Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Global Oil Output Short of 6Mln BPD Due to Western Policy: Russian Energy Official

Samizdat – 14.09.2022

ST. PETERSBURG, Russia – A significant investment shortage into traditional energy sources caused by the Western sanctions and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policy has caused a global production deficit of 5-6 million barrels per day, Russian First Deputy Energy Minister Pavel Sorokin said on Wednesday.

“The current situation on the energy market is not a result of the last few months but a consequence of the policy that was being created by the West during the last decade. The sanctions, which were imposed not only on Russia but on other countries, as well as the green agenda and the ESG policy of the last 10-15 years caused a significant shortage of investments into traditional energy sources. It has deprived the world of 5-6 barrels of oil per day, according to our estimates,” Sorokin said at the 11th St. Petersburg International Gas Forum.

The official also said that traditional energy sources are short of at least 250-270 billion euros ($25.1- $27 billion) in investments per year, adding that the slowdown in demand for oil and gas in the developing countries in Latin America, Africa and in the Asia-Pacific region affect the global economy, increasing the risks of economic recession.

The 11th St. Petersburg International Gas Forum (SPIGF), which is taking place from September 13-16 in the Expoforum Convention and Exhibition Centre, is hosting more than 80 events with the participation of 700 speakers from 20 countries. It aims to outline prospects for the further development of the sector, according to the organizers.

Among the main events of the SPIGF 2022 convention program are the international scientific and practical conference “Underground Gas Storage: Reliability and Efficiency” and plenary session “Gas Engine Fuel: a Reliable Solution in the Face of New Social-Economical and Environmental Challenges.”

September 14, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

Europe’s leaders continue to prioritise US interests over citizens’ wellbeing 

European protestors demand an end to anti-Russia sanctions to alleviate cost-of-living crisis.

By Ahmed Adel | September 13, 2022

With winter approaching, Europeans are thinking about how their livelihoods will be affected. Rallies, strikes, demonstrations and protests are gaining momentum as the cost-of-living becomes unbearable. Although European media tried to hide this, even paid local propagandists cannot ignore the growing anger amongst Europeans. 

Protests have occurred in Prague, Lisbon, London and many other cities, with people belonging to a wide variety of ideologies, including left and right-wing, and even libertarians and anarchists. Although labelled by the media as Putin’s stooges, name-calling is not having the desired effect, especially as people are united by the fear of winter woes, regardless of political affiliation.

Though attempts are being made to blame the continent’s declining economic situation on Russian President Vladimir Putin, Europeans are no longer accepting this excuse. Europeans are realising that anti-Russian sanctions hit them much harder than the Russians.

Forty percent of Austria’s population does not support anti-Russian sanctions, 51 percent of Italians are against them, and 80 percent of Germans believe that Berlin should not send weapons to Ukraine and instead seek a peaceful solution to the conflict in Ukraine. With these ideas, Europeans are rallying across the continent, with people not being deterred despite being accused of serving Putin.

However, it is the US ruining Europe, something which Moscow itself does not want as it would rather see an independent and prosperous continent. None-the-less, the European elite made an unconditional surrender of their countries and peoples to serve the interests of Washington instead.

It is evident that European protestors are completely devoid of common leadership and clear common goals and strategies. These protests are not an organised mass led by a charismatic leader, but small groups of people, and as already mentioned, from varying political ideologies. 

Their potential success remains questionable though since citizens cannot change their leaders until the next election cycle. Germans, for example, were outraged when Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock openly said that she will defend Ukraine’s interests, even against the will of voters. To make matters worse, she made the statement in English, an obvious signalling to Washington. Despite their outrage, Germans cannot remove Baerbock from her post and replace her with another politician until the next election. 

Baerbock is hardly alone though when it comes to powerful politicians dismissing the opinion of the people, with only very few exceptions existing in Europe. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban is one of the few exceptions as he prioritises the welfare of his citizens rather than capitulation to American pressure.

In neighbouring Austria, state leaders are now putting pressure on Vienna and are asking federal authorities to negotiate with Moscow. State leaders have a negative attitude towards sanctions, with Upper Austria Governor Thomas Stelzer saying that “nothing is set in stone”. Austria’s approach to sanctions will have to be changed as “they will cause great damage to our lives”, added Stelzer. 

Much will also depend on the results of the Italian elections. It appears that most Italians support Russia-friendly parties. There is a serious chance that at the end of September they will win the election and a coalition of Russia-friendly politicians will appear in the Italian Parliament. Giorgia Meloni of “Brothers of Italy” supported Putin’s re-election as president in 2018, Matteo Salvini of “League” became famous for being photographed in Moscow’s Red Square wearing a t-shirt with an image of Putin, and Silvio Berlusconi is introducing himself as the man to improve European-Russian ties.

More importantly, Europeans are beginning to understand that Washington is not a protector, but a dangerous and unscrupulous state that is prioritising its own interests, not Europe’s. Russia at war, whilst Europe cripples itself by arming Ukraine and imposing anti-Russia sanctions, is an ideal scenario for Washington. In this way, not only is one of Washington’s main adversaries bogged down in the conflict with Ukraine and NATO, but it deepens Europe’s status as nothing more than a submissive protectorate

With frustrations and worries reaching boiling point, and the harsh winter only some weeks away, European leaders need to quickly reach a compromise with Moscow to help alleviate the cost-of-living crisis or else citizens will face a suffering, at least at an economic level, not experienced since World War II.

Ahmed Adel, Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

September 13, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Special Military Operation, Season 2

Big Serge | September 12, 2022

September 9 – 11 will go down in history as a period of great significance in the Russo-Ukrainian war. Both belligerent parties crossed very important thresholds, which taken together suggest that the war is entering a new phase. On the 9th and 10th, Ukraine achieved its first concrete success of the war by retaking all the Russian-held territory in Kharkov Oblast west of the Oskil river, including the western bank of Kupyansk and the transit node of Izyum.

Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin convened an emergency meeting of his national security council, which precipitated Russia’s own escalation on the 11th, when Ukrainian infrastructure was at long last subject to attack, plunging much of the country into darkness.

It seems clear that the war is entering a new phase, and it seems highly likely that both parties will attempt to take decisive action in the near feature. For now, let’s try to parse through the developments of the past week and get a handle on where the war is heading.

The Kharkov Counteroffensive

At the risk of sounding very pedantic, Ukraine’s counteroffensive in eastern Kharkov Oblast is an excellent demonstration of the difficulties in evaluating military operations. Everyone agrees on the basic geography of what has happened: Ukraine cleared everything west of the Oskil river of Russian forces. Nobody agrees on what this means, however. I have seen all of the following interpretations posited – note, people reached all of these conclusions from the same set of data:

  • Russia has drawn Ukraine into a trap and will soon counterattack
  • Russia voluntarily withdrew from Kharkov to prioritize other fronts
  • Russia drew the Ukrainians out to hit them with artillery
  • Russia suffered a massive intelligence failure and did not see or respond to Ukraine’s offensive
  • Russia suffered a defeat in battle and was forced to retreat

Let’s do a methodical autopsy and see what we come away with.

The first thing we want to note is that the disparity of forces on this front was absolutely laughable. Ukraine assembled a strike group of at least five full brigades, and aimed at a line of contact which had no Russian regular troops at all. The Russian frontline defenses in the region were manned by allied donbas militia and national guardsmen. It seems there was a lone Battalion Tactical Group (BTG) in Izyum, but little else.

It is undeniable, even for Ukrainians celebrating the advance, that Kharkov oblast had been almost completely hollowed out of Russian troops, leaving little more than a screening force. Two important things flow from this. First, that the Ukrainian shock group was in most places advancing against virtually nonexistent resistance. Secondly, more ominously for Ukraine, the low quality units left behind for screening purposes were able to put up good resistance against the Ukrainians – the Rosgvardiya men in Balakliya held out tenaciously for several days before evacuating through a corridor.

In my previous analysis, conducted while the Ukrainian counteroffensive was just beginning to develop, I noted two important things about the shape of the battlefield.

  1. I argued that Ukraine would be unable to push across the Oskil and properly exploit their offensive.
  2. I noted that Ukraine was making rapid advances against thinly manned, hollowed out portions of the front, and that Russia had committed very little to the battle.

Both of these statements were correct. I freely admit, however, that I drew the incorrect conclusion from them. I believed the Ukrainian advance would culminate at the Oskil river, leaving them vulnerable to a Russian counterattack by the arriving reserves. It seems fairly clear now that this is incorrect, and the Russian reserves that were en-route were tasked with stabilizing the defense at the Oskil, not launching a counterattack.

This was not an operational trap by Russia, but neither was it a victory in battle for Ukraine – for the simple reason that there was not much of a battle at all. Russia had already hollowed out these positions, and withdrew the remaining screening forces very quickly. Ukraine covered a lot of ground, but were unable to destroy any Russian units, because there really weren’t any there.

It would be silly to try to talk the Ukrainian side out of their excitement right now. Credit where credit is due, they did manage to put together a good sized shock group, aim it at a weak portion of the front, and regain a good bit of ground. Considering the abject lack of successes for Ukraine in this war, they are rightfully trying to eke every last bit of morale and propaganda out of this.

I do not, however, believe that the territorial losses in Kharkov in any way change the ultimate calculus of the war. Russia hollowed out this front and surrendered ground, but they were able to maul the Ukrainian forces as they advanced with relentless artillery and airstrikes. Ukrainian channels widely report overflowing hospitals. The Russian Ministry of Defense claimed 4,000 killed and 8,000 wounded for Ukraine during their advance – I believe this is high, but even if we reduce the numbers by 50% (leaving us with 6,000 total casualties, reasonable given how much ordnance Russia discharged) it is very clear that the loss ratios in this operation were stacked badly against Ukraine, as they always are.

Momentum

As I predicted in my last piece, Ukraine has so far been unable to exploit their offensive by reaching the operational depth. They have been totally unable to project forces across the Oskil River. With the advance eastward firmly culminated, they are seeking to maintain their momentum, or at least the appearance of it.

Ukraine’s successful advance in Kharkov Oblast has been augmented with a blitz of fakery and propaganda designed to simulate a total shift in strategic momentum. These include fakes related to Russian domestic politics, such as fabricated calls for Putin’s impeachment, and battlefield misinformation, like claims that the Ukrainian Army has breached the borders of the LNR or stormed Donetsk City. They have also circulated out of context videos (the most popular one shows a Russian vehicle depot in Crimea) purporting to show that the Russians abandoned hundreds of vehicles in Izyum.

The fakery is not important. Ukraine will, however, also attempt to maintain battlefield momentum by piggybacking on the Kharkov operation with additional counteroffensives. They continue to attempt to cross the Donets River in force to storm Lyman, unsuccessfully. They also continue their attacks in the Kherson direction, making little progress and taking high casualties.

The most important development, however, is the claim that a second Ukrainian shock group has been assembled in Zaparozhia. This is an area where the geography actually would allow Ukraine to achieve operational exploitation. A successful drive towards Melitopol or Mariupol would compromise the land bridge to Crimea and threaten to crumble Russia’s entire position in the south.

Unlike Kharkov, however, this is not a hollowed out portion of the front. The newly formed Russian 3rd Corps is concentrated in the south, and Russian convoys have been spotted recently moving through the Mariupol region. Ukraine may very well attempt yet another offensive operation in this direction, but given the strength of the Russian grouping here the results will be more like Kherson than Kharkov.

Sovereignty

During the opening months of the war, I argued on Twitter that massed offensives are difficult, and that Ukraine had not yet shown the organizational ability to organize an operational higher than the brigade level. All the attacking action that we saw from Ukraine early on took the form of single brigade – or more often, single battalion – commanders taking initiative.

Well, lo and behold, Ukraine managed to field at least two (Kherson, Kharkov) and perhaps three (Zaporizhia) multi-brigade shock groups, and launch coordinated operations. This was made possible because Ukraine is a pseudo-state, which is supplied, financed, and increasingly managed by NATO. Western agencies cannot resist bragging – Britain identified itself as the party responsible for planning and organizing the Kherson operation, while the USA claims credit for the more successful Kharkov attack.

It is difficult to overstate the extent to which Ukraine is sustained solely by the west. Ukrainian soldiers are trained by NATO officers, armed with NATO weapons, accompanied in the field by NATO soldiers foreign volunteers, and the Ukrainian pseudo-state is kept running by cash injections from the west. Videos from the Kharkov front abound with English speaking soldiers and foreign weapons.

The point isn’t just to point out, yet again, that Ukraine is a failed state – a corpse that is given the illusion of life by outside actors moving its limbs. The point is that Russia understands this and correctly understands itself to be in a civilizational collision with the west. To that end, we must understand that Russian escalation is underway, and think about what that means.

Escalation and Mobilization

By this point, the idea that Russia needs to mobilize has become a tired old meme, courtesy of the deranged Igor Strelkov. It is certainly true that Russia must escalate, but leaping directly to mobilization (putting the economy on war footing and calling up conscripts) would be a grave mistake. Russia has other, better ways to escalate. The recent Ukrainian advance in Kharkov is an obvious signal to raise the force deployment, and Ukrainian potshots at targets across the Russian border only add to the pressure to take the gloves off.

First, I would like to comment on why I am against mobilization. One of the most important dimensions of this war is the economic front. Europe is being driven to the brink by the energy crisis. The Wall Street Journal keyed in on what I believe to be the most apt descriptor of the crisis, warning of a “new era of deindustrialization in Europe.”

A full mobilization would be very costly for Russia’s economy, risking the edge that it currently holds in the economic confrontation with Europe. This, I believe, is the main reason that the Russian government was quick to quash rumors of mobilization today. There are other steps on the escalation ladder before going to total war footing.

There are already rumors that Russia is planning to change the formal designation of the war, from “Special Military Operation”. While that could mean a formal declaration of war, I think that is unlikely. Rather, Russia will likely give the Ukraine operation the same designation as its operations in Syria, loosening the rules of engagement and beginning to target Ukrainian assets in earnest.

We saw a foretaste of this last night, when Russia wiped out over half of Ukraine’s power generation with a few missiles. There are many more targets that they can go after – more nodes in the electrical grid, water pumping and filtration facilities, and higher level command posts. There is at least some probability that Russia begins targeting the command facilities with NATO personnel in them. Plausible deniability works both ways; because NATO is not officially in Ukraine – only “volunteers” – targeting their personnel is not an overtly aggressive act.

Russia also has many ways to boost its force deployment in Ukraine that fall short of full mobilization. They have a pool of demobilized contract soldiers that they can call up, as well as a pool of reservists that they can raise with a partial mobilization.

The Russian line is hardening. Just in the past 24 hours, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said there were “no prospect for negotiations” with Ukraine, and Putin said “Unfriendly forces are targeting us, and we must take initiative in order to succeed in confronting them.” Medvedev went even further just now: “A certain Zelenskyy said that he will not hold a dialogue with those who issue ultimatums. The current ‘ultimatums’ are a warm-up for kids, a preview of demands to be made in the future. He knows them: the total surrender of the Kiev regime on Russia’s terms”

If you believe the Russian government is utterly incompetent and duplicitous, feel free to view statements like this as bluster. But given the warning shot at Ukrainian power generation yesterday, my sense is that Russia is preparing to escalate to a higher level of intensity, which Ukraine cannot match with its indigenous resources. The only other player on the escalation ladder is the United States.

Dark times are ahead for Ukraine – and perhaps for Americans on the other front of this war.

The Other Southern Front

Syria and Ukraine are two fronts in the same war. This is very important to understand. In Syria, the United States has attempted to wreck Russia’s most important Middle Eastern ally and create a Trashcanistan of chaos to suck in Russian resources; in Ukraine, NATO has armed a kamikaze state to hurl at Russia’s western border. In the Russian mind, these wars are inextricably linked.

After the Kharkov counteroffensive, I strongly suspect that Russia will look for a way to strike back at the United States, without crossing red lines that could lead to a more direct confrontation. Syria is the place where this would happen. The United States maintains several illegal bases on Syrian soil, which Russia could strike using its Syrian allies much the same way that the United States is using Ukraine. Russia is in the finishing stage training a new Syrian airborne division. With Russian air cover, an attack on one of the American bases in Syria would be possible – the USA would be forced to choose between shooting down Russian planes and flirting with nuclear war, or humbly accepting the loss of an illegal base that it has worked hard to hide from its own citizens. Given the utter lack of enthusiasm among the American public for yet another war in the Middle East, it seems that the USA would simply have to swallow the loss.

Big Serge Expectations:

  1. Russian escalation of attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure and command centers.
  2. Russian force deployment raised without full mobilization.
  3. Intensification of Russian efforts to recover DNR territory.
  4. Possible escalation in Syria, likely in the form of Syrian army attacks on US bases.

September 13, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , , , | Leave a comment

US could benefit from EU recession – WaPo

Samizdat | September 12, 2022

White House officials believe the effect of a recession in the EU on the US economy would be “modest,” while some economists suggest that it would actually help America, the Washington Post has reported.

With the European Central Bank raising interest rates by 0.75 points last week amid soaring energy prices and spiking inflation, White House aides believe “the growing likelihood of a recession in Europe is unlikely to change under the current trajectory,” the paper wrote on Sunday.

However, US officials who talked to WaPo on condition of anonymity said they didn’t think that a recession in Europe would necessarily cause one in America.

One senior member of the Biden administration told the outlet that the Treasury Department and the Council of Economic Advisers had estimated that the impact on the US from such an event would likely be “modest and manageable.”

Trade with Europe accounts for less than 1% of US gross domestic product, while the country also has enough of its own natural gas to minimize the impact of a possible stoppage of Russian energy supplies to the EU, the paper pointed out.

In fact, the US economy could actually benefit from the whole situation as it would potentially cause a reduction in global demand for energy, further alleviating price pressures in the US, it added.

“If Europe goes into recession, there’s obviously less demand for a wide range of products. We’re in such a perverse situation here [that] it may actually be positive,” Dean Baker, co-founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, told the Washington Post.

However, if Moscow goes further and stops selling its oil and gas not only to the EU, but also to other markets, in response to a proposed price cap on its energy imports, it “would threaten the US economy more,” according to the paper.

“That will push the economy into recession. Gasoline prices will go skyward, back over its record $5 a gallon almost overnight. The economy can’t digest $5 a gallon – that would be overwhelming,” warned Mark Zandi, an economist at Moody’s Analytics.

September 13, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Germany imports less from Russia but pays more

Samizdat | September 13, 2022

German imports from Russia saw a dramatic 45.8% year-on-year decline in July, data from the Federal Statistical Office of Germany showed on Monday.

However, in monetary terms, German purchases of Russian products surged 10.2% to €2.9 billion ($2.94 billion), data indicates.

The imbalance arose due to soaring prices of oil and gas. The value of energy imports from Russia increased by 1.6% to €1.4 billion, according to the data, despite the much lower volume of purchases compared to the same period a year ago.

At the same time, Germany’s exports to Russia saw a substantial year-over-year drop of 56.8%.

Germany, along with other EU countries, has been seeking to reduce its reliance on imports of Russian fossil fuels, and has stepped up the effort since late February, when Moscow started its military operation in Ukraine.

Earlier this month, Finland’s Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) reported that more than half of the €158 billion that Russia earned from oil and gas exports over the past six months was paid by EU countries. The bloc has reportedly imported 54% of all Russian energy exports since late February, worth around €85 billion.

September 13, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Europe Commits Suicide-by-Sanctions

By Ron Paul | September 12, 2022

A Swiss billboard is making the rounds on social media depicting a young woman on the telephone. The caption reads, “Does the neighbor heat the apartment to over 19 degrees (66F)? Please inform us.” While the Swiss government has dismissed the poster as a fake, the penalties Swiss citizens face for daring to warm their homes are very real. According to the Swiss newspaper Blick, those who violate the 66 degree heating limit could face as many as three years in prison!

Prison time for heating your home? In the “free” world? How is it possible in 2022, when Switzerland and the rest of the political west have achieved the greatest economic success in history, that the European continent faces a winter like something out of the dark ages?

Sanctions.

While long promoted – often by those opposed to war – as a less destructive alternative to war, sanctions are in reality acts of war. And as we know with interventionism and war, the result is often unintended consequences and even blowback.

European sanctions against Russia over its invasion of Ukraine earlier this year will likely go down in history as a prime example of how sanctions can result in unintended consequences. While seeking to punish Russia by cutting off gas and oil imports, European Union politicians forgot that Europe is completely dependent on Russian energy supplies and that the only people to suffer if those imports are shut down are the Europeans themselves.

The Russians simply pivoted to the south and east and found plenty of new buyers in China, India, and elsewhere. In fact, Russia’s state-run Gazprom energy company has reported that its profits have increased by 100 percent in the first half of this year.

Russia is getting rich while Europeans are facing a freezing winter and economic collapse. All because of the false belief that sanctions are a cost-free way to force other countries to do what you want them to do.

What happens when the people see dumb government policies making energy bills skyrocket as the economy grinds to a halt? They become desperate and take to the streets in protest.

This weekend thousands of Austrians took to the streets in a “Freedom Rally” to demand an end to sanctions and the opening of Nord Stream II, the gas pipeline on the verge of opening earlier this year. Last week an estimated 100,000 Czechs took to the streets of Prague to protest NATO and EU policy. In France, the “Yellow Vests” are back in the streets protesting the destruction of their economy in the name of “defeating” Russia in Ukraine. In Germany, Serbia, and elsewhere, protests are gearing up.

Even the Washington Post was forced to admit that sanctions on Russia are not having the intended effect. In an article yesterday, the paper worries that sanctions are inflicting “collateral damage in Russia and beyond, potentially even hurting the very countries that impose them. Some even worried that the sanctions intended to deter and weaken Putin could end up emboldening and strengthening him.”

This is all predictable. Sanctions kill. Sometimes they kill innocents in the country targeted for destruction and sometimes they kill innocents in the country imposing them. The solution, as always, is non-intervention. No sanctions, no “color revolutions,” no meddling. It’s really that simple.

Copyright © 2022 by Ron Paul Institute.

September 12, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Algeria to discuss joining BRICS with Russia

The BRICS bloc represents an alternative to western economic hegemony, and can serve as a powerful tool to bypass economic sanctions

The Cradle | September 11, 2022

According to media reports on 8 September, the newly appointed Russian ambassador to Algeria, Valeryan Shuvayev, announced that the North African country’s president, Abdelmajid Tebboune, will likely visit Moscow before the end of the year to discuss mutual cooperation between the two countries.

Tebboune’s potential visit will center around Algeria’s desire to join the Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) group of emerging economies.

The BRICS group of nations represents the world’s most prominent economies outside of the western hemisphere.

In his first media appearance outside of the Russian embassy in Algeria, Shuvayev stated that President Tebboune sent a letter to Russia’s President Vladimir Putin regarding his country’s desire to join BRICS.

In May, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov visited Algeria and met with President Tebboune, as well as his Algerian counterpart, Ramtane Lamamra, where they discussed a boost in relations between both countries, and the intention to sign a number of agreements in the near future that will further enhance the relationship between Moscow and Algiers.

Two months later, in late July, Tebboune referred to the BRICS group as a significant “economic and political power” which is of interest to the North African state and added that his country holds the necessary criteria to be included into the organization.

In mid-August, former Algerian Industry Minister, Ferhat Ait Ali, said during an interview: “This bloc seeks to attract countries that are neither poor nor very rich, but rather countries that [can serve as an] alternative to Western hegemony.”

The BRICS group “includes two historical allies and partners for Algeria to trust in… namely China and Russia, and other partners who have no problem in the progress of our economic system in parallel with theirs,” the former Algerian minister added.

Algeria and Russia have historically enjoyed a smooth relationship. The Soviet Union was the first country to establish diplomatic relations with Algeria following its independence from French colonial occupation in 1962.

The BRICS group of emerging economies represents a beneficial alternative to the dominant US and western-led economic system, especially for countries negatively affected by western sanctions.

In June, the Islamic Republic of Iran submitted an application to become a member of the BRICS group. Tehran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Saeed Khatibzadeh, said at the time that the bloc’s member countries represent 30 percent of the world’s GDP and 40 percent of the global population.

September 11, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

German President Says Homeless Numbers May Rise Amid Cost-of-Living Crisis

Samizdat – 11.09.2022

More people in Germany may become homeless this winter as soaring costs of living keep adding pressure on vulnerable households, President Frank-Walter Steinmeier warned on Sunday.
Over 300,000 Germans do not have a home, Steinmeier told a conference at his Bellevue residence. Of them, 45,000 are forced to sleep rough on the streets.

“More than 300,000 is a huge figure! And let’s be clear: this number may rise in the coming months. The war and crises may increase the number of people suffering from lack of housing in fall and winter,” he said.

Germany marks the Day of the Homeless on September 11. The German president traditionally invited people who do not have a roof over their head to his Berlin residence in the upscale Tiergarten neighborhood.

Steinmeier said that the problem of homelessness was more acute than ever at this time of crisis. He urged politicians to make sure that “the topic is not relegated to the bottom of the political agenda”.

Germany and other European countries are suffering from soaring inflation and immense energy prices caused by Brussels’ decision to impose sanctions on Russia after the start of the special military op in Ukraine. As a result, gas prices and energy bills at record-high levels have become a major issue for many Europeans.

September 11, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | | Leave a comment

The Big picture of disengagement in Ladakh

BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | SEPTEMBER 10, 2022 

The Ministry of External Affairs has done the right thing by explaining its taciturn press release on Thursday in a single sentence regarding the disengagement of troops in the area of Gogra-Hotsprings along the LAC in the Western Sector of India-China border areas. 

The Official Spokesman Arindam Bagchi shared on Friday more details. Broadly, a consensus reached at the 16th round of India China Corps Commander Level Meeting on 17 July has since been fleshed out by the two sides, and the actual disengagement commenced on Thursday which will be completed on coming Monday. The following key elements draw attention: 

  • Both sides will “cease forward deployments in this area in a phased, coordinated and verified manner, resulting in the return of the troops of both sides to their respective areas.” 
  • All temporary structures and other allied infrastructure created in the area by both sides “will be dismantled and mutually verified.” 
  • “The landforms in the area will be restored to pre-stand-off period by both sides.”  
  • “The agreement ensures that the LAC in this area will be strictly observed and respected by both sides, and that there will be no unilateral change in status quo.” 
  • Going forward, the sides will “take the talks forward and resolve the remaining issues along LAC and restore peace and tranquility in India-China border areas.” 

The last two elements — prohibiting “unilateral change in status quo”  and the commitment to resolve the remaining issues — are inter-related. 

Simply put, there will be no attempts by either side to indulge in any “Mission Creep” to seize unilateral advantage of territory. This is hugely important, given the two vastly divergent narratives on what precipitated the standoff two years ago. How the “status quo” is to be understood is not yet in the public domain but presumably, it is to mutual satisfaction.

A judicious mix of firmness and realism made this agreement possible. Some Indian commentators have rushed to belittle its importance by linking it to a possible meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping next week at Samarkand.

That said, if there is going to be a meeting at Samarkand, this disengagement provides a setting for constructive discussion. Both governments have high stakes in maintaining peace and tranquility along the LAC in the present hugely transformative period in the world order. For China, issues of war and peace in the Taiwan Straits are a top priority. 

As for India, a crucial period of adjustment to new geopolitical conditions lies ahead which presents daunting challenges to its strategic autonomy and independent foreign policies, stemming from the West’s attempts to polarise the world community against Russia and China. 

Both India and China sense the high importance of pursuing their respective trajectories of economic growth and development optimally in a difficult and unfavourable climate internationally. Speaking of India, our analysts prefer — either due to ignorance or with deliberation — to sidestep the co-relation between a peaceful and tranquil border and the country’s overall economic situation. 

The Ukraine conflict is adding to global inflation by raising the cost of energy and other raw commodities while an increasingly hawkish US Fed is tightening its policies, and significantly reducing its balance sheet. There could be looming currency and foreign exchange worries. Time may have come to build up a clearing system among BRICS countries. India’s current foreign exchange reserves are at their lowest since October 2020. Persistent foreign outflows from India’s equity and debt markets have also weighed on the rupee.  

There is continuing Western interference in India-China relations and the fact that the government has sequestered the bilateral track with China is not going to be to the liking of the West. Fundamentally, the contradiction is that without India, there is no “Indo-Pacific Strategy” against China. 

In a recent interview with an Indian newspaper, the former Prime Minister of Australia and an acclaimed hawk on China, Kevin Rudd, posed the question that troubles the Western mind most: “What does India do ultimately, if China does unilaterally resolve the border, as Gorbachev did, with the Russian Federation within the Soviet Union in 1989?” 

Rudd repeated, “what would India then do in terms of China’s rise if the border was resolved, and India and China and Russia folded into one enormous market of mutual opportunity?” In such a scenario, Rudd could see only a binary choice for India: it should either “bandwagon” with China or “balance” China. 

Rudd must be a terribly disappointed man to see that there could be a Third Way. China is not really  expecting anyone to “bandwagon” with it. Its DNA is similar to India’s — pursuit of national interests while retaining strategic autonomy (even with regard to its partner Russia.) 

China takes satisfaction that India treasures its strategic autonomy. Its expectation is only that India should not align with the US to pursue  hostile policies. That is perfectly understandable, too. 

A consensus with China that neither party will try to gain territorial advantage is the maximum that can be expected today and the irreducible minimum required until such time as the Indian opinion  can accept a fair and just settlement of the boundary question in a spirit of compromise. 

Notably, Chinese commentators have appreciated EAM Jaishankar’s forceful remarks through March-April enunciating India’s oil purchases from Russia giving primacy to national interests. Conceivably, such assertion of India’s strategic autonomy created a favourable ambience in the ongoing talks at various levels with China, leading to the disengagement in Gogra-Hotsprings. 

China and India have many common interests in the emergent world order. Only two days ago, PM’s remarks at the Eastern Economic Forum plenary at Vladivostok signalled India’s interest to work with Russia in the Arctic (where China is also a participant) as also in the Northern Sea Route (where China too is a stakeholder).

By the way, the Russia-China Joint Statement on the International Relations Entering a New Era and the Global Sustainable Development (February 4, 2022)speaks about the two countries “consistently intensifying practical cooperation for the sustainable development of the Arctic” as well as the “development and use of Arctic routes.”

There is no empirical evidence to show that China has blocked India’s pathway in the Arctic or the Russian Far East, Southeast Asia, Central Asia or West Asia. The disengagement in Ladakh gives hope that the bilateral relations can be restored, especially in the economic sphere. There is no question that India should be vigilant about its defence and national security. But to be paranoid about it or getting  entrapped in xenophobic attitudes will be wasteful and ultimately debilitating. 

September 10, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

Rand Paul Hits Out at ‘Enormous Disconnect’ Between Priorities of Congress and Constituents

Samizdat – 10.09.2022

Since the beginning of the ongoing Russian special military operation in Ukraine, Washington has supplied Kiev with unprecedented amounts of funding, not least military assistance worth a total of at least $54 billion, according to the New York Times.

Republican Senator Rand Paul has lashed out at what he describes as a huge gap between Congress’ priorities and those of normal US constituents, especially when it comes to funding programs.

Speaking to Fox News, Paul argued that there’s an “enormous disconnect between those in Washington and those on the ground, like in Kentucky,” his home state which was hit by “severe” flooding in late July in which 40 people died and “hundreds of homes were lost”.

The Republican pointed to a total $54 billion dollars of funding that Washington has reportedly sent to Kiev since the beginning of Russia’s ongoing special operation to demilitarize and de-Nazify Ukraine on February 24. According to the senator, this sharply contrasts with the fact that Kentucky and much of Appalachia has struggled with serious infrastructure issues for decades.

“I was just out there,” Paul claimed. “Not one person said, ‘Can you please send more money to Ukraine?’ They said, ‘How come we’re a rich country and we’re having trouble digging our ditches, repairing our roads and all of the basic functions of government?’”

“And yet in Washington, it’s not just Democrats. You’ve got Democrats and all the Republican leadership lining up saying, ‘Please send more of our money to Ukraine,’ but I’m not hearing it at home at all,” he said.

Paul suggested that billions of taxpayer dollars pertaining to foreign assistance could be better spent at home on infrastructure-related issues, adding that these hefty sums could also help Americans ride out soaring inflation and energy crisis.

Referring to the US’ total national debt, Paul said, “We’re $30 trillion in the hole and it’s inflationary”. According to him, “You borrow more money to buy weapons. It also causes inflation. And so really what I hear still around Kentucky and around the U.S. is, ‘My gas costs so much. We can’t go on vacation this year. The groceries cost so much […]”.

In an apparent nod to constituents, the senator argued that, “They all instinctively know this is from the massive debts, the massive borrowing, and the huge COVID lockdowns and all the mistakes that were foisted upon us by Democrats, by Biden, by the Democrat Congress.” Paul warned that he thinks that “there’s a huge wave building”.

The remarks followed US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announcing that the White House had approved another $675 million in military assistance to Kiev, which includes howitzers, shells, Humvees, armored ambulances and anti-tank systems, among other weapons and munitions. Moscow has repeatedly warned Washington that supplying Kiev with arms will only prolong and aggravate the Ukraine conflict.

September 10, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

Germany has ‘stupidest government’ in Europe: MP

© AFP / John MacDougall
Samizdat | September 9, 2022

Germany’s government is the “stupidest” in Europe for managing to embroil itself in a full-blown “economic war” with its top energy supplier, Russia, left-wing politician Sahra Wagenknecht said on Thursday.

Speaking in the Bundestag, the former co-chair of the party Die Linke (The Left) urged an end to anti-Russian sanctions and the resignation of the country’s vice chancellor and economy minister, Robert Habeck.

While describing the ongoing conflict in Ukraine as a “crime,” Wagenknecht said the anti-Russian sanctions are “fatal” for Germany itself. With energy prices out of control, the country’s economy will soon “just be a reminder of the good old days,” the MP warned, as she urged canceling the restrictions and engaging in talks with Russia.

“We really have the stupidest government in Europe,” she told the parliament, calling for Habeck to resign.

“The biggest problem is your grandiose idea of launching an unprecedented economic war against our most important energy supplier.”

“The idea that we are punishing Putin by impoverishing millions of families in Germany and destroying our industry while Gazprom is making record profits – how stupid is that?” Wagenknecht wondered.

The controversial speech met quite a mixed reaction, with Wagenknecht’s remarks scoring applause in the Bundestag from MPs of polar opposite political views, including members of the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD). However, multiple left-wing politicians rushed to distance themselves from Wagenknecht’s statements and condemn her.

“The party’s position on sanctions against Russia was decided at the last federal party conference. There is no ‘economic war against Russia.’ Russia is at war with Ukraine,” the former co-chair of Die Linke, Bernd Riexinger, tweeted, adding that there must be “no doubt” about whom the party backs in the ongoing conflict.

Former left-wing MP Niema Movassat went even further, taking to Twitter to call for Wagenknecht to be excluded from his parliamentary group. The politician’s remarks contradict “a lot of” what the party agrees on, and she should be punished for “acting against” Die Linke, Movassat suggested.

September 9, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

The West Gives Lip Service to Fighting Hunger

By Vladimir Danilov – New Eastern Outlook – 08.09.2022 

Although the energy crisis and the impoverishment of Europe’s population due to the Russophobic sanctions policy of European leaders have been the main themes of the Western media in recent weeks, articles on the fight against hunger nevertheless continue to appear.

Above all, media publications are discussing the consequences of the Istanbul package of documents signed on July 22 to tackle the issue of food and fertilizer supplies on world markets in fighting hunger in several parts of the world. It should be recalled that one of the agreements regulates the procedure for grain exports from Kiev-controlled Black Sea ports, based on the need to urgently address the food crisis in developing countries.

The Director of the World Food Program, David Beasley, who spoke to CNN on August 21, said the daily ships carrying Ukrainian grain would solve problems with access to food around the world, improving the situation in Somalia, Ethiopia, northern Kenya and several other poorer countries where it is most needed.

However, as the German magazine Der Spiegel admitted on September 2, despite the UN’s initial stated aims to fight hunger, only 13 of the 63 cargo ships that had left Ukrainian ports as of early September were carrying wheat. According to the publication, the remaining vessels were mainly carrying corn, used overwhelmingly as animal feed or to produce biofuel. A dozen ships were loaded with soybean or sunflower products, which are also mainly used to feed livestock.

In this regard, the interview given on August 18 to the Rossiya Segodnya news agency by Pyotr Ilyichev, Director of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Department for International Organizations, was quite remarkable. He stressed in particular that the 16 ships that had left Ukrainian ports up to that day, carrying 535,000 tons of wheat and fodder crops, had, to great surprise, gone not to needy developing countries, but to rich countries. In particular, to the UK, Ireland, Italy, France and the Republic of Korea – in other words, the countries which are not threatened by hunger but which need fodder for livestock. At the same time, many experts emphasize that Ukrainian grain, primarily corn, is mainly fodder grain. And such actions publicly neglect the urgent problems of Africa and other world’s poorest countries.

Mikhail Ulyanov, Permanent Representative of Russia to International Organizations in Vienna, said in August that ships carrying grain from Kiev-controlled Black Sea ports were primarily destined for countries not at all threatened by hunger.

On August 23, Vasily Nebenzia, Permanent Representative of Russia to the UN, pointed out the same fact at a Security Council meeting on conflicts and food security, noting that of all 34 ships with grain that had left Ukraine, only one sailed to Africa, which needs this food. “Here, of course,” Nebenzia pointed out, “it is worth recalling the public image failure of the ‘pioneer’ ship Razoni, which in fact brought to Lebanon not the wheat they had been waiting for, but corn, and at the same time, fodder.” The Permanent Representative of Russia to the UN also stressed that against this background, the reaction to UN Secretary-General António Guterres’ words at the UN Security Council on May 19 that 49 million people in 43 countries are threatened with famine and nearly 140 million people in 10 countries, including Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen and several African states face severe food shortages, raises a lot of questions. As does the statement by the Secretary-General of the world organization in the port of Odessa that “grain exports and lower prices on global food markets will not bring relief to countries in need that cannot afford to buy it anyway.”

Meanwhile, Western politicians and media continue to persist in promoting the view that the main factor driving up grain prices is the restriction of Ukrainian grain supplies to importers, allegedly due to events in that country. However, an analysis of grain production and supply from Ukraine shows that the special operation currently taking place in that country has very limited influence on the situation with grain supply on the global food market. Because of Ukraine’s record 2021 harvest of grains, pulses and oilseeds, the increased supply of Ukrainian reserves further increases the supply of grain on the market and reduces the price of grain.

Overall, an analysis of the global food market shows that the destabilization of the market is not due to a decline in food production and supply, but to more fundamental causes. As Zhang Jun, Permanent Representative of China to the UN, emphasized at the UNSC meeting on May 19, 2022, “the current crisis once again brings to light the structural problems of the global food system. The world food supply and demand pattern is characterized by food production highly concentrated in a few countries, while consumer countries are geographically well dispersed. This makes the balance of food supply and demand highly vulnerable to extreme weather conditions pandemics, armed conflicts, and other emergency and unforeseen factors.”

Igor Kostyukov, Head of Main Directorate of General Staff of Russian Armed Forces, said in August at a Moscow conference on international security that Western countries were provoking a global food crisis by imposing restrictions on Russia. In particular, he stressed that well-functioning mechanisms for supplying grain and fertilizers to global consumers are being disrupted, leading to artificial price rises on world markets. For example, before the sanctions were imposed, Russia supplied more than 20 million tons of crops and about 11 million tons of fertilizers annually to the Middle East and North Africa, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria and other countries. However, the West’s current Russophobic sanctions policy has disrupted this logistical process.

The pattern of world hunger is therefore not at all what Antony Blinken and Josep Borrell originally painted. The problem is the emergence of food shortages due to declining yields caused by a shortage of fertilizers from Russia and Belarus. And also because of attempts to impose on Russia, which, unlike Ukraine, is actually one of the world’s biggest grain exporters, restrictions in trade in food, including grain.

It is clear to everyone that rich countries will not suffer too much because of the fall in yields, and that they will solve their food problems by raising prices and eliminating certain products. For example, vegetables, which were available all year round thanks to cheap energy and greenhouse facilities, but in an economic crisis they will simply become seasonal again and unaffordable for most of the population during the cold season because of their price. The “civilized world” will try to solve all its global food problems at the expense of poor countries: food exchange prices will rise and it will be the rich who will buy it back to curb inflation in their own countries and contain popular discontent. Poor countries, on the other hand, may simply get nothing in such circumstances. Of course, the G7 leaders will demonstrate their ostentatious concern for the people of poor countries and even invent “humanitarian programs” whereby, for example, several ships carrying food will be sent to starving regions of Africa, presenting it through the Western media “as a massive operation to save Africans from starvation.” But this will save few, for the only thing that can save is a return of the world to adequate trade rules that do not involve the imposition of unilateral sanctions and other restrictions.

September 8, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »