Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Sending heavy weapons to Ukraine in German interests?

By Lucas Leiroz | April 22, 2022

Political polarization in Germany continues to increase. Currently, there is strong pressure for German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to take a more incisive stance on the Ukrainian issue. The opposition insists on the need to send weapons to support Zelensky, endorsing the speech spread by NATO and the EU. It is evident that by refusing to take such positions, Scholz is trying to look for the interests of his country, but it remains to be seen whether he will be really strong enough to deal with the pressure coming both externally, from Brussels and London, and internally in Berlin.

Recently, Scholz met in London with his British counterpart Boris Johnson to discuss the Ukrainian conflict. During the conversation, Johnson clearly pressed Scholz to go along with the UK and the rest of the West in their stance of absolute opposition to Russia in the conflict. The Chancellor, however, avoided giving clear answers and maintained his ambiguous position on the possibility of supporting Kiev militarily, preventing from doing more incisive statements and preferring silence.

What happened next was even more remarkable and symbolic: the British prime minister traveled to Kiev to meet with Zelensky while Scholz returned to Germany in order to promote electoral campaign. The international mainstream media took advantage of the fact to intensify its pro-NATO propaganda, claiming that Scholz is concerned only with his internal political condition, ignoring the current international situation, while the Western world is supposedly “concerned” and takes the Ukrainian issue as a “humanitarian” priority.

In Germany, Scholz’s opponents are also increasingly agitated to criticize the chancellor, taking benefit of international pressure to intensify polarization and generate a crisis of legitimacy against him. Obviously, this was a predictable attitude on the part of opposition groups, but the main problem currently is that Scholz is losing support within his own coalition. The Free Democratic Party (FDP) and the Green Party are deeply dissatisfied with Germany’s unwillingness to send weapons to Kiev and use the case as a pretext to point to Scholz as a “big problem” to be solved through an electoral overthrow. And, in this sense, his situation is really worsening day after day.

In general, Scholz’s enemies demand that he takes a more active stance on the German role in the conflict. The chancellor is characterized by an extremely passive posture, avoiding making decisions until they become inevitable. Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, a member of the FDP and head of the Defense Committee in parliament, for example, recently commented that Scholz needs to “take the baton in his hand and set the rhythm.” In other words, opponents are asking Scholz to guarantee Germany a leading role on the European stage, as might be expected from the continent’s greatest economic power.

The central problem in this topic is that Scholz already seems to have realized that the most strategic thing for Germany is to remain as neutral as possible and away from any involvement in activities that harm the partnership with Russia, which is a very important commercial pillar for Germany. Scholz did not want to adhere to large-scale economic sanctions, especially regarding the SWIFT ban and the energy boycott. But he was forced to slowly accept such measures as other Western countries implemented them. This has been his typical behavior: postponing but, in the end, passively adhering to all Western measures when he finds himself “isolated”.

In this sense, the opposition is right on one point: Scholz has to change his attitudes and assume a leadership position, since this is what is expected from a country like Germany, which for years has consolidated itself as one of the “leaders” of the European bloc. The oppositionists’ problem is that they are pressuring Scholz to assume a leadership stance that is as damaging to German interests as his current indecision and passivity.

It is naive to think that sending heavy weapons to Ukraine benefits German interests in any way. On the contrary, it only extends the abyss between Moscow and Berlin even further, and with practically no benefit in return for the Germans: neither Ukraine will be sufficiently strengthened to win the conflict by receiving such heavy weaponry, nor will Germany reassume a supposed role of “leadership” in Europe.

It is not by chance that the greatest pressure on the Germans so far has been exerted precisely by Boris Johnson. The UK is not part of the EU and therefore does not care about the German role in the bloc, but, on the other hand, it is one of the most important members of NATO and tries to elevate its status in the military alliance as a way of boosting its international image in this post-Brexit context. In fulfilling British requests, Scholz would only be pursuing non-German and non-European interests.

It is obvious that there is also pressure within Europe and within Germany itself, but this pressure belongs to an outdated view of what the role of Germans and Europeans in the Western world should be. Scholz’s opponents apparently still expect a totally submissive stance on NATO from Berlin. This is also a very active thought in Brussels, with a strong tendency to see the entire European continent as a mere annex of the American military umbrella, ignoring that Europe has its own interests, which can often collide with those of the Western military alliance. That is why, in trying to prevent Germany from getting actively involved in the Ukrainian case, Scholz proves to be a really pragmatic politician who prioritizes the interests of his own country, but without the political force necessary to guarantee them.

In addition, there is a topic that needs to be mentioned, which is the German military passiveness of the last seventy years. Although it is active within NATO and has been trying to reform its defense forces in recent years, Berlin remains a virtual-demilitarized country, with an army of low offensive potential, outdated weaponry and a low-investment war industry.

In order to send heavy weapons to Ukraine, Germany would have to start a broad military industrial investment, which would cost it not only millions of euros, but a change in its international image, returning to being a nation of effective participation in international conflicts. Of course, improving its military status is a German right, but it must be taken into account in the name of what Berlin intends to do so. Would it really be strategic to break with seventy years of pacifism to defend the interests of the Maidan Junta in a conflict where Russian victory is highly predictable?

Scholz needs to be strong and active in defending German interests. His posture of passivity and silence demonstrates weakness and damages the image of both him and his country. But his stance must not be to subject Germany even more to foreign interests: on the contrary, he must assert what is in Berlin’s interests and pragmatically defend it, even if he has to clash with the NATO’s plans to do so. If Germany is interested in neutrality and maintaining good relations with Russia, Scholz must not only refrain from adhering to the new Western sanctions but also revoke those taken so far.

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

April 22, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia warns G20 of global impact of sanctions

Samizdat | April 21, 2022

Sanctions imposed on Russia are creating serious risks to the global economy, Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov said via video link at a meeting of G20 finance ministers and central bank governors in Washington, DC on Wednesday.

“Excessively loose budgetary and monetary policy pursued in recent years in developed countries created inflationary pressure last year, and the sanctions imposed against Russia not only further strengthened it, but also led to new risks in the economy,” Siluanov said.

Spiking prices for energy and agricultural produce will hit developing and low-income countries, the minister warned, adding that some countries will face severe social consequences.

According to Siluanov, Russia has never refused to fulfill its obligations and continues to comply with all contracts’ terms, while shipments of goods across the global markets are being artificially restrained by sanctions, triggering an imbalance in supply and demand.

Russia has faced unprecedented penalties introduced by the US and its allies in retaliation to the Ukrainian military operation.

In less than two months, Russia has turned into the world’s most sanctioned nation, having become subject to more than 6,000 different targeted restrictions.

April 21, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , | Leave a comment

10 Reasons Behind Most Chronic Health Issues

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | April 20, 2022

The 2015-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) recorded the highest rate of obesity ever documented by the survey — 39.6% of adults with obesity.1 Those numbers only continue to grow. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention2 recorded 42.5% of adults 20 and over with obesity in 2017-2018.

When the percentage of people who are overweight is included, that percentage rises dramatically to 73.6% of the population. The adult obesity prevalence map3 shows the highest prevalence of obesity and overweight in the Midwest and southern states with greater than 40% of the population recorded as obese.

The exception is Florida, where the percentage of the population who are obese ranges between 25% and 30%. The greatest challenge to maintaining a healthy weight is your diet. There are other factors that contribute to weight gain, including a lack of physical activity.

But it’s important to recognize that you’ll never out-exercise a poor diet. So, it’s the first factor you should address if you want to maintain a healthy weight, which is important as obesity is one of the major triggers for preventable disease.4

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,5 6 of every 10 adults in the U.S. have at least one chronic health condition, such as heart disease, cancer or Type 2 diabetes. These are also the leading causes of death in the U.S.,6 and obesity and overweight are significant risk factors for them.7

One 10-year study8 showed there was a dose-response relationship between being overweight or obese and the development of several chronic health conditions including gallstones, type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, colon cancer, and heart disease.

There are significant challenges within the food supply that make it more and more difficult each month for people to make healthy choices. @MrSollozzo from the Meat Mafia Podcast created an informative graphic tweet9 in which he lists many of the diet and food-related challenges faced by Americans today, such as:

1. 10 Companies Control Almost All Manufactured Food

Oxfam America is a nonprofit organization that focuses on the inequalities that drive poverty and Injustice. In 201410 they created a powerful graphic image demonstrating how 10 companies control nearly every food product and beverage you find in the grocery store. Between them, revenues add up to more than $1 billion every day.

These companies include CocaCola, Mars, Nestle, Kellogg, General Mills, Wrigley and Wonka. They have a vested interest in ensuring loyal customers and engaging new customers each year using advertising to promote their products as healthy, wise diet choices for foods or as a fun dessert splurge.

It is difficult for many to ignore the hot buttons11 they push in their advertising campaigns, which include featuring catchy packaging,12 funding nutrition studies13 and publishing enticing print and video campaigns.14

Advertising drives people’s preferences and eating habits, which supports a company’s financial return, and in turn, drives the obesity epidemic. If you think your hands are tied, though, you still have a voice in what these companies market as you can vote with your pocketbook by refusing to purchase their products.

2. 70% of All Crops Are Genetically Modified (GM)

When you’re looking through the produce aisle for tonight’s meal, consider the fact that nearly 70% of crops grown in the U.S. are from genetically modified seeds. According to data15 from the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) the most popular GM crops are soybeans, maize, cotton and canola.

Soybeans, corn and canola are products used in many processed and ultraprocessed foods on grocery store shelves. There are two types of genetically engineered seed: herbicide-tolerant (HT) and insect-resistant (Bt).16 The USDA finds the adoption rate for both is increasing, and the adoption of stacked seed varieties, which has both traits, has accelerated in recent years.

The implications for your health after exposure to GM plants are significant and tied to the use of the herbicide glyphosate,17 which has increased dramatically in the last 20 years.18 Your gut flora is extremely important to your health and is negatively impacted by glyphosate. Experts have tied exposure to glyphosate and GM plants to an imbalance in gut bacteria19 and a variety of chronic diseases, including obesity.20

3. Meat Packers Underpay Ranchers and Overcharge Consumers

In 2020, the Department of Justice began formally investigating antitrust violations of the four largest beef packers in the U.S.,21 following complaints from several states and agricultural organizations. The “Big 4” companies are Cargill, Tyson Foods, JBS and National Beef, and they are responsible for processing 85% of all beef made into steaks, roasts and other cuts.22

When hamburger is factored into the equation, the Big 4 processes 70% of beef production. The four firms gained greater control of the industry in the early 1990s when USDA data showed the market share of slaughtered animals rose from 25% in 1977 to 71% in 1992. Several incidents brought attention to the consolidation that gave just four companies controlling interest in the market.

Cattle ranchers are frustrated by the price drops they experience when a meatpacking plant closes, while the packing companies benefit from rising meat prices. In the short term, this impacts the rancher’s livelihood and ability to stay in business. In the long-term, rising prices at the grocery store from lower supply levels may move more people to purchase plant-based fake “meat”.

4. 70% of the American Diet Is Processed Food

When you investigate the links between obesity and chronic illness, roughly 70% of the crops grown in the U.S. are genetically modified; 73.6% of the population is overweight or obese;23 roughly 60% of the population has at least one chronic disease and, according to data from two studies,24,25 consumption of ultraprocessed and processed foods is just over 70% in the general population. There are well over 40,000 on grocery store shelves, with the majority being processed and ultraprocessed foods.26 One study27 found that 57.9% of foods eaten were ultraprocessed and contributed 89.7% of calories from added sugar. Data also show that an excess of sugar in the diet may lead to a decrease in satiety, an increase in calorie intake and impaired energy production in your body.28

One model tracked the link between rising sugar consumption and obesity rates, finding that “past U.S. sugar consumption is at least sufficient to explain adult obesity change in the past 30 years.”29

5. Doctors Have Become Legalized Drug Dealers

@MrSollozzo calls doctors “legalized drug dealers,”30 as many frequently overprescribe medications31 rather than help patients change lifestyle habits to avoid chronic disease. Examples can be found in patients who are overprescribed pain medication, proton pump inhibitors, antidepressants,32 antibiotics33 and medications to manage the side effects of other medications.34

This is a symptom of a larger condition in which a physician’s care appears to be highly influenced by the pharmaceutical industry and not by a focus on the prevention or treatment of physical conditions that include nutritional and lifestyle alterations.

6. Big Pharma Controls Agriculture and the Seed Supply

In the 1990s, laws were introduced to protect bioengineered crops. In 2021, four large corporations owned more than 50% of the world’s seeds, which is a staggering monopoly that dominates the global food chain.35 One of those companies is Bayer, which acquired Monsanto in 2018.36

Monsanto is an agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology company, owned by a pharmaceutical company that controls a significant portion of the world’s seed supply, namely GM seed.37 Essentially, this means that Monsanto controls the GE food you eat, and Bayer supplies you with the drugs you need to treat your chronic disease triggered by that food.

7. Government Policies Favor Corporate Farming

Earl Butz was secretary of the USDA in the 1970s. It was his vision to create a centralized food system which, as Grist writes, “plunged a pitchfork into New Deal agricultural policies that sought to protect farmers from the big agribusiness companies whose interests he openly pushed.”38 At the time he was appointed to the USDA, he had served as a board member for several large firms, including Ralston Purina.

Critics predicted that these ties might compromise his ability to function objectively, and the prophecy was fulfilled when he forced agribusiness and large farming conglomerates on the national interest. His legacy continues to thrive as small farmers are gradually forced out of business and large conglomerates buy up huge tracts of land, expanding the reach of GE produce and concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs).

Most people have likely never shaken the hand of their local farmer, who may sell produce and meat at local farmers markets, to small grocers or directly to you, the consumer. One of the best things about these local food suppliers is that they are incentivized to provide you with the best quality food to stay in business.

8. ‘Science’ Replaced Saturated Fat With Refined Sugar

Research known as the Seven Countries Study was conceived by the late Ancel Keys, a mid-20th century physiologist who promoted polyunsaturated fats over natural, saturated dietary fats.39 He launched the study in 1958 with the intent of identifying dietary patterns that impact heart disease.40

The results of the study changed government dietary recommendations for decades, with recommendations to eliminate saturated fats from your diet. Along with the addition of polyunsaturated fats to replace the missing natural fats, the food industry also added sugar and whole grains to the mix of processed foods meant to tempt your palate.

Yet, as science has demonstrated, this move has had a broad impact on health and instead of helping to decrease heart disease, actually increased many people’s risk of coronary heart disease as replacement leads to:41

“… changes in LDL, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), and triglycerides that may increase the risk of CHD.

Additionally, diets high in sugar may induce many other abnormalities associated with elevated CHD risk, including elevated levels of glucose, insulin, and uric acid, impaired glucose tolerance, insulin and leptin resistance, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, and altered platelet function. A diet high in added sugars has been found to cause a 3-fold increased risk of death due to cardiovascular disease.”

As a result of the new processed foods, average Americans developed a sweet tooth so strong that many experts believe they are consuming as much as 130 pounds of sugar each year.42,43,44 Sugar has become so cheap and ubiquitous, that it’s in nearly every processed and ultra-processed food.

9. Natural Fats Replaced With Factory-Produced Vegetable Oils

According to the USDA, consumption per year of added fat and oil rose by 30 pounds from 1970 to 2010. However, the amount of saturated animal fat declined while the rate of vegetable fat from seed oils increased.45 These are industrial vegetable and seed oils that are likely behind the majority of diseases diagnosed in this past century.

The number of people diagnosed with heart disease, cancer, high blood pressure, diabetes, obesity, metabolic syndrome, Alzheimer’s disease and stroke has all risen dramatically in the last decades and they all are linked to the consumption of seed oil.

In a 45-minute presentation titled, “Diseases of Civilization: Are Seed Oil Excesses the Unifying Mechanism?” Dr. Chris Knobbe reveals startling evidence that seed oils, so prevalent in modern diets, are the reason for most of today’s chronic diseases.46

His research indicts the high consumption of omega-6 seed oil in everyday diets as the major unifying driver of the chronic degenerative diseases of modern civilization. He calls the inundation of Western diets with harmful seeds oils “a global human experiment … without informed consent.”47

10. Fake Meat Plant Foods Sold as Healthier Choice

Although many fake meat products are sold as a healthier choice for you and the environment, it turns out that this is yet another smokescreen to control the food supply. As meat prices rise, more people may consider a choice they may not have before: to eat fake meat.

Total revenues for the plant-based Beyond Meat brand have grown steadily from $16.2 million in 2016 to $87.9 million in 201848 and exceeded expectations in 2020, hitting $406.8 million.49 The rising market share is a testament to how well their branding and advertising has convinced the public that they are healthier than pure animal protein.

Yet, it’s widely known that ultraprocessed foods are the enemies of good health, even increasing the risk of premature death by 62% when eaten in quantities of more than four servings each day, with each added serving increasing the risk by another 18%.50

So what is plant-based “meat,” anyway? “It’s not food; it’s software, intellectual property — 14 patents, in fact, in each bite of Impossible Burger with over 100 additional patents pending for animal proxies from chicken to fish,” says Seth Itzkan, environmental futurist and cofounder and co-director of Soil4Climate.51

He suggests fake meat products are destroying the environment by perpetuating a harmful reliance on genetically engineered (GE) grains while accelerating soil loss and detracting from regenerative agriculture.

Buyer Beware

Controlling the food supply is one more way of controlling your health and your future. With every passing year, it becomes more important to be aware of the food choices you make each day as they impact your health and wellness.

Your nutrition dictates how well your body works, and therefore how well you feel each day. As summer approaches, make a commitment to make smart choices for your health and visit local farmers markets for produce, seek out regeneratively-grown produce, meat and dairy products and consider buying your meat and dairy directly from local farmers.

Sources and References

April 21, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

IMF to expedite $5 billion loan to Ukraine

Samizdat | April 20, 2022

Ukraine likely needs $5 billion a month in financial assistance to keep its economy operating and the immediate priority was finding ways to fill that gap in the next three months, according to International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva.

The Washington-based financial institution will start work on a future loan program, but it was “unfair” to expect Ukraine to implement a far-reaching package of reforms at the moment, Georgieva told a news conference on Wednesday.

On Sunday, Kiev requested $50 billion in financial support from the Group of Seven (G7) nations and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to cover a budget deficit largely created by the military conflict with Russia.

Ukraine is also considering issuing 0% coupon bonds to bridge the fiscal gap, as the country is currently facing an estimated $7 billion deficit a month, according to Oleg Ustenko, the top economic adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The IMF and World Bank have approved more than $2 billion in loans to Ukraine since the beginning of Russia’s military operation in the country. Meanwhile, the World Bank said it was preparing nearly $1.5 billion in extra funds to allow essential Ukrainian government services to continue.

Over the weekend, Georgieva said “more [funds] would be necessary … to keep the economy functioning and prevent inflation shooting up.”

April 20, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Economics | , | Leave a comment

‘Greece seizes Russian oil tankers’

Samizdat | April 19, 2022

Greece seized a Russian oil tanker in the Aegean Sea on Tuesday as part of European Union sanctions imposed on Moscow over the war in Ukraine, Kathimerini daily has reported.

According to the newspaper, the Russian-flagged Pegas ship, with 19 crew members on board, was seized on April 19 near the coastal city of Karystos on the southern coast of the island of Evia.“It has been seized as part of EU sanctions,” a shipping ministry official was quoted as saying.

A coastguard spokeswoman told AFP that the seizure order concerned the ship itself and would not affect its cargo.

Greek media had reported earlier that the vessel faced engine trouble and was being escorted by a tugboat towards the Peloponnese, but was forced to moor at Karystos due to poor weather.

According to the Maritime Bulletin portal, another Russian tanker, VF Tanker 2, was detained earlier near Euboea due to EU sanctions. The vessel reportedly left the port of Piraeus on April 17, bound for Russian Kavkaz port in the Black Sea, but for some unknown reason ended up in Karystos Bay.

The European Union, of which Greece is a member, has adopted a wide range of sanctions against Moscow. They include import and export bans for a wide array of goods, as well as an embargo on access to EU ports by Russian-flagged ships. Russian oil aboard those ships has not been sanctioned.

April 19, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

India set to boost Russian energy imports

Samizdat – April 19, 2022

Indian importers plan to increase purchases of Russian crude oil and coal at discounted prices, media reports have stated.

According to The Economic Times, India’s state-owned oil refiners plan to boost Russian imports, shifting their purchasing strategy from tenders to negotiated deals in order to get larger discounts.

“In the coming weeks, Indian importers expect an increase in oil purchases from Russia. Due to the events in Ukraine and the outbreak of Covid-19 in China, India can get more oil at a more attractive price than before,” the publication stated, citing market sources. India has already increased purchases of Russian oil, having bought 15 million barrels of it since late February at a 25% discount. The discounts were offered by Moscow to secure trade contracts, amid the sanctions, placed on Russia by the US and its allies in response to its military operation in Ukraine. India has declined to join the sanctions campaign.

Separately, S&P reported that India is looking to raise imports of Russian coal amid stockpile shortages, as Moscow’s discounted prices are much lower than those on Australian and South African coal. Also, new purchase offers are expected soon, as, according to data from India’s Central Electricity Authority, stockpiles at Indian power plants as of April 13 were enough for little over eight days of coal burn. India imported 1.76 million metric tons of coal from Russia in 2021, according to data from Iman Resources. Market sources say that the only obstacle to buying Russian oil and coal for Indian importers is the difficulty in finding a payment method.

Western countries have cut off Russian banks from using the SWIFT financial messaging network, which facilitates interbank payments, and have limited their ability to conduct business using the US dollar and the euro.

However, at the end of March reports emerged that Russia and India were working to create a new transaction mechanism for bilateral trade, which would allow for settlements in national currencies, rubles and rupees. Reports say the countries may opt for adopting the Russian Financial Message Transfer System (SPFS) for bilateral trade, which is an analog of SWIFT.

According to analysts, a rupee-ruble trade mechanism is key to continued trade growth between the two countries, as India’s economy needs Russian energy and commodities to grow and Russia needs the huge Indian market to offset the impact of Western sanctions.

April 19, 2022 Posted by | Economics | , | Leave a comment

Russia Has Withstood West’s ‘Economic Blitzkrieg’ Attempt – Putin

Samizdat | April 18, 2022

The US and its allies have slapped a grand total of over 9,600 sanctions against Russian officials, the state, companies, tycoons and other entities in connection with the crisis in Ukraine. Moscow now has more restrictions against it than Iran, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela and Myanmar combined.

Russia has successfully withstood unprecedented sanctions pressure from the West, President Vladimir Putin has said.

“The calculation was to quickly undermine the financial and economic situation in our country, to provoke panic in the markets, the collapse of the banking system, and a large-scale shortage of goods in stores,” Putin said, speaking at a briefing on the economic situation on Monday.

“We can say with confidence that this policy against Russia has failed – that the strategy of the economic blitzkrieg has failed,” he added.

Meanwhile, the president said, ordinary Europeans and Americans have been made to suffer a deterioration in their living standards as a result of their leaders’ shortsightedness.

“Moreover, the sanctions were not without consequences for the initiators themselves. I am refering to the growth of inflation and unemployment, the deterioration of economic performance in the US and the countries of Europe, the decline in the standard of living of the Europeans and the devaluation of their savings,” Putin said.

Putin asked the government to continue to expand its programme of emergency measures to deal with Western pressure, including by accelerating the switchover to foreign trade in rubles and the currencies of Russia’s trade partners.

“The restrictions placed on Russia by unfriendly countries have undoubtedly affected the possibilities of our businesses. They have complicated the logistics of delivery in export and import, created obstacles for payment. It is necessary to assist entrepreneuers in solving these problems, including by speeding up the transition of foreign trade to settlements in rubles and the national currencies of countries which are reliable trade partners,” he said.

At the moment, the president said, the Russian economy has stabilized, and the ruble exchange rate has basically returned to the levels seen in early February, before Moscow and its Donbass allies kicked off their military operation in Ukraine.

Russia achieved a Q1 2022 current account balance of payments of over $58 billion, “a historic maximum,” Putin said.

The Russian ruble collapsed in late February and early March against major foreign currencies, falling 30 percent against the US dollar and by a similar amount against the euro. The move prompted a temporary halt in trading on the Moscow stock exchange, led the central bank to raise the interest rate to 20 percent, and prompted authorities to force companies to sell 80 percent of their foreign exchange reserves to stabilize the situation.

The ruble began to bounce back after Putin’s announcement on 23 March ordering payments for Russian gas to be made in rubles, and is trading for about 80.6 USD/ruble, approaching the 77.3 marker it hit before dropping once Russia recognized the sovereignty of the Donbass republics in February.

The Kremlin has since asked the relevant ministries to expand the list of goods to be traded for using national currencies.

April 18, 2022 Posted by | Economics | | Leave a comment

The Future Of Energy In The U.S.: Which Projection Do You Believe?

By Francis Menton | Manhattan Contrarian | April 10, 2022

What will the production and consumption of energy look like in the United States in 2050? There are two very different answers to that question.

On Side One are those who assert that we face a “climate crisis” that can only be addressed by the rapid forced suppression of the production and use of fossil fuels. Therefore, some combination of government coercion, investor pressure and voluntary institutional action will shortly drive coal, oil and natural gas from the energy marketplace, to be replaced by carbon-free “renewables.” And thus by 2050 we will have achieved the utopia of “net zero” carbon emissions.

Those on Side Two think that the Side One vision is completely unrealistic fantasy. Simple arithmetic shows that without massive energy storage no amount of building of wind and solar generators can make much difference in fossil fuel use for electricity production; and adequate energy storage devices to fill the gap do not even exist as a technical matter, let alone at remotely reasonable cost. Result: no matter what the grandees say, fossil fuel production and use in 2050 will be as high or higher than they are now.

Which Side do you think is right?

At the moment, all of the Great and the Good seem to have planted their flags on Side One. President Biden leaves no doubt as to where he stands. By Press Release of April 22, 2021, Biden committed the U.S. to a “net zero” economy by 2050:

On Day One, President Biden fulfilled his promise to rejoin the Paris Agreement and set a course for the United States to tackle the climate crisis at home and abroad, reaching net zero emissions economy-wide by no later than 2050.

And by various Executive Orders, Biden has the whole federal bureaucracy committed to the fossil fuel suppression project, from stopping drilling to blocking pipelines to decommissioning power plants.

In the investment world, all of the biggest banks and money managers are on board. Here is a link to the “Road to Net Zero” web page of BlackRock, the nation’s largest mutual fund manager. Pithy quote:

We believe that the transition to a net zero world is the shared responsibility of every citizen, corporation, and government. . . . In January 2021, we committed to supporting the goal of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 or sooner – and announced a number of steps to help our clients navigate the transition.

And it goes without saying that the world of academia has joined Side One with full unanimity. After all, these are the “smartest” people; and the “smartest” people all know that the “climate crisis” can only be solved by suppressing fossil fuels. Here is a representative statement from President Peter Salovey of Yale University, June 24, 2021:

To avoid the most severe outcomes of climate change, experts recommend taking immediate action to reach world-wide carbon net neutrality in the next three decades. Yale will become a net zero carbon emissions campus in less than half of that time.  Along our path to zero actual emission by 2050, we expect to reduce our actual emissions by at least 50 percent below 2005 levels by 2035.

So surely then, with this kind of unanimous agreement from the top, backed by the full force of federal government coercion, fossil fuels will be completely gone by 2050.

Perhaps before getting too confident in that conclusion, we should check in with the Energy Information Administration. The EIA is the part of the federal Department of Energy that provides data and statistics on U.S. energy production and consumption, both historical and projected. Once a year, generally in March, they issue what they call their Annual Energy Outlook, or AEO. AEO2022 just came out on March 3. The opening page of AEO2022 provides a wealth of links that can keep you busy for hours if you have the inclination.

The incredible thing about this AEO is it’s like nobody told them that the fossil fuels are about to be suppressed. Basically, they treat the whole “net zero by 2050” clamor as so much background noise. For example, what is the EIA’s view as to U.S. natural gas consumption from now through 2050? That’s in this chart:

Net zero anyone? Instead, it looks like ongoing slow but steady growth throughout the entire projection period.

How about U.S. crude oil production? Surely that will plummet toward zero well before 2050. Not according to the EIA:

Basically, they predict that U.S. crude production will increase substantially over the next few years, and then level out and remain there through 2050.

To be fair, the two charts above represent what they call their “reference case.” They have other charts that show high production/consumption cases and also low production/consumption cases. However, the high cases are driven by high prices, and the low cases are driven by low prices. There is no effect discernible in the EIA projections resulting from regulatory suppression, let alone from woke investors or the pompous pronouncements of academia.

One of my favorite charts is this one covering projected “light duty vehicle” sales, aka cars.

And you thought that buying anything but a fully-electric vehicle would be illegal by 2030? The EIA’s projection is that even by 2050, fully-electric vehicles will not have achieved 10% of the market, while fully gasoline-powered vehicles will still have a market share around 75%.

Numerous other links on the AEO2022 intro page provide for fascinating reading, essentially contradicting everything about our energy future that is coming out of the White House. For example, there is “EIA projects U.S. energy-related CO2 emissions fall in the near term, then rise.” In other words, the claims of “net zero” emissions by 2050 are so much hot air. Or there’s “Petroleum and natural gas are the most-used fuels in the United States through 2050.”

So place your bet as to which projections you believe. For myself, obviously I’m going with reality over fantasy.

April 17, 2022 Posted by | Economics | | Leave a comment

Is There Anyone Taking This Green Energy Transition Thing Seriously?

By Francis Menton | Manhattan Contrarian | April 13, 2022

As reported in my last post, even the U.S. government’s own Energy Information Administration in the Department of Energy doesn’t believe for a minute that any kind of rapid transition to “net zero” carbon emissions is about to occur in this country. Although President Biden has supposedly committed the entire federal bureaucracy to the “net zero” by 2050 transition, the EIA projects steady and even increasing fossil fuel usage in the U.S. through the entire 28 intervening years.

But surely there must be somebody taking this green energy transition thing seriously. The obvious place to look for such serious commitment would be in New York State, and most particularly New York City. Here, deadly earnest climate campaigners dominate local politics. New York State’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, enacted in 2019 and effective in 2020, commits the State to the energy transition. And to prove its own bona fides, the City Council just enacted legislation at the end of 2021 banning new buildings from burning natural gas starting for smaller buildings (up to six stories) in 2024, just two years from now, and then applying to all new buildings by 2027, just five years away. Yup, natural gas is definitely on the fast train to oblivion around here.

All of which led me to be greatly curious when I heard the jackhammers going out on the street starting around 8 AM for the last several days. On closer observation, they seem to be putting in new pipelines of some sort:

So I picked out a guy who looked like the job foreman, and asked him what is going on. Sure enough, they are installing new gas mains in the neighborhood. According to the foreman, it’s a new higher-pressure natural gas system, to replace the old low pressure system. He said that the old mains were close to 100 years old.

So it’s great to know that we will shortly have a new natural gas distribution system in Greenwich Village, ready for the next hundred years or so. Do you think that they will just shut off the gas one day? I’m willing to bet that that’s not going to happen.

April 17, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Boris Johnson Supports Ukraine to the Detriment of the Brits

By Valery Kulikov – New Eastern Outlook – 15.04.2022

A highly sensationalist article by Bloomberg clearly shows that the British government left more than 5 million Britons without support in the current crisis in implementing its pronounced Russophobic policy!

As the publication emphasizes, a significant part of the British population feels the consequences of the cost of living crisis especially strongly, and this is due more to politics than to the economy. An increase in electricity bills and in the cost of food and loan rates has already become a difficult test for all the British without exception. Thus, since April 1, gas and electricity prices alone have increased by 54%! Prices for fruits and vegetables in Britain may soon rise by a third, which is already creating problems and a shortage of products on the shelves of British stores. At the same time, warehouses are already running out of sunflower oil, which jeopardizes the production of traditionally beloved British dishes, writes Daily Mail.

New statistics shows that food inflation in Britain has already increased by 5.3% year-on-year. The Bank of England warned last week that the incomes of many Britons will experience an “historic” shock after inflation jumped to a 30-year high last month, has already reached 6.2%, and, according to forecasts, may rise to 8% this spring, notes Daily Mail.

The independent Food Aid Network, which consists of more than 550 food banks from all over Britain, has sent a letter to Prime Minister Boris Johnson, writes The Independent, with a demand to take urgent measures, since the number of requests for help has increased enormously in recent weeks. This is due to high electricity bills, rising food prices and health insurance. For this very reason, many families are barely surviving, and in some food banks the number of requests has doubled since the end of 2021. Some food banks have already had to reduce the amount of food they provide.

Britain is witnessing the biggest decline in living standards since the 1950s, and many British families in such conditions have to wonder, “how to survive further”?

“Fuel poverty” has affected 88% of the British population, Sky News reports. As the British told the TV channel, against the background of rising energy prices, they are forced to go to bed earlier or take buses and trains all day to keep warm. At the same time, the country predicts that as energy prices continue to rise, it will be even more difficult for families already living on the brink.

However, instead of providing effective assistance to the residents of the kingdom and reducing unnecessary spending, at the expense of the British taxpayers, on “settling in and helping Ukraine,” the British government continues to take not just a wait-and-see stance, but one overtly contradicting the interests of its own people. Against this background, the “decision”, covered by The Sun, of the British company Octopus Energy to distribute blankets with electric heating to financially struggling customers in order to “help them survive a sharp rise in heating prices,” is perceived as a cruel joke on the impoverished Britons. This company did not even stop to think about how the British will pay bills for the use of electric blankets when they do not have enough money to pay for heating their homes! Do not forget that in early April, energy prices in the United Kingdom jumped by 54% due to a strong rise in wholesale gas prices. The rates increase has hit millions of households across the kingdom. Now the energy bill for the country’s residents will increase by an average of 700 pounds per year.

The results of a survey conducted by the National Statistical Service indicate that residents of the United Kingdom have to seriously reduce spending. More than half of respondents stated that they save on “non-essential” goods, 34% – on gas or electricity, and 31% – on food and essential goods.

On March 28, Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak, speaking before the British Parliament, said that although rising costs have been hitting people across Europe in recent weeks, no major economy leaves its unemployed population in such a vulnerable position. There are 5.3 million people in Britain today who could work but depend solely on state aid, and more and more Britons are forced to resort to the services of food banks and apply for short-term cash loans at high interest rates. This number of disadvantaged Britons is approximately equal to the number of all residents of Scotland and accounts for a tenth of people of working age in the United Kingdom.

Against the background of the lack of financial assistance from the government to the catastrophically impoverished Britons, the inhabitants of the kingdom were perplexed at learning the results of the recent trip of the British Prime Minister to Kiev, where he arrived with a new package of financial and military assistance to this country. In particular, Boris Johnson said that Britain would supply Ukraine with an additional 120 armored vehicles and anti-ship complexes. In addition, Kiev will receive new loan guarantees from Britain worth USD 500 million through the World Bank, while the British Prime Minister expressed readiness to help in the restoration of Kiev and the Kiev region after the end of the Russian military operation.

This is causing new anti-government protests among Britons who are outraged by the sharp rise in the cost of living over the past couple of months and the failed government policies. Protest demonstrations took place across the country, including in Belfast, where the rally participants demanded that the government allocate an additional thousand pounds to each family in Northern Ireland to help the population reduce the rising costs of fuel and food. Similar actions took place in dozens of other cities across the kingdom. British households are telling the government that they are experiencing more blows to their finances amid an unprecedented crisis caused by the rising cost of living.

“The residents of Britain are facing difficult times due to anti-Russian sanctions, but the country’s authorities, apparently, do not realize the threat,” was the conclusion of retired General Jonathan Shaw made on the pages of The Independent. He is convinced that the Johnson government’s Russophobic policy of banning, in particular, imports of wheat and oil, will hit the standard of living of the population, which will become “much worse.” Shaw believes that many people in Britain, like the government, have “the wrong mentality” about the severity of the consequences of the “new cold war” with Russia.

Recall that in early March, the British government announced its intention to stop importing oil and petroleum products from Russia. After that, the cost of gasoline and diesel fuel at British gas stations went up sharply, breaking several records along the way.

Considering how much attention Boris Johnson pays to the sanctions policy against Russia, it is surprising how this Titanic still manages to stay afloat despite the widespread negative attitude towards it. At the same time, his criticism is growing every day, in proportion to the rate of decline in the standard of living of the population and the resolution of the issue of Scotland’s independence referendum.

In principle, it is already obvious to everyone today that the era of economic liberalism in its former form has come to an end. In fact, the current Western political elites openly follow the path of forming an ultratotalitarian supersystem, supranational hyperfascism, in which the former values of capitalism, free market and political freedoms of citizens have almost entirely lost their value. And the “welfare state” that the collective West was so proud of is already a thing of the past. And by trying to unleash an even more Russophobic sanctions policy, the rulers of Britain and some other parts of the West only accelerate the change of political power in their states.

April 15, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

US not planning to return seized Russian assets – Jake Sullivan

Samizdat | April 14, 2022

Washington is not planning to return the assets confiscated from Russian businessmen as part of the latest sanctions imposed on Moscow over the military operation in Ukraine, US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said on Thursday.

“Our goal is not to give them back,” Sullivan said at the Economic Club of Washington, adding that the US authorities would use the seized assets “in a better way.”

“There are authorities we have, and there are further authorities that maybe we could develop, and that’s something we’re actively looking at,” the official added.

The White House has introduced several rounds of sanctions against Moscow since February 24, when Russia’s military operation in Ukraine began. As part of the penalties, the US authorities arrested Russian foreign assets along with those belonging to the country’s businesses and high-profile individuals.

Several US congressmen have already called for the sale or liquidation of Russian assets caught up in the sanctions campaign, stating that the proceeds should be used for the reconstruction of Ukraine.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said Moscow has no plans to nationalize foreign assets in Russia in response. “Unlike Western countries, we will respect property rights,” he said.

Stephen Lendman:

According to the International Criminal Court:

“(D)estroying or seizing the enemy’s property unless such destruction or seizure be imperatively demanded by the necessities of war” constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts.

This rule is included in military manuals.

It’s applicable to armed conflicts.

Its violation is an offense, according to laws of many nation states on what’s permitted or not in armed conflicts.

And this resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly in February 1946.

It’s not binding international law like Security Council resolutions but significant nonetheless. … Read full article

April 15, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment

What’s Keeping China From Buying More Russian Crude?

By Tsvetana Paraskova | Oilprice.com | April 13, 2022

Outbound shipments of Russian oil have yet to show signs of a major decline, as many analysts feared last month. In fact, Russia’s shipments of crude oil rebounded in the first full week of April to the highest level so far this year, Bloomberg News’ tracker of crude leaving Russian ports showed on Monday. Yet, a “buyers’ strike” in Europe with many majors refusing to deal with Russian spot cargoes is forcing Russian crude to make much longer and complicated voyages to reach willing buyers in Asia. While China and India are not shying away from Russian crude—which sells at hefty discounts attracting price-sensitive buyers—the logistics of shipping oil from Russia’s Black Sea and Baltic ports to Asia and the scarce tanker availability, bank guarantees, and insurance for Russian cargoes would limit the amount of oil that Asia could take and compensate for lost barrels that are no longer going to Europe, analysts say.

Due to major shifts in global trade routes to accommodate more Russian oil going to Asia, the world’s top-importing crude region will not be able to accommodate all the oil Europe is shunning.

Shifts in trade routes are already happening.

Some volumes previously bound for the West will be replaced by Asia, but not all, analysts say. That’s because of the two-month-long trip to Asia (and a four-month round trip) which will necessitate many supertankers that are not readily available on the global tanker market, says Zoltan Pozsar, Global Head of Short-?Term Interest Rate Strategy at Credit Suisse.

Before the war, 1.3 million bpd of Russian oil was shipped from the Baltic ports of Primorsk and Ust Luga to Europe on Aframax carriers, and these journeys to Hamburg or Rotterdam take a week or two to complete, Pozsar wrote in a market commentary on March 31.

“If Russia now needs to move the same amount of oil not to Europe but China, the first logistical problem it faces is that it can’t load Urals onto VLCCs in Primorsk or Ust Luga because those ports aren’t deep enough to dock VLCCs. Russia will first have to sail Aframax vessels to a port for STS crude transfer (ship -to -ship crude transfer) onto VLCCs,” Pozsar says.

The STS transfer takes weeks, and after the transfer is done, the VLCC will sail two months east, discharge, and go back to the Baltics, which is another two months.

“Conservatively, Russian crude traveled about a week or two before it fueled economic activity (the time it took to sail smaller Aframax carriers from Primorsk to Hamburg) and now will have to travel at least four months before it fuels economic activity,” Credit Suisse’s Pozsar notes.

“Worse, it’s not just the time to market that’s getting worse, but we also end up with a ship shortage and a corresponding surge in shipping freight rates,” he added.

According to OPEC’s analysis in its latest Monthly Oil Market Report published this week, “Tanker markets are being broadly impacted by uncertainties related to the conflict in Eastern Europe, which is expected to affect trade patterns.”

“Aframax spot freight rates around the Mediterranean are up more than 70% in March from January levels, while spot Suezmax rates in the Atlantic basin are some 50% higher over the same period. The strength filtered up to VLCCs, improving overall sentiment,” OPEC said.

The reshuffling of the Russian barrels is very attractive for buyers such as China and India due to the hefty discounts on Urals. But refiners in China and India face challenges in taking up too much Russian crude in the short term because of contractual obligations with Middle Eastern producers, according to Wood Mackenzie.

In addition, China hasn’t shown yet too much appetite for Russian crude because of several factors, WoodMac said. These include expensive freight for Russian cargoes due to the sanctions, challenges with payments and tanker insurance, the fact that a Urals voyage takes double the time compared to Middle Eastern grades going to China, and Chinese refiners’ long-term contracts with oil exporters from the Middle East.

Russia may still have willing buyers for its oil in developing Asia, and those buyers may not care about the ethics of buying Russian crude, but they will certainly care about tanker rates and availability and much longer voyages.

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

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »