The German Federal Audit Office (BRH) has delivered a scathing assessment of former Greens Economics Minister Robert Habeck over his handling of a €600 million loan to the Swedish battery manufacturer Northvolt, which has since filed for bankruptcy.
In a classified 50-page report, the auditors accuse Habeck and his ministry of grave failures in risk assessment and oversight, warning that taxpayers could now face a total loss.
As reported by Bild, the 2023 state loan was intended to help Northvolt establish a major battery factory in Heide, Schleswig-Holstein, with support from additional German subsidies. But the BRH now alleges that Habeck’s ministry “systematically underestimated the risks” involved and approved the funding without sufficient scrutiny.
Earlier this year, Northvolt filed for bankruptcy, and the chances of German taxpayers recouping even a percentage of the funds handed over are slim to none.
The report highlights that the usual checks and balances were ignored. Instead, Habeck’s officials assessed the risks of the massive convertible bond unilaterally, without independent or interdepartmental review. The auditors accuse the ministry of acting “largely according to the principle of hope.”
Adding to the scandal, the BRH said that essential decision-making steps were poorly documented or not recorded at all, especially in video calls with the auditing firm PwC. This lack of documentation, it warned, means key actions “elude traceability and external control.” The report also noted that these omissions are particularly serious given the size and political sensitivity of the case.
Criticism from across the political spectrum is now piling up. CDU budget spokesman Andreas Mattfeldt said the revelations go beyond negligence: “One gets the impression that not only gross negligence is at play here. It seems that it was presumably intentional.” He called the affair “one of the major financial affairs of the republic” and warned of its explosive political potential.
The right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD), now the main opposition to the Grand Coalition government in the Bundestag, has called for a full parliamentary inquiry into the dealings.
“Habeck is said to have single-handedly approved €600 million of taxpayers’ money for Northvolt. Especially in view of the fact that the CDU continues Habeck’s policy identically, the citizens have a right to transparent clarification — so that such a scenario is not repeated!” she wrote on X.
Michael Espendiller, the budget spokesman of the AfD parliamentary group, added, “A committee of inquiry is unavoidable here, and we call on the Union to make this possible together with us.” The politician criticized “burning millions of euros of taxpayers’ money,” “conflicts of interest,” sloppy file management,” and state action “without adequate risk assessment.”
June 19, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Economics | Germany |
Leave a comment
The Austrian energy ministry believes that the European Union should be open to resuming imports of natural gas from Russia after the end of the Ukraine conflict, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday.
“[Brussels] must maintain the option to reassess the situation once the war has ended,” the ministry told the Financial Times.
Austria is the third EU nation after Hungary and Slovakia to openly suggest resuming imports of Russian gas after the conflict ends.
The European Commission will propose on Tuesday that the EU ban new gas contracts with Russia. The Commission will use trade law to bypass potential vetoes by Hungary and Slovakia. According to the summary of the proposal seen by the Financial Times, the current short-term contracts are to be terminated starting 2026, while long-term contracts are to come to an end on January 1, 2028.
On June 12, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said that Hungary and Slovakia believed that a ban on Russian energy imports to the EU was unacceptable interference in their energy sovereignty. Szijjarto said that Hungary and Slovakia had blocked the Commission’s proposal to this effect during the meeting of EU energy ministers in Luxembourg on Monday.
In early May, the EU Commission presented a draft roadmap to stop Russian energy imports to the EU by the end of 2027. It includes a ban on imports from Russia under new Russian gas contracts and existing spot contracts, which is to come into effect by the end of 2025. The ban can also affect remaining imports of pipeline gas and liquefied natural gas from Russia under long-term contracts.
June 17, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Russophobia | Austria, European Union, Hungary, Slovakia |
Leave a comment
Salome Zourabichvili, the former president of Georgia who stepped down six months ago, gave a speech at the recent GLOBSEC international conference in Prague in which she called on the EU to keep up the pressure against her country to oust the current government.
The populist, conservative Georgian Dream party won the election in Georgia last autumn, with incumbent Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze remaining in power, much to the dismay of liberals in Brussels.
“European sanctions against Georgia need to be stepped up. We need more and stronger European sanctions. Why? Because sanctions work against a small country like Georgia. They cause damage. They hurt. They kill the Georgian economy and private sector. In other words, in the long run, they will bring down the Georgian government,” Mandiner quotes her as saying.
Salome Zourabichvili continued: “The EU must continue to do what it has been doing towards Georgia for the past year: not to recognize the Georgian government and (its) rule and to stop their European accession as long as the Georgian Dream party is in power.”
Calling attention to her comments on social media, Anton Bendarjevskiy, director of the Oeconomus Institute, commented: “So the former Georgian president, who only left office six months ago, goes to an international forum and demands that as many and stronger sanctions be imposed on her country as possible, because that will kill the Georgian economy, and then she and the political forces that support him can take power in the country.”
Hungary has faced a similar situation, with the opposition Tisza Party MEP Kinga Kollár celebrating the fact that sanctions have hurt her country by way of withholding needed funds and thus helped increase the chances of her party ousting Prime Minister Viktor Orbán from power.
The Georgian Dream party has long been under scrutiny for its close ties to and preference for Russia, accusations of helping Putin evade sanctions, and its anti-Western stances, including Irakli Kobakhidze’s battle against what he has called a “Global War Party.”
June 17, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Russophobia | European Union, Georgia |
Leave a comment
With the Israel-Iranian conflict in full swing, oil producers and oil consumers alike are wondering: could Iran resort to shutting down maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, and if so, how it might affect oil prices?
Oil could hit $130 per barrel, or even $300, if Iran does close the strait, warns Dr. Tilak Doshi from the King Abdullah Petroleum Studies and Research Center.
It is very likely that such high prices would not be “favored by the US administration, and they will try to arrive at a resolution of the war as soon as possible,” he notes.
“Historically, in 2008, oil prices briefly reached $147 per barrel without any major geopolitical conflict, driven solely by financial speculation and tight supply-demand dynamics,” muses energy economist Dr. Kazi Sohag.
“During the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo, triggered by the Yom Kippur War, oil prices increased by 300%, demonstrating how quickly markets can react to political shocks,” he adds.
Even without the strait’s closure, targeting Iran’s oil export and refining facilities could push prices to $80 or even $90, predicts Marc Ayoub, energy policy researcher.
“If things continue like they are currently, we would stay on the same norm, and we might reach a level or a ceiling of $80 per barrel maximum,” he elaborates.
“And also, if Israeli Kareesh or Leviathan are targeted as well, we might see increases for up to $5, between $5 and $10. That means we might reach… $90 or something.”
June 16, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Wars for Israel | Iran, Middle East |
Leave a comment
The fall of former Syrian president Bashar al-Assad in December 2024 was expected to trigger a mass return of Syrian refugees. It did not. Six months on, UN figures show fewer than eight percent of Syrians abroad have made the journey home. The promise of a new era in Damascus has collided with the harsh realities of insecurity, poverty, and heightened foreign interference.
The Syrian refugee crisis – now in its 14th year – was born of war, western-imposed economic blockade, and the disintegration of state institutions that started in March 2011. What began as internal displacement soon morphed into a mass exodus across West Asia and into Europe, producing one of the most severe refugee crises of the 21st century.
Life after Assad: The enduring refugee crisis
Despite the fall of the Assad government, the Syrian refugee crisis remains unresolved. As of early 2025, the UN reports that approximately 6.2 million Syrians remain registered as refugees abroad – primarily in Turkiye, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq, and Egypt – with millions more residing in Europe and North America. Only a fraction have returned since the Syrian opposition assumed power.
The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) estimates that about 400,000 refugees returned between December 2024 and April 2025. This number rose slightly to 481,730 by May, still below eight percent of the total refugees abroad. This disparity underlines a stark reality: The fall of Assad did not translate into mass return as the west suggested for years, which reveals that there are deeper, unresolved issues that keep Syrians away from Syria.
In West Asia’s key host countries, Turkiye hosts between 2.7 and three million Syrian refugees under a temporary protection regime, in addition to roughly one million unregistered Syrians. Lebanon hosts around 750,000 registered refugees, though Beirut places the actual figure closer to 1.5 million. Jordan houses approximately 650,000 Syrian refugees.
While many refugees may dream of returning, reality intervenes. A mid-2024 survey found 57 percent hoped to return one day, yet fewer than two percent believed this was feasible within the following year. UNHCR identifies safety concerns and the lack of stable livelihoods as the most significant obstacles. These core issues shape the calculus of return – a calculus that has not shifted meaningfully since Assad was in power.
Why Syrians aren’t going back
A May poll cited critical return deterrents: housing and property conditions (69 percent), service availability (40 percent), safety (45 percent), and economic hardship (54 percent). Fourteen years of war have left Syria fractured, devastated, and distrustful. There is no unified, trustworthy security or governance structure. The post-Assad era remains deeply uncertain to Syrian refugees.
The current political set-up in Damascus is a patchwork of domestic and foreign-influenced actors. Despite Assad’s ousting, returnees consistently cite improved security and essential services as prerequisites. A recent survey indicated that 58 percent of Syrians abroad would return only under “safe and dignified conditions,” while 31 percent remain undecided.
Governance challenges are equally daunting. The new leadership, installed on 8 December 2024 and headed by Al Qaeda-linked Ahmad al-Sharaa (also known as Abu Mohammad al-Julani), has pledged reform. But memories of infighting among rebel groups linger. Many Syrian refugees are alarmed by the ascension of militant factions, including former Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) affiliates, fueling fears of sectarian reprisals and authoritarianism.
Beyond Syria’s borders, refugee networks now serve as lifelines. After more than a decade abroad, Syrian refugees have established enduring community ties. In Turkiye, 60 percent of working-age Syrians are employed, mostly in informal sectors. These jobs, although low-paid, offer stability compared to war-torn Syria.
Yet, most Syrians in Turkiye remain socially unanchored: Over half report feeling disconnected from Turkish society, where racism has become rife, while 84 percent still feel moderately connected to Syria. This duality reflects a long-term migration trend where refugees retain ties to their homeland while integrating abroad.
A recent survey shows that just seven percent of Syrians in Turkiye have concrete plans to leave. Others express the desire to relocate, but without actionable steps. Citizenship also affects permanence: Around 238,000 Syrians had been naturalized in Turkiye by mid-2024, granting them full legal protections, including immunity from deportation. Turkish opposition sources, however, estimate this figure could be as high as 2.5 million.
The return paradox: Poor conditions in host nations, yet no return?
Even deteriorating conditions in host countries have not significantly altered return patterns. Economic collapse in Lebanon, rising costs in Turkiye, and recent conflict along the Lebanese border have not pushed Syrians homeward. Studies consistently show return decisions hinge more on improvements in Syria – security, jobs, services – than on hardships abroad.
Divisions among external powers inside Syria further complicate matters. Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and western states continue to prioritize their respective geopolitical gains over stability. The result is a fragmented political order dominated by armed factions and foreign patrons, with little accountability to actual Syrians.
This instability has real consequences. The massacres along Syria’s coast last March, reportedly instigated by UAE-backed elements, required intervention by the new Damascus authority. Such events erode trust and deter return.
Economically, Syria remains in free fall. According to the UN Development Programme (UNDP), 90 percent of Syrians live below the poverty line. The World Bank projects an additional one percent GDP contraction in 2025. The World Food Programme (WFP) says 9.1 million are food insecure, with 3.6 million reliant on aid.
Electricity is available just two to three hours a day, crippling industry and inflating living costs. Despite promises by the transitional government to reform banking and attract Persian Gulf investment, remaining sanctions and market isolation are still serious hurdles, even after Washington lifted most restrictions in May 2025.
Unemployment is rampant, fuel and transport costs are surging, and social safety nets are vanishing. Monthly incomes in many regions fall below $40, while basic food baskets cost twice that amount. The exodus of Syrian professionals continues to deplete the labor market, deepening reliance on remittances in the absence of a coherent reconstruction plan.
Syria remains a high-risk return
The reluctance of millions of Syrians to repatriate was never actually about leadership change – credible data simply does not exist on this. It is about the cumulative consequences of war: insecurity, economic collapse, political fragmentation, and the absence of justice or reconciliation.
Unless those in power focus on rebuilding credible institutions and securing livelihoods – not just reshuffling elites – the prospect of return will remain a perilous gamble.
June 11, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Economics | Lebanon, Middle East, Syria, Turkey |
Leave a comment
The European Commission has proposed a ban on the use of Nord Stream gas infrastructure and a reduction of the price cap on Russian oil in its 18th sanctions package against Moscow, EC President Ursula von der Leyen announced on Tuesday.
“No EU operator will be able to engage directly or indirectly in any transaction regarding the Nord Stream pipelines. There is no return to the past,” she stated.
Both pipelines were severely damaged in a series of underwater explosions in the Baltic Sea in September 2022. Since the sabotage, the pipelines have been out of service.
The commission also intends to lower the price cap on Russian crude oil exports from the current $60 per barrel to $45. The cap, which was introduced in December 2022 by the G7, EU, and Australia, aimed to curb Russia’s oil revenue while maintaining global supply.
The new sanctions package also proposes a ban on the import of all refined goods based on Russian crude oil and sanctions on 77 vessels that are allegedly part of Russia’s so-called ‘shadow fleet’, which Brussels claims is used to circumvent oil trade restrictions.
The commission has also suggested expanding the EU sanctions list to include additional Russian banks and implementing a “complete transaction ban” alongside existing restrictions on the use of the SWIFT financial messaging system. The restrictions would also apply to banks in third countries that “finance trade to Russia in circumvention of sanctions,” according to the EC president.
The draft sanctions package will next be put up for discussion among EU members and must be approved by all 27 EU states in order to pass. Previous rounds of sanctions faced resistance from countries such as Hungary and Slovakia, which argue that the restrictions harm the EU economy.
Russia has dismissed the Western sanctions as illegitimate, saying pressure tactics are counterproductive. President Vladimir Putin has said the removal of sanctions is among the conditions for a settlement of the Ukraine conflict.
June 10, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Russophobia | European Union, Hungary, Slovakia |
Leave a comment
French President Emmanuel Macron and Chief of the Defense Staff General Thierry Burkhard at the VE Day parade, Paris, France, May 08, 2025. © Getty Images / Pierre Suu
France may not be able to afford to ramp up defense spending under a broader EU militarization drive, the Financial Times reported on Saturday, citing experts. The country’s growing national debt and large budget deficit present major obstacles to its rearmament goals, the newspaper noted.
President Emmanuel Macron earlier proposed raising defense spending to 3-3.5% of GDP by 2030 – nearly double the current level – which would require an extra €30 billion ($34 billion) annually. However, experts told the FT that France’s fiscal position is too precarious to go through with the plan. They noted that debt-to-GDP ratio hit 113% in 2024, one of the highest in the EU, while the budget deficit reached 5.8%, almost twice the EU’s 3% cap. Interest payments on debt totaled €59 billion last year and are expected to reach €62 billion in 2025 – roughly the combined annual cost of defense and education.
Experts also noted that the government is struggling to pass a deficit-reduction package, which reportedly features unpopular moves such as cuts to social spending, including pension tax breaks and healthcare subsidies.
“In France, and this is probably different than elsewhere, we cannot go back on our deficit reduction goals, nor can we raise taxes since they are already very high,” Clement Beaune, a former minister for Europe and Macron ally, who heads a government think tank, the told FT.
Experts said France could apply for the EU’s “escape clause,” which allows countries to exceed deficit caps to boost defense budgets by 1.5% of GDP. However, they warned that the move is unlikely, as it could spook bond markets and drive up borrowing costs. Paris could also join another EU scheme offering loans for joint arms purchases. Experts, however, said that rising costs and inflation could mean France would end up with fewer weapons even if it boosts spending. Some described it as a “bonsai army” – broad in scope, but limited in scale.
France’s rearmament plans come as the EU pushes for more spending and less reliance on US weapons, citing a supposed Russian threat. Moscow has repeatedly dismissed the claims as “nonsense,” accusing the West of using fear to justify funneling public funds into arms. Russian officials have warned the EU’s buildup risks wider conflict. Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova recently said the bloc “has degraded into an openly militarized entity.”
June 10, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Militarism | European Union, France |
Leave a comment
Like many developing economies, India faces coercion from the United Nations and Europe to conform to climate policies, especially through the imposition of carbon taxes on imports into their countries. But Delhi is not about to bend to such tactics.
“If they [EU and U.K.] put in a carbon tax, we’ll retaliate,” said India’s Union Minister Piyush Goya at the Columbia India Energy Dialogue in New York City. “I think it will be very silly, particularly to put a tax on friendly countries like India.”
That isn’t a bluff. It’s a moral, strategic, and scientific imperative grounded in realpolitik and economic logic.
India and the U.K. have inked a trade deal that promises to boost bilateral trade by more than $33 billion and increase U.K. gross domestic product and wages by many billions.
On paper, this deal is a triumph for both nations, removing duties on 99% of Indian goods entering the U.K. For India, this means greater market access for textiles, agriculture and manufactured goods – sectors that employ millions and drive economic growth.
Yet, the U.K.’s pending Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) remains in place with no exemptions for Indian steel, cement and aluminum, despite the trade agreement.
Starting January 2027, the U.K. is to impose a levy on these “carbon-intensive” imports, supposedly to compensate for the difference between the U.K.’s domestic carbon tax and India’s lower assessment at home. The tax on imports is to prevent “carbon leakage” — the idea that emissions are “outsourced” to countries with fewer regulations.
This hocus-pocus is nothing more than repugnant virtue signaling that penalizes manufacturers in developing countries for using the very fossil fuels that powered the West’s rise in the 19th and 20th centuries.
India’s export of these products to the EU and U.K. are a critical part of its economic engine. In 2022 alone, 27% of India’s iron, steel and aluminum exports went to the EU.
Yet, the EU’s CBAM, set to take effect in 2026 prior to the U.K. tax, would slap tariffs of 20-35% on these goods.
For Indian exporters, this translates to a steep cost increase. India’s predominantly coal-based blast furnaces have higher carbon intensity of around 2.5-2.6 metric tons of CO₂ emissions per metric ton of steel produced in comparison to the global average of 1.85 metric tons of CO2 . This means a higher CBAM assessment for India.
Profit margins for steel exports could shrink, while aluminum exporters might face a sudden surcharge once indirect emissions from coal power are factored in. Take the case of Tata Steel, which employs over 75,000 people and produces 30 million tons of steel annually. A 20-35% carbon tax under the EU’s CBAM would erode profit margins, forcing layoffs or price hikes that could cost it market share.
India’s dismissal of the climate war on fossil fuels is grounded in necessity and science. Economically, the nation aims to become a $5 trillion economy by 2027, a goal that demands rapid industrialization and infrastructure growth.
Steel, cement, and aluminum are the building blocks of this ambition, used in everything from bridges to skyscrapers, and an important source of export revenue. Fossil fuels, particularly coal, are the lifeblood of these industries, providing the energy needed to keep production costs low and globally competitive.
Coal generates more than 70% of India’s electricity. It powers the factories that make steel and cement. It keeps the lights on in rural hospitals and schools. And it fuels the economic engine that has lifted 415 million people out of poverty in the past two decades.
The modern crusade against fossil fuels is based on the false premise of a disintegrating global environment. But that is not the case. Carbon dioxide is not a toxin. It is a colorless, odorless gas essential to life on Earth.
Even the term “carbon emissions” is a sleight of hand. The emissions are carbon dioxide but calling them “carbon” conjures images of potentially harmful soot and smoke. Fear perpetrated by lies have made people less resistant to destructive policies like CBAM.
However, India won’t bow to carbon taxes, and it won’t join an unscientific climate war that sacrifices its future. The U.K. and EU would do well to listen, lest they find themselves on the losing end of an Asian-dominated trade battle over manufactured goods.
Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India.
June 10, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | European Union, India, UK |
Leave a comment
The EU is considering adding Russia to its anti-money laundering “grey list” in an effort to cause reputational damage and increase financial pressure on Moscow, Financial Times reported on Friday.
The blacklist includes countries that Brussels considers to have inadequate regulations against shady financial activity. Inclusion on the list would impose extra compliance requirements on banks and financial institutions dealing with Russian individuals and entities, leading to higher costs in conducting business activity.
The European Commission is preparing to adopt a revised list of high-risk third countries next week, after postponing its release at the last minute for “administrative/procedural reasons,” FT reported.
”There is huge support for putting Russia on the list,” Markus Ferber, a German MEP with the center-right European People’s Party, the EU parliament’s largest grouping, told the outlet.
Typically, the EU aligns its blacklist with decisions from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), a global intergovernmental body that combats money laundering and terrorist financing.
Although Russia’s FATF membership was suspended in 2023, several countries would likely block any attempt to formally add it to the FATF grey list, leading Brussels to consider unilateral action.
Despite its suspension from FATF, Russia continues to engage with the Eurasian Group (EAG), a regional body affiliated with FATF. In 2024, the EAG assessed Russia’s progress in strengthening its anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing measures. It acknowledged some improvements but urged further action, particularly in enforcing targeted financial sanctions and increasing transparency around beneficial ownership.
Ukraine has repeatedly pushed for Russia to be placed on the FATF blacklist, citing its connections with already blacklisted states and the potential risks it allegedly poses to the global financial system. However, these attempts have failed due to resistance from several FATF member states, including China, India, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa.
Despite being suspended, Russia remains obligated to comply with FATF standards and continues to fulfill its financial commitments to the organization.
June 7, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Russophobia | European Union, Russia |
Leave a comment
Brussels will bend and break its own rules to ensure Ukraine joins the EU
The EU wants Ukraine in the European Union, and they are willing to use underhanded methods in violation of the founding treaty, including cutting Hungary out of the process and ignoring the country’s veto.
Marta Kos, the European Commission’s commissioner for enlargement, spoke to the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday, where she made it clear that they want to complete the enlargement process for Ukraine by the end of the next EU term, which is 2029.
“We must and will succeed in the next phase of European unification. We have a realistic chance of bringing one or more candidate countries to the finish line in this cycle,” said Kos.
To speed up the process, Brussels is also working on introducing an “alternative” decision-making mechanism. This is intended to ensure that bilateral disputes – such as Hungarian vetoes – can no longer hold back EU enlargement.
“Together with EU member states, the commission is exploring options to simplify access procedures so that bilateral issues do not hinder enlargement in this very sensitive geopolitical situation,” she said.
Kos also specifically addressed the accession process of Ukraine and Moldova, stating: “Now we absolutely have to take the next step with Ukraine and Moldova. Both countries have done their homework.” She also emphasized that all preparations have been made, so it is now up to the Council of Member States to open the first negotiation cluster.
According to the commissioner, enlargement is not only an economic opportunity, but also a key security guarantee for the European Union. To this end, the EU commission is already starting to open up the internal markets to the countries concerned — in particular in the areas of defense and security, energy and connectivity.
“To complement the accession negotiations, the commission is stepping up its efforts to accelerate the integration of the internal market: now in the areas of defense and security, and then in connectivity, energy and other areas, together with EU member states,” she added.
Kos said: “Ukraine’s access to the EU is a key security guarantee. We must make it happen. We must move forward to maintain the momentum of reforms in Ukraine, to help our member states address their concerns and, ultimately, to respond to the greatest security challenges since the Second World War.”
It is worth remembering that it was Marta Kos who recently admitted that accession negotiations with Ukraine would begin in June, and also spoke of doing everything she could to accelerate Ukraine’s accession.
She even said that a thousand people are already working in the Brussels institutions to accelerate the accession. This is interesting because it was EU Commissioner Marta Kos who showed Alex Soros that Ukraine could not meet a single EU accession condition.
Ukraine is considered the most corrupt country in Europe, a point that many top officials and organizations have acknowledged repeatedly in the past. The EU has already sent tens of billions to the country, but if EU membership occurs, European taxpayers can expect to be on the hook for many tens of billions more. The EU agriculture sector is also expected to experience even more losses if markets are opened up to cheap Ukrainian products, which is not just a concern of Hungary, but of countries across the bloc.
June 6, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Militarism | European Union, Hungary, Moldova, Ukraine |
Leave a comment
A bipartisan coalition of Senators is lobbying President Donald Trump to endorse legislation that will add new sanctions on Russia. The bill has sweeping bipartisan support in the Upper Chamber with over 80 co-sponsors.
According to The Hill, Senators are prepared to pass the legislation that would place a 500% tariff on countries that import Russian energy. Republicans in the Upper Chamber are waiting for Trump’s endorsement before moving forward with the bill.
Trump has used the bill as a threat to ramp up the economic war on Russia if the Kremlin does not reach an agreement with Ukraine to end the war. However, Trump has not explicitly given his support for the legislation.
The Guardian reports that Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has played a key role in prodding Trump to take a more aggressive stance towards Russia in private meetings. “Senator Graham deserves a lot of credit for making the case for tougher pressure on the Kremlin,” said John Hardie, of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a hawkish think tank. “Carrots clearly haven’t worked, so it’s time to start using some sticks, including by going after Russia’s oil revenue. This economic pressure should be paired with sustained military assistance for Ukraine.”
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) said the bill could receive a vote this month. “[The White House is] still hopeful they’ll be able to strike some sort of a deal, but … there’s a high level of interest here in the Senate on both sides of the aisle in moving on it,” he said. “I think a genuine interest in doing something to make clear to Russia that they need to come to the table … I think that would have a big impact.”
The White House is considering instructing Republican Senators to vote according to their conscience on the legislation. Such a move would give the GOP lawmakers the ability to vote for the bill without Trump giving an explicit endorsement.
On the other side of the aisle, Democratic leadership is demanding immediate action on the bill. “The single best thing President Trump can do to strengthen Ukraine’s hand right now is to show that the U.S. stands firmly behind them and squarely against Russia. But so far, Trump has not done that,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said.
The legislation also has support in the House. Republican Speaker Mike Johnson said Monday, “There’s many members of Congress that want us to sanction Russia as strongly as we can. And I’m an advocate of that.”
If passed into law, the legislation would represent a significant escalation in the US economic war with Russia, and a break from Trump’s campaign pledge to end the war in Ukraine and improve ties with Moscow.
Graham has described it as “the most draconian bill I’ve ever seen in my life in the Senate.”
The bill would also spike tensions with China and India, as the two Asian giants would be slapped with 500% tariffs for importing Russian oil. The Senators hope that the threat of tariffs would lead Delhi and Beijing to end imports from Moscow and bankrupt the Russian war machine.
“I have coordinated with the White House on the Russia sanctions bill since its inception. The bill would put Russia on a trade island, slapping 500% tariffs on any country that buys Moscow’s energy products. The consequences of its barbaric invasion must be made real to those that prop it up.” Graham wrote last week, “If China or India stopped buying cheap oil, Mr Putin’s war machine would grind to a halt.”
The European Union believes its members will avoid the tariffs even as some of its members still import Russian gas and nuclear fuel. The bill has the endorsement of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
Following the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, President Joe Biden claimed a western economic war would cripple the Russian economy and prevent Moscow from waging war. However, the Kremlin has weathered a number of Western economic measures, including having its assets frozen, sanctions, and price caps, while increasing the size of its military.
June 4, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics | China, European Union, India, Russia, United States |
Leave a comment
Brussels Forces Energy Companies Into Expensive Climate Theater
The European Commission just delivered a wake-up call that Americans ignore at their own peril. In a sweeping new mandate, Brussels is forcing 44 oil and gas companies across Europe to build massive underground CO2 storage facilities by 2030.
Under the newly adopted Net-Zero Industry Act, European energy producers must collectively provide 50 million tons of annual CO2 injection capacity by 2030. The requirements, and costs, for individual companies are massive. Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschappij, the Dutch energy giant, now faces a mandate to store 6.35 million tons of CO2 annually. OMV PETROM must handle 5.88 million tons, while Romania’s SNGN ROMGAZ is on the hook for 4.12 million tons.
These companies have until June 30, 2025, to submit detailed plans showing exactly how they’ll meet these arbitrary government targets. European officials frame this as making oil and gas companies “part of the solution,” but the reality tells a different story. This massive regulatory burden will force energy companies to redirect billions of dollars from their core mission—producing reliable, affordable energy—into speculative technology with a deeply troubled track record.
The Inconvenient Truth About Carbon Capture
Here’s what Brussels bureaucrats don’t want to admit: carbon capture and storage simply doesn’t work as advertised. Despite decades of development and billions in investment worldwide, not one single CCS project has ever reached its target CO2 capture rate. The industry loves to talk about achieving 95% capture rates, but no existing project has consistently captured more than 80% of carbon emissions.
Projects from Algeria to Texas tell the same story: cost overruns, delays, and performance failures. For the hundreds of CO2 disposal projects currently being proposed around the world, there’s remarkably little solid information about whether their underground storage sites will actually work long-term.
Even if these technologies worked perfectly, the numbers are sobering. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that carbon capture will account for only 2.4% of global carbon mitigation by 2030. Capturing and storing CO2 from power plants still costs more than $100 per ton of CO2, higher than even the Biden administration’s estimate for the social cost of carbon. Needless to say, cost-benefit analysis must be thrown out when there is a “climate crisis” to solve.
The Real Cost: Your Energy Bill
What does this mean for ordinary Europeans? Higher energy costs, plain and simple. When governments force energy companies to spend billions on unproven technology instead of investing in reliable energy production, consumers pay the price. Every euro diverted to these mandated CO2 storage projects is a euro not spent on maintaining and expanding the energy infrastructure that keeps the lights on and homes warm.
This isn’t theoretical. European families are already struggling with some of the world’s highest energy costs, and these new mandates will only make things worse. Energy companies will have no choice but to pass these massive compliance costs on to their customers. The result is less money in family budgets that are already paying the world’s highest energy prices, and higher costs for European businesses trying to compete in global markets.
America’s Dangerous Drift Toward European-Style Energy Policy
Unfortunately, the United States is already following Europe down this costly path. The Inflation Reduction Act expanded and extended the 45Q tax credits that subsidize carbon capture projects. These credits offer $85 per ton for capturing CO2 from power plants and industrial facilities and an eye-watering $180 per ton for direct air capture technology. The Treasury Department estimates that the credits will cost taxpayers $25 billion over the next 10 years.
Taxpayer money flows to unproven technology while reliable energy sources face increasing regulatory pressure. And while Congress looks set to heavily scale back tax credits for wind and solar, it is not touching these 45Q credits.
Thankfully, the Trump administration is set to overturn the newest iteration of the Clean Power Plan, which was set to mandate CO2 capture for all gas and coal power plants. We hope that in due time the Supreme Court will put an end to the insanity of the federal government’s attempts to regulate CO2 emissions and that Congress will bury the 45Q program. Until then, Life:Powered will be fighting to save your electric bill and your tax bill from the cost of fruitless carbon capture mandates and subsidies.
June 3, 2025
Posted by aletho |
Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | European Union, United States |
Leave a comment
Aletho News 