount of hydrogen required to make 62 million tons of steel, which excludes the amount of steel made using scrap in electric arc furnaces, and then doubling the number of nuclear plants to compensate for the production of cement. (The United States produced 87.9 million tons of steel in 2021.)

  • Number of new nuclear power plants required to generate the electricity used by electrolyzers to produce the hydrogen to make steel and cement = 80

The total number of new nuclear power plants to achieve net-zero carbon by 2050 is:

  • 304 + 497 + 80 = 881

Or, 31 new nuclear power plants every year between now and 2050.

This, in the face of the fact that the US hasn’t been able to build one new nuclear plant over the past ten years.

Additional considerations

Nuclear power plants are scheduled to be shut down beginning in 2032 unless their operating licenses are renewed, with all existing nuclear power plants shut down by 2064. While two units in Georgia are likely to be completed in the next year or two, both Diablo Units in California are scheduled for closure in 2025. There is no provision in the above calculations for additional nuclear power plants to replace any shut down before 2050.

Wind and PV solar have expected lives of 20 years. This means that:

  • All 54,244 wind turbines and all PV solar panels installed before 2022 will also have to be replaced with additional nuclear power plants before 2050.
  • All wind turbines and all PV solar panels installed between now and 2030 will also have to be replaced with additional nuclear power plants before 2050.

These additional nuclear power plants have not been included in the above calculations.

Conclusion

If nuclear power is used in an attempt to eliminate fossil fuels, it will require building at least 31 new nuclear power plants every year between now and 2050. 

  • However, not one new unit has been built during the past ten years, during which time there has been an ongoing effort to build 2 units in Georgia.

This reality check should give everyone pause, as it demonstrates that it’s not possible to eliminate fossil fuels using nuclear power.

Net-zero carbon cannot be achieved using nuclear power.

May 24, 2022 Posted by | Economics | | Leave a comment

Biden Says Record-High Gas Prices Part of ‘Incredible Transition’ US Going Through

Samizdat | May 24, 2022

Following the beginning of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine on 24 February, the US and several of its allies cut off all imports of Russian oil and gas, which added greatly to soaring gas prices for Americans.

President Joe Biden has argued that the current record-high gas prices in his country are part of America’s major transition from fossil fuels.

“Here’s the situation. And when it comes to gas prices, we’re going through an incredible transition that is taking place that, God willing, when it’s over, we’ll be stronger and the world will be stronger and less reliant on fossil fuels when this is over,” he said during a joint press conference with Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on Monday.

POTUS then insisted that his administration’s actions helped “keep it [the gas prices] from getting worse — and it’s bad”.

“The price of gas at the pump is something that I told you — you heard me say before — it would be a matter of great discussion at my kitchen table when I was a kid growing up,” Biden said before admitting, “It’s affecting a lot of families.”

House Republican Steve Scalise was quick to respond by telling reporters that Biden is “saying the quiet part out loud now.” In an apparent nod to the Biden administration, Scalise added that “they’re causing you pain at the pump because it’s all part of their radical agenda.”

He spoke as the national average for a gallon of regular gas in the US stood at $4.56 as of Monday, which is more than $0.40 higher than it was just a month ago.

In some US states such as California, the average price for a gallon of regular gas has meanwhile already reached $6.06.

While Biden previously tried to cast the price increases as the fault of Russian President Vladimir Putin, labelling high gas prices “Putin’s price hike”, the recent polls show that Americans aren’t buying it.

A survey conducted by conservative pollster Rasmussen found that beliefs about the importance of rising gas prices were essentially unchanged since November 2021, but that a majority (51%) of American voters surveyed held POTUS responsible for higher fuel prices. Another 26% blamed oil companies for the price hike, while just 15% blamed Putin.

May 24, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | | Leave a comment

Russian oil shipments hit record high

Samizdat | May 24, 2022

Nearly 62 million barrels of Russia’s flagship Urals crude oil, a record amount, are currently in tankers at sea, according to data from energy analytics firm Vortexa, as cited by Reuters.

However, traders are reportedly struggling to find buyers for some of the cargo as EU countries fail to agree on a possible Russian oil ban. Other buyers have reportedly been shunning Russian crude due to fears of future sanctions.

According to Vortexa, the volume of Urals crude oil on the water is triple the average recorded before February 24, when Russia’s military operation was launched in Ukraine.

“The headline numbers, showing Russian exports are still relatively strong, don’t tell the full story,” Houston-based energy strategist Clay Seigle said, as quoted by Reuters. “Russian oil at sea is continuing to accumulate.”

The number of Urals cargoes at sea with no set destination constitutes 15% of the total, also a new high, Seigle said, adding that some of the oil could be in transit to undisclosed buyers, while others could be unsold cargoes.

Most barrels of Russian crude oil have reportedly headed to Asia, mostly to India and China, while volumes headed to Europe have also increased.

May 24, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

Ukraine on the verge of debt collapse

By Lucas Leiroz | May 23, 2022

In recent months, many Western countries have offered financial assistance to Kiev, with billions of dollars and euros being sent to assist in the purchase of weapons and military equipment to be used against Russian forces. For the Western media, such aid is a “humanitarian effort”, and for Ukrainian propaganda it is an “example of cooperation between Ukraine and the West”. But none of this is real. It is just simple business. Kiev is taking loans it will have to pay back in the future. And, certainly, payment will only be possible at the expense of a major inflationary crisis.

One of the largest global risk analysis agencies, Moody’s Corporation, recently issued a report in which it downgraded Ukraine’s credit score from Caa2 to Caa3, which corresponds to “poor” or “high risk”. At the same time, the agency’s perspective on the credit situation in Ukraine changed from “under review” to “negative”, with expectations of significant deterioration in the short term.

Among the justifications for such classification, the agency emphasized the widespread debt situation that the country is currently in. Loans recently taken by Kiev from Western countries as a result of the military conflict have now reached a highly worrying level, which precludes the existence of any optimistic expectation of rapid economic and social recovery. The company predicts that Kiev’s debt will jump from 49% of the national GDP – last year’s rate – to 90% in 2022, forming an absolutely catastrophic scenario in the coming months.

In fact, Western loans are acting as an important form of aid in the immediate purchase of military material, which allows Ukraine to continue fighting for an extended period of time, despite the zero chances of victory. The problem, however, is that the constant taking of loans is creating an unsustainable debt for the Ukrainian economy, which will result in default.

This scenario aggravates a series of previous factors that were already harming the country’s economy. Ukraine was already in debt for almost half of its GDP before Moscow launched the special operation. Now, with the general costs of the current conflict, there are already estimates by the World Bank in economic losses around 45% of the country’s GDP. Furthermore, with the current situation, the Ukrainian government has lost a considerable part of its tax revenue. Adding all this to the current loans, there really does not seem to be any good expectations in the economic area in Ukraine, regardless of the outcome of the military conflict.

Recently, the G7 announced a new aid program for Ukraine, which includes several billion-dollar packages sent by each of its members. The public objective of the measure, this time, is to “save” the Ukrainian economy, not just to encourage militarization. However, the practice of offering loans is maintained on a large scale. Donations to Kiev, although existing, are few and of low value – as, for example, the recently announced German donation of one billion euros. In general, loans remain the norm, both for immediate aid and for long-term macroeconomic recovery planning. Obviously, the propaganda effect of this is immense, both for Zelensky and his allies. But the seriousness of the real situation cannot be ignored by analysts: Ukraine will not have enough money to pay for all this.

If Russia ended its special operation today, the result would be a Ukraine militarily defeated, politically disorganized and economically indebted, dependent on constant Western aid – which would result in new debts, in an endless cycle. The best way to handle the situation is through a formal surrender on the part of Zelensky, accepting the peace conditions demanded by Moscow, and initiating negotiations for the restructuring of the country. With a neutral and demilitarized Ukraine, there would be possibilities for cooperation with both Russia and the West for economic reconstruction. But, apparently, this is not the desire of the Ukrainian president and his team.

The most likely scenario is that Russia will be forced at some point to increase the intensity of the operation to achieve its objectives of neutralization, demilitarization, and sovereignty for Donbass, which will make Kiev leave the conflict in a much more disadvantageous situation and much more economically dependent on the West. Post-special operation Ukraine will only be able to pay off its debt in the long term, after successive renegotiations, and through a large tax rise and inflationary crisis, with the final consumer being punished for the mistakes made by the Kiev Junta.

In the same way that the UK only paid off its debts to the US for reconstruction after WWII in the 2000s, Kiev will face long times of debt in the coming decades. And this may be even worse if this “aid” – which only benefits Western creditors themselves – is not cut now.

Lucas Leiroz is a researcher in Social Sciences at the Rural Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; geopolitical consultant.

May 23, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | | Leave a comment

Looming food crisis caused by Anti-Russia sanctions, not Moscow’s actions: Kremlin

Samizdat | May 23, 2022

Sanctions imposed on Moscow are the real cause of a looming global food crisis, not Russia’s actions, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists on Monday.

He said that Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed with UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres’ opinion that there was a risk of global hunger.

“That is true. But when it comes to grain, the president said that the imposed sanctions and restrictions led to the collapse that we are now witnessing,” Peskov revealed.

The US, the UK, the EU and many other countries imposed hard-hitting sanctions on Russia in response to its military operation in Ukraine. In Guterres’ view, Russia’s offensive in the neighboring country has added to the problems that were already affecting the situation on the food market, namely climate change and the Covid-19 pandemic. Guterres pointed out that Moscow should stop blocking the export of food from Ukrainian ports but at the same time made it clear that fertilizers and food products from Russia should be allowed to reach the world markets without obstacles.

Peskov noted that both Russia and Ukraine have always been reliable grain exporters and that Moscow in no way prevents Kiev from exporting grain to Poland by rail. He also emphasized that as the Poles send trains with weapons to Kiev, “No one prevents them from exporting grain back on the same trains.”

In regard to maritime transportation, the Kremlin spokesman accused the Ukrainian forces of planting naval mines in the Black Sea. According to Peskov, such actions made trade and shipping “virtually impossible” and special measures needed to be taken in order to resume navigation.

“And when it comes to the alternative routes, again, we are not the source of the problem which is causing the threat of world hunger. The sources of this problem are those who imposed sanctions, and the sanctions themselves,” Peskov claimed.

Also on Monday, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Andrey Rudenko said that allegations that Moscow was blocking the export of Ukrainian grain in the Black Sea ports, thereby leading to the deficit on the grain market, were “nothing more than speculation.”

“All restrictive measures that were introduced against Russian exports should be canceled,” Rudenko said.

Earlier this month, Deputy Chairman of the Security Council Dmitry Medvedev stressed that Russia would not export food to the detriment of its own population. Referring to the anti-Russia sanctions, the former Russian president also said that the West could blame its own “cosmic cretinism” for the looming food crisis.

As Russia and Ukraine are major wheat suppliers, accounting for some 30% of global exports, prices have significantly grown since the launch of the Russian military attack and the subsequent sanctions imposed on Moscow.

The fact that Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus are leaders in the production of fertilizers also aggravates the situation on the global food market – something that was mentioned by both Guterres and Medvedev.

May 23, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Progressive Hypocrite | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »