Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Le Pen Blasts EU’s Borrell Over Threat to ‘Annihilate’ Russian Army

Samizdat – 16.10.2022

In a speech on Thursday in which he compared the European Union to a paradise-like “garden” flanked by “jungles,” the EU high representative for foreign and security policy warned that Russia’s military would be destroyed if Moscow used nuclear weapons in Ukraine.

France would probably be at war with Russia if Josep Borrell was in charge of the nation’s foreign and security policy, National Rally Marine Le Pen has said.

“I believe that we must hold to the tools of diplomacy. Because when I hear the statements of the head of European diplomacy, Josep Borrell – if he made decisions for us, I think we would have already entered the war,” the French opposition leader said, speaking to BFM TV on Sunday.

Le Pen cautioned against crossing the line of assistance to Ukraine and becoming a direct participant in the conflict between Moscow and Kiev. “The French people don’t want this, I don’t want this,” she stressed. “Be careful not to take too big a step which would take us to war.”

The politician also expressed consternation that the term ‘peace’ “has practically disappeared from the lexicon of the participants” of the crisis, and called for negotiations, recalling her idea of Paris hosting a global peace conference.

Borrell warned Thursday that Russia’s army would be “annihilated” by NATO if Russia used nukes in Ukraine.

“There is the nuclear threat, and [Vladimir] Putin says he is not bluffing. Well, he cannot afford bluffing,” Borrell said at a European Diplomatic Academy event in Bruges. “It has to be clear that the people supporting Ukraine and the European Union and the member states, and the United States and NATO are not bluffing either. And any nuclear attack against Ukraine will create an answer – not a nuclear answer but such a powerful answer from the military side – that the Russian army will be annihilated, and Putin should not be bluffing,” Borrell said.

Western officials and media have spent weeks discussing the escalating danger of a nuclear war after deliberately distorting comments made the Russian president last month about statements by senior NATO officials on the possibility or even admissibility of using weapons of mass destruction against Russia.

Russia’s nuclear doctrine expressly forbids the use of nuclear weapons unless WMDs are used against it first, or in the event of a conventional attack so severe that the country’s very existence is threatened. The US nuclear doctrine faces no such restrictions, and the Pentagon explicitly rejects ruling out the concept of a nuclear first strike.

France has committed hundreds of millions of euros-worth of military aid to Ukraine, including heavy towed and self-propelled artillery systems, armored personnel carriers and trucks, anti-tank and anti-air missile systems, radars, engineering equipment and small arms. Moscow has repeatedly called on Paris and other Western countries to halt weapons deliveries, pointing to the danger they pose in escalating the crisis and creating a multi-billion dollar weapons smuggling network.

French Armed Forces Minister Sebastien Lecornu announced Saturday that Paris will be providing general combat, logistics and equipment training for 2,000 Ukrainian troops, who will be assigned to French units for “several weeks.”

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , | Leave a comment

EU parliament wants to give up both Nord Stream pipelines: “Nord Stream” to be abolished

Establishment parties vote for doom in Brussels

FRONT NIEUWS | October 15, 2022

It should now be official. Nord Stream 1 and 2 are not repaired. Last week the EU parliament already voted on the further procedure with the two pipelines. Without much ado they simply decided to abandon the project, with the CDU/CSU, SPD, Greens, FDP and Free Voters voting in favour. This means: a further rise in gas prices and further deindustrialization of Germany and Europe, reports Wochenblick.at.

Europe on its way to the abyss

Germany, Austria and all of Europe are suffering from the suicidal sanctions against Russia. The industry goes bankrupt or migrates to the US, which lures German entrepreneurs with cheap energy and good conditions, traditional companies that have already survived economic crises and two world wars will not survive the impoverishment program of the system. The fate of Germany as one of the most important industrialized countries is thus sealed.

This vote shows very clearly that the old parties are simply not interested in promoting the interests of their own country, and even of Europe. They have opened the door to ever-increasing poverty and stabbed their own citizens in the back.

Bernhard Zimniok, MEP of the AfD, reported in a video about the vote and the attempted cover-up by Brussels:

Europe ReloadedHeartfelt thanks to journalist and ER contributor Michel van der Kemp for producing a translation of the video:

Hello from Brussels. Last week, the EU Parliament voted on a motion to finally give up Nord Stream 1 and 2. In doing so, the EU Parliament made a mistake that was very helpful to us:it accidentally initiated a roll-call vote instead of an electronic vote, which nobody noticed at first and which the EU Assist website, which documents all voting results, has therefore recorded on its site. On the one hand, an electronic vote means that it is known exactly how many votes were cast for or against a motion or how many abstained. But it also means that the election takes place more or less anonymously, because no member of parliament has to raise their hand, they just press a button. A roll-call vote is practically the opposite: It is documented exactly which member of parliament voted and how. When the administration realized their mistake and changed it on their website, the child had already fallen into the well, because EU Assist documented exactly who voted and how. Of all the German MPs, only the three non-attached, one from the SPD, the left and of course we from the AfD voted against giving up Nord Stream 1 and 2. The Greens, FDP, Freier Wahler (Free Choice), CDU/CSU and all but one of the SPD MPs voted to finally abandon Nord Stream 1 and 2 and thus voted for the fact that gas prices will continue to rise and that we may soon run out of gas, so voting for potential blackouts and cold apartments. Anyone who supports these parties is calling for a loss of prosperity and the collapse of the German economy, indeed of the entire country. Only the AfD makes politics for Germany!

The “creative” destruction of Europe

The future impoverishment of Germany and all of Europe is probably entirely in the interest of those forces who have [in mind] something very different for the world. With the destruction of the European continent, the breeding ground for the Great Reset has been created. The peoples have been disintegrated and fragmented by mass migration, the economy is virtually non-existent, the population is impoverished and destitute.

“You will own nothing” is one of the dogmas of the future, which the WEF has put into circulation. No one will voluntarily surrender his property, and taking it is not possible without arousing the resentment of the people. This is different in the event of a major crisis, perhaps even a war, where in the end – except for a few – no one is left with anything. A dystopian “brave new world” can be built on such a foundation.

After the end of “Nord Stream” one no longer has to face the unpleasant question of who is responsible for the terrorist attack on the pipelines.

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | , , | Leave a comment

Time to start worrying again!

By Gilbert Doctorow | October 15, 2022

Some readers have commented in direct emails to me that they have taken comfort from my writings insofar as I have been a moderate voice, avoiding alarmism over the often troublesome daily news in and around the Russian war with Ukraine, or more properly speaking today, Russia’s proxy war with NATO in and about Ukraine.

For this very reason, I hesitated whether to share with readers the deep pessimism that overcame me a couple of days ago over our chances of avoiding nuclear Armageddon. This followed my watching the latest Solovyov political talk show on Russian state television. I have used this show regularly as a litmus test of the mood of Russian social and political elites: that mood has turned black.

Whereas in the past, going back six months or more, I had reported on the open contempt which leading and highly responsible Russian academics from university circles and think tanks were showing for the American political leadership in their statements on the political talk shows, this contempt has moved into an actionable phase, by which I mean that serious, God-fearing Russians are so furious with the rubbish propaganda coming out of Washington, repeated with bullhorns in Europe that if given the chance they would personally “press the button” and unleash nuclear attacks on the United States and Britain, in that order notwithstanding the possibility, even probability of a return strike, which, however enfeebled, would be devastating to their own country. That is to say, deterrence as a policy is fast losing its psychological impact on the Russian side of the argument.

Whatever the words of the Biden Administration about nuclear war being ‘off the table,’ America’s aggressive and threatening behavior, including the ongoing ‘training in nuclear weapons’ currently going on in Europe under U.S. direction, has made rational and very serious Russians ready to give it a try.

One of the most sober-minded international affairs experts to appear on the Solovyov show, Yevgeny Satanovsky, president of the Institute of the Near East think tank, contained his rage with some difficulty, saying only that while he had once held some sympathy for the United States, he would see its utter destruction now with little regret; he left no mention where his feet are pointed when he added that he could say no more on air for fear that he will be censored and his words removed from the video.

For these reasons, I have given to this essay addressed to the Collective West, and in particular to the fomenters of world disorder in Washington and London, a title that fits the current situation.

*****

As we have seen from even before the launch of the ‘special military operation,’ Russian talk programs identify by name individuals in the Biden team whose outstanding stupidity, obtuseness and rank ignorance they find unbearable, with the likes of Antony Blinken, Jake Sullivan and Lloyd Austin among those coming in for special mention. We are left with the impression that when Biden calls in his advisers to the Oval Office, he, senile dimwit that he is, is the bright light in the room. The Russians conclude from this that they have no one to negotiate with.

Now the naming of idiots in high places carries over to all discussion of European Union and British leaders. The denunciation of incompetence, rank stupidity and, yes, neo-colonialist or fascist mindsets among European leaders was well reflected in the latest Solovyov show. The most discussed whipping boy was the EU’s commissioner on external action, Josep Borrell, who seems to be speaking to the world daily and acknowledges no limits on what he may proclaim, as if it were official EU policy in defense as well as diplomacy.

The Solovyov show put up on screen a brief video recording of Borrell expounding smugly on Europe’s privileged position as ‘a garden of liberal democracy, good economic prospects and social solidarity’ which is surrounded by ‘the jungle.’  That jungle reference fits in well, Solovyov remarked, with the colonialist mindset of Rudyard Kipling and is deeply offensive to the Rest of the World, of which Russia is a part. More to the point, Borrell was also notorious in Russia this past week for his statement that any use by Russia of nuclear weapons in Ukraine would be met by a massive non-nuclear attack from Europe which would ‘annihilate’ the Russian army. However, Borrell was not alone in the stocks: other European leaders who were decried for their stupid policies this past week included German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and French President Emanuel Macron.

So you have no bomb shelter? Then, as the Russians said decades ago, it is high time to throw a bed sheet over your shoulders and slowly walk to the nearest cemetery.

*****

One of the two latest fake news stories being disseminated simultaneously and ubiquitously in Western major media this past week is that Russia is considering using against Ukraine ‘tactical nuclear weapons,’ meaning warheads with a destructive force equivalent to the Hiroshima-Nagasaki bombs mounted on cruise or medium range ballistic missiles.  Our print and electronic media speculate on the numbers of warheads Russia currently possesses (2,000 or more), as if that would make any difference in an assault on Ukraine.

Rubbish say the Russians on Solovyov’s show: we have no need of nuclear arms to finish off the Ukrainians. The only nuclear forces we would deploy in the current situation are strategic arms, and they are directed against…. Washington with the help of the Sarmat and Poseidon delivery systems.

The other major fake news disseminated massively by Western media in recent days was the allegation that the Russians are seeking to freeze the Ukrainians to death by their strikes against power generation infrastructure. Images of Stalingrad were evoked by our broadcasters. A similar freeze is said to be inflicted on Western Europe by the cut-off of Russian energy supplies to the EU.

More rubbish say the panelists on the Solovyov program. The attack on the electricity grid in Ukraine is not directed against civilians per se; it is intended to halt rail deliveries of advanced weapons systems and munitions coming into Ukraine at the Polish border and being moved by train to the fronts in the east and south of the country.  Without these inputs, the Ukrainian army will be kaput and the war can come to an early conclusion with the capitulation of Kiev.  As regards the EU, whatever chill out may be coming this winter is due solely to the unprofessional and ignorant decisions of the Commission on imports of Russian hydrocarbons that have been blindly followed by the Member States without due consideration of consequences for their own populations.

*****

The Collective West speaks of ‘sham’ referendums in the four Ukrainian oblasts that have now been reintegrated into (or annexed by, depending on your politics) the Russian Federation. In this spirit, in the middle of the past week the United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly approved a U.S. sponsored resolution refusing to recognize the legality of this annexation. Among those who voted against Russia were such prominent ‘friendly states’ as Serbia and Hungary. One hundred forty states voted with the United States; four states, including the pariah regimes in Venezuela and North Korea, joined Russia in voting ‘nyet,’ and thirty-five states abstained.

The United States trumpeted this victory at the UN over the mischievous and rules-breaking Russians. EU chief of diplomacy Borrell was also gloating, though he expressed regret that 20% of the member states had not voted for the resolution.

The Russians, for their part, insist that this vote was a sham, given the carrots and sticks that U.S. and European diplomats used to get the results desired. Blackmail of all kinds was applied, say the Russians. Morever, the number of states in each tally tells only part of the story: among the 35 abstaining countries were India and China, which between them alone account for 35% of humanity.

Meanwhile, over in Europe, on the next day the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe meeting in Strasbourg adopted a resolution condemning Russia for its alleged aggression against Ukraine with a bill of particulars several pages long and including a call for the 46 member states to declare Russia a ‘terrorist state’ as Zelensky had requested of them. The vote as published was said to be 99 for the resolution, 1 opposed.  No mention was made in the announcement of vote results that the actual number of deputies in PACE is 306. The point was not missed by the Solovyov panel, who here too cried ‘foul.’

Putting aside these two votes that garnered so much attention in the propagandistic Western media, there were other international developments bearing on the relative standing of Russia in the global community which Western media chose to ignore, but Russia media, featured prominently.

I think in particular of the three days of summitry in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan. The first of these gatherings brought together 27 heads of state from across Asia, running from Israel and Palestine, Qatar and the Emirates in the west to Korea in the east. Let us remember that a goodly number of the participants were from countries that voted against Russia in the UN General Assembly. Their presence in Astana gave the lie to the notion that they were expelling Russia from polite society.

The key personality at the meeting of 27 was clearly Vladimir Putin. Film footage on Russian television showed him in animated conversation with these leaders in group and bilateral formats. Of these the most significant was likely the face-to-face with Turkish president Erdogan, during which the two discussed immediate steps to implement the Russian proposal that a new pipeline be added to Turk Stream so as to greatly increase possibilities for delivering gas to Europe by this southern route through the Balkans. In this concept, Turkey will become a major gas hub, which represents fulfillment of a long-held dream by the Turkish leader.

In its capacity as hub, Turkey would be able to mix Russian gas with flows from Azerbaijan and possibly later from Turkmenistan, so that the product sold as a Turkish export would be bullet proof against American or European sanctions. The additional line could probably be laid down within a year, that is to say, more quickly than the problematic repairs to the damaged Nord Stream 1 pipelines.

The next day in Astana, another summit was held between leaders of the Community of Independent States. This reduced circle of members was also of great importance insofar as it confirms Russia’s standing as facilitator of diplomatic solutions between member states experiencing armed conflict with one another, the Azeris and Armenians being first in line. And the final summit, among the leaders of Central Asian republics with Russia had yet another important agenda:  agreeing security measures to defend against spillover into their region of the developing civil war in Afghanistan, where the U.S. and Britain are aiding extremist groups seeking to overthrow Taliban rule. From the body language of leaders, it would seem that Putin’s ear was much in demand. Relations with Kazakhstan leader Tokaev appeared to be solid once again after a trying period of several months earlier in the year.

In considering the meaning of these gatherings, I think that a remark made several days ago on another Solovyov show and with regard to the decision of the Saudis and Gulf States to snub the insistent demands of Biden that oil production be raised: the decision to make common cause with Russia came not out of pity for the weak but out of Realism, namely the assessment that Russia will win the military contest with NATO/Ukraine.  These rulers in Opec, like the rulers who came to Astana this past week, back winners not prospective losers.

If I may draw any positive conclusions from the otherwise bleak analysis in the foregoing, they are that Russia is successfully resisting massive U.S. and E.U. pressures, and that the world is realigning before our eyes in a more multi-polar and democratic direction.  And yet, the fears of miscalculations on one side or another in this tense and unparalleled contest mean Armageddon constantly threatens in the background.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2022

October 16, 2022 Posted by | Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

EU opens probe into vaccine deals

Samizdat | October 15, 2022

The European Union prosecutor’s office has launched an investigation into the bloc’s procurement of billions of Covid-19 vaccine doses, amid allegations of corruption and secret backroom dealings from several members of the EU parliament.

EU officials announced the probe in a brief statement on Friday, confirming an “ongoing investigation into the acquisition of Covid-19 vaccines in the European Union.” They added that the case follows “extremely high public interest” around the issue, though declined to share any other details.

While prosecutors were tight-lipped about the exact nature of the probe, the announcement follows allegations from MEPs that European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen conducted vaccine negotiations with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla in secret. Despite requests from journalists, lawmakers and an EU watchdog, von der Leyen’s office has failed to produce personal text messages sent to Bourla during talks for nearly 2 billion vaccine doses, prompting accusations of corruption.

Croatian MEP Mislav Kolakusic noted the new investigation later on Friday, saying the decision was made thanks to pressure from lawmakers. Though he was unable to shed additional light on the probe, Kolakusic has been highly critical of the EU’s vaccine procurement process, claiming deals for billions of doses were marred by “corruption” and secrecy.

“Today, 10 of us MEPs asked [von der Leyen] the following question: when will she present to us… the communication she had with Pfizer during the procurement of 4.5 billion doses of vaccines at a time when there was absolutely no proof of the effectiveness, and especially not of the harmfulness, of that product?” he said in a tweet earlier this week, calling the issue the “biggest corruption scandal in the history of mankind.”

Last month, the European Court of Auditors said it had asked the commission to provide information on “preliminary negotiations” for the EU’s largest Pfizer purchase – including “scientific experts consulted and advice received, timing of the talks, records of the discussions, and details of the agreed terms and conditions” – but added that “none was forthcoming.” The European Commission still has yet to make the information public, fueling corruption allegations from MEPs.

READ MORE: EU chief can’t find Pfizer CEO texts

October 15, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Pipelines v. USA

By Scott Ritter | Consortium News | October 12, 2022

Intent, motive and means: People serving life sentences in U.S. prisons have been convicted on weaker grounds than the circumstantial evidence against Washington for the attack on the Nord Stream pipelines.

Circumstantial evidence, just like direct proof, can be used to prove the elements of a crime, the existence or completion of certain acts and the intent or mental state of a defendant. Generally speaking, a prosecutor, to obtain a conviction, needs to show beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant committed a certain act and that the defendant acted with specific intent.

Nord Stream 1 is a multi-national project operated by Swiss-based Nord Stream AG intended to supply some 55 billion cubic meters (bcm) of Russian natural gas annually to Europe by directly transporting it from Russia, through twin 1,224 kilometer-long pipelines laid beneath the Baltic Sea, to a German hub, from which the gas would be distributed to other European consumers.

The first of the twin pipelines was completed in June 2011 and began supplying gas in November 2011. The second was completed in April 2012 and began supplying gas in October 2012. Gazprom, the Russian gas giant, owns 51 percent interest in the Nord Stream 1 pipeline project.

Nord Stream 2 is a near clone of the Nord Stream 1 project, consisting of twin 1,220-kilometer pipelines laid beneath the Baltic Sea connecting Russia to Germany. Started in 2018, it was completed in September 2021. Like Nord Stream 1, the Nord Stream 2 is designed to deliver approximately 55 bcm of natural gas from Russia to Europe through Germany. Nord Stream 2, like Nord Stream 1, is operated by a multinational company in which Gazprom has 51 percent ownership.

Unlike Nord Stream 1, Nord Stream 2 was never allowed to begin supplying gas.

The Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines are anathema to U.S. national security policy, which for decades has been sour on the degree to which Russian natural gas dominates the European energy market. This animus was perhaps best captured by a column published in the German newspaper DieWelt in July 2019.

The piece, co-authored by Richard Grenell, Carla Sands, Gordon Sondland (respectively, the U.S. ambassadors to Germany, Denmark and the European Union), was entitled “Europe must retain control of its energy security” and made the argument that the “Nord Stream 2 pipeline will drastically increase Russia’s energy leverage over the EU,” noting that “[s]uch a scenario is dangerous for the bloc and the West as a whole.”

Observing that “a dozen European countries rely on Russia for more than 75 percent of their natural gas needs,” the ambassadors concluded “This makes United States allies and partners vulnerable to having their gas shut off at Moscow’s whim.”

Moreover, the ambassadors claimed,

“European Union reliance on Russian gas presents risks for Europe and the West as a whole and makes U.S. allies less secure. The Nord Stream 2 pipeline will heighten Europe’s susceptibility to Russia’s energy blackmail tactics. Europe must retain control of its energy security.”

The ambassadors also wove in some critical geopolitical context as well, declaring

“Make no mistake: Nord Stream 2 will bring more than just Russian gas. Russian leverage and influence will also flow under the Baltic Sea and into Europe, and the pipeline will enable Moscow to further undermine Ukrainian sovereignty and stability.”

Russia’s “weaponization” of energy against Europe was the topic of a “debate” that Gary Peach and I carried out in December 2018 on the pages of Energy Intelligence, which monitors issues pertaining to global energy security. Gary, one of EI’s senior writers, covers Russian energy.

I argued that “Russia has never sought to use its status as a major supplier of energy to Europe as a vehicle of policy influence,” noting that:

“[t]he weaponization of Russian energy comes in the form of sanctions imposed against Moscow and the pursuit of policies designed to curtail development of Russia’s energy sector. It is far easier to make a case that the U.S. and Europe pose a threat to Russian energy security rather than vice versa.”

Gary, on the other hand, noted that

“Gazprom’s supply contracts exhibit the underlying economic threat from Moscow: The pricing formula is roughly the same for all countries, but those countries in Russia’s good graces receive an arbitrary ‘discount.’” He concluded that “when Gazprom is the only conceivable gas supplier, it has shamelessly abused the monopoly.”

In December 2019 the administration of President Donald Trump imposed sanctions in a desperate last-second bid to prevent the Nord Stream 2 pipeline from being completed.

These sanctions were waived by the administration of President Joe Biden in May 2021 in an effort to be seen as repairing relations with Germany that had been severely frayed during the Trump administration. However, upon completion, Nord Stream 2 was prevented from operating by objections raised by German regulators regarding licensing issues, which were not expected to be resolved until mid-2022.

In the lead up to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Biden administration devised a plan to punish Russia by imposing severe economic sanctions which would target the Russian energy sector, including measures designed to halt the delivery of gas from Russia to Germany via the Nord Stream pipelines.

One of the issues confronting U.S. policy makers was finding the right mix of sanctions that would succeed in harming Russia without destroying the European economy in the process. Policy makers on both sides of the Atlantic, however, recognized that meaningful sanctions which targeted Russian energy contained collateral risk to the European economy which could not be avoided.

One of the mechanisms that U.S. and E.U. policy makers were hoping would alleviate the economic consequences of sanctioning Russian energy was to increase the supply of U.S. liquified natural gas (LNG) to Europe. Since 2016 the amount of LNG supplied by the U.S. to Europe has increased, with more than 21 bcm delivered in 2021.

But 21 bcm couldn’t begin to offset the quantity of natural gas being shipped by Russia to Europe in case of any large-scale disruption of Russian energy supplies brought on by the imposition of economic sanctions that targeted the Russian energy sector.

After the Russian invasion of Ukraine — and the realization that the energy disruption to Europe was going to be far greater than had been anticipated — Biden made good on his promise to increase the supply of U.S. LNG to Europe. But the quantities still fell far short of demand, and at prices that were, literally, bankrupting all of Europe.

The Victims

With Germany blocking the operation of Nord Stream 2 and sanctions precluding the repair of the Nord Stream 1, the German population began bearing the brunt of the sanctions on Russian energy.

Despite their government’s insistence that it would remain resolute in confronting what it perceived as Russian aggression against Ukraine, the German people had other plans. By Sept. 26 they began taking to the streets in large numbers to demand that their government open the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and provide the German people and economy with the energy needed to survive.

The Crime

On Sept. 26, the Nord Stream 2 pipeline reported a massive drop in pressure. The next day, the Nord Stream 1 pipeline reported the same. A Danish fighter jet, flying over the pipeline route, reported seeing a one-kilometer diameter disturbance in the water off the island of Bornholm, directly over the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, created by the massive release of natural gas underwater. (Danish authorities have estimated that between the two pipelines the total amount of methane released into the atmosphere was around 500,000 metric tons.)

The incident took place in the exclusive economic zone of Sweden, and the Swedish Security Service took the lead in investigating what had happened. (Curiously, Russia was not invited to participate, despite having a vested economic and security interest in the matter.)

“After completing the crime scene investigation,” the Swedes reported, “the Swedish Security Service can conclude that there have been detonations at Nord Stream 1 and 2 in the Swedish economic zone,” noting that the blasts had caused “extensive damage” to the lines.

The Swedes also declared that they had retrieved some materials from the incident site, which were being analyzed to determine who was responsible. This evidence, the Swedes stated, “strengthened the suspicions of gross sabotage.”

While all parties involved with the Nord Stream pipeline “sabotage” concur that the cause was manmade, no nation outside Russia has named a suspect. (Russian President Vladimir Putin has attributed the attack, which Russia has labeled an act of “international terrorism,” on the “Anglo-Saxons” — the British and Americans.)

Biden dismissed the Russian claims. The pipeline attack “was a deliberate act of sabotage and the Russians are pumping out disinformation and lies,” the U.S. president said. “At the appropriate moment, when things calm down, we’re going to be sending divers down to find out exactly what happened. We don’t know that yet exactly.”

But we do know. Biden told us himself. So did Secretary of State Antony Blinken. So did the U.S. Navy. Between the three, we have incontrovertible evidence of intent, motive and means — more than enough needed to prove guilt beyond any reasonable doubt in a court of law.

Intent

Speaking to reporters on Feb. 7, Biden declared “If Russia invades, that means tanks or troops crossing the border of Ukraine again, there will no longer be a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.”

When a journalist asked how Biden could do such a thing, given that Germany was in control of the project, Biden retorted: “I promise you: We will be able to do it.”

No prosecutor has ever had a more concise statement of intent — a veritable confession before the event — than this. Joe Biden should be taken at his word.

Motive

When asked by reporters on Oct. 3 to comment on the Nord Stream pipeline attacks, Blinken responded in part by noting that the attack was “a tremendous opportunity to once and for all remove the dependence on Russian energy and thus to take away from Vladimir Putin the weaponization of energy as a means of advancing his imperial designs.”

Blinken further declared that the U.S. would work to alleviate the “consequences” of the pipeline attack on Europe, alluding to the provision of U.S. LNG at exorbitant profit margins for U.S. suppliers — another “opportunity.”

Prosecutors often speak of cui bono, a Latin phrase that means “who benefits,” when seeking to import motive for a crime committed, under the presumption that there is a high probability that those responsible for a specific crime are the ones who stand to gain from it.

Blinken. Tremendous opportunity.

Cui Bono.

Means

In early June, in support of a major NATO exercise known as BALTOPS (Baltic Operations) 2022, the U.S. Navy employed the latest advancements in unmanned underwater vehicle, or UUV, mine hunting technology to be tested in operational scenarios.

According to the U.S. Navy, it was able to evaluate “emerging mine hunting UUV technology,” focusing on “UUV navigation, teaming operations, and improvements in acoustic communications all while collecting critical environmental data sets to advance the automatic target recognition algorithms for mine detection.”

One of the UUV’s used by the U.S. Navy is the Seafox.

In September, specialized U.S. Navy helicopters — the MH-60R, capable of employing the Seafox UUV — were tracked flying off the Danish island of Bornholm, directly over the segments of the Nordstream 1 and 2 pipelines that were later damaged in the sabotage incidents.

To quote TASS,

“On November 6, 2015, the NATO Seafox mine disposal unmanned underwater vehicle was found during the scheduled visual inspection of the Nord Stream 1 gas pipeline. It lay in space between gas pipelines, clearly near one of strings. NATO said the underwater mine disposal vehicle was lost during exercises. Such NATO exercises when the combat explosive device turned out to be exactly under our gas pipeline. The explosive device was deactivated by Swedish Armed Forces at that time.”

Guilty Beyond Reasonable Doubt

The burden that exists to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt “is fully satisfied and entirely convinced to a moral certainty that the evidence presented proves the guilt of the defendant.”  In the matter of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 attacks, this burden has been met when it comes to assigning blame to the United States.

Biden all but confessed the crime beforehand, and his secretary of state, Blinken, crowed about the “tremendous opportunity” that was created by the attack. Not only did the U.S. Navy actively rehearse the crime in June 2022, using the same weapon that had been previously discovered next to the pipeline, but employed the very means needed to use this weapon on the day of the attack, at the location of the attack.

Guilty as Charged

The problem is, outside of Russia, no one is charging the United States. Journalists run away from the evidence, citing “uncertainty.” Europe, afraid to wake up to the reality that its most important “ally” has committed an act of war against its critical energy infrastructure, condemning millions of Europeans to suffer the depravations of cold, hunger and unemployment —all the while gouging Europe with profit margins from the sale of LNG that redefine the notion of “windfall” — remains silent.

There is no doubt in any thinking person’s brain as to who is responsible for the attacks on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines. The circumstantial case is overwhelming and fully capable of winning a conviction in any U.S. court of law.

But no one will bring the case, at least not at this moment.

Shame on American journalism for ignoring this flagrant attack on Europe.

Shame on Europe for not having the courage to publicly name their attacker.

But most of all, shame on the administration of Joe Biden, who has lowered the U.S. to the same standard of those it hunted down and killed for so many years — a simple international terrorist, and a state sponsor of terrorism.

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

EU’s LNG storage space runs out as Brussels braces for winter without Russian gas

By Drago Bosnic | October 14, 2022

The European Union’s self-imposed energy crisis is taking a turn for the worse. The political elites in Brussels and their suicidal subservience to Washington DC is breaking records day by day. The latest energy hurdle the bloc is facing is a chronic lack of transport ships carrying liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the United States to EU countries. According to Bloomberg, as the bloc is trying to prepare for a winter without Russian natural gas and other crucial commodities, LNG shipping rates are surging, but this will not be enough to meet the EU’s energy needs this season. The report states that European countries are now paying to keep the LNG transport ships loaded with natural gas in ports as onshore LNG storage facilities are full.

As companies are racing to charter entire fleets of LNG transport ships, there is a growing fear that there will not be enough vessels capable of transporting natural gas from the US. This problem is further exacerbated by those ready to pay for the already-loaded ships to stay in ports. Gas Market Report by the International Energy Agency (IEA), released on October 3, states that the demand for LNG in EU member states surged by 65% for the first three quarters of 2022 when compared to the same period last year.

In the aftermath of anti-Russian sanctions, the EU was forced to import less from Russia. According to OilPrice.com, in June, the bloc imported more natural gas from the US than from Russia for the first time in its history. A Reuters report claims that up to 70% of US LNG exports were sent to the EU in September, which was a 7% increase in comparison to August. In the meantime, countries in East Asia and South America are also trying to acquire more natural gas in preparation for the winter season, which is adding even more pressure on shipping companies. Worse yet, US states in New England, which are dependent on LNG imports, are now forced to compete with EU buyers, which further drives up prices, according to Seeking Alpha.

The October 11 report published by Bloomberg states that the cost to charter a transport ship loaded with LNG and set to sail across the Atlantic Ocean rose to $397,500 per day. This new record for Atlantic LNG shipping rates represents an increase of over 6% in less than a week, as the previous record of $374,000 per day was set on October 3. However, to better understand just how mind-boggling the shipping prices are now, it’s better to compare on a yearly basis. In 2021, the Atlantic LNG freight rate was $91,000 per day. With the newest record, which has very likely already been topped, this is an increase of over $306,500 per day, or 337%, and an approximately 500% increase since January 2022, according to Spark Commodities.

The LNG shipping price assessor reports that this broke the 2021 all-time record high for the Pacific Ocean freight rates which happened at the height of the supply chain crisis. The price is expected to surge further as traders are hoarding even more natural gas. The scramble to buy more LNG and charter additional transport ships to carry it is very likely to create the next big shortage in the energy market, experts and traders agree.

The shortage has become so severe that LNG exporters in Asia are now selling natural gas directly from their ports instead of offering to ship it to buyers. However, many buyers lack LNG shipping vessels of their own and are forced to pay exorbitant prices to get natural gas to their own ports, while in some cases they can’t even find a way to transport the LNG they already paid for. According to LNG traders, there are very few transport ships left to charter for the rest of 2022 and they are charging astronomical rates.

The shipping issues for LNG are a clear indicator that pipelines have no viable alternatives. However, with NATO countries and satellite states being involved in sabotage operations against Russia-EU pipelines, be it through sanctions or terrorist acts such as the Nord Stream 1 and 2 explosions, Brussels is now forced to contend with both US LNG producers and freight companies and their exorbitant prices.

There’s growing frustration in the EU as it is painfully obvious that the US is making astronomical profits thanks to the escalation of tensions between Brussels and Moscow. Global demand for LNG transport vessels is driving freight rates even higher, which will make pipelines even more important. The EU will have a clear choice – either come to an agreement with Russia and stop acts of sabotage or continue paying several times more for LNG and brace for certain shortages as storage space runs out.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

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

Europe’s descent into totalitarianism

By John Laughland | Forum for Democracy | October 11, 2022

On 7 October 2022, late in the evening, at around 11.30 pm, I was detained at Gatwick Airport in London by anti-terrorism police. I was not released until shortly before 1 am and my computer was taken from me. It has not yet been returned.

My passport and all my personal belongings – my wallet, my phone, my keys, everything – were removed. I was taken to a room where I was questioned for an hour by two anti-terrorism police officers, acting under powers given to the police (as I learned for the first time) by Schedule 3 of the 2019 Counter-terrorism and Border Security Act.

The Act is supposedly designed to allow the police to detain ‘hostile actors’ who are travelling to the country to ‘plan, prepare or carry out their hostile acts’ (according to the leaflet the officers gave me). But the Act itself says, ‘An examining officer may exercise the powers under this paragraph whether or not there are grounds for suspecting that a person is or has been engaged in hostile activity’ (my emphasis)[1].  So an Act ostensibly designed to allow hostile actors to be stopped in fact applies indiscriminately to everyone, according to its own explicit terms.

It is certainly surprising that the powers were wielded, in my case, against a British national. Nationals should not normally be questioned in this way about their reasons for entering the territory of their own country.

One of the officers opened the interrogation by saying that I was not being detained and that therefore I could not have access to a lawyer. But of course I was being detained, since it was impossible for me to leave the interrogation room and, even more so, the airport, without my passport and personal effects. (I was kept on the ‘air side’, i.e. before passing through passport control.) The word ‘detained’ has evidently been emptied of all meaning.

According to the leaflet, ‘Unlike most other Police powers, the power to stop, question, search and, if necessary, detain persons under Schedule 3 does not require authority or any suspicion.’ So the special powers enjoyed by the Police at UK ports are a ‘regime of exception’ in which the normal safeguards of the rule of law have been tossed aside.

It goes on, ’You can be searched, and anything you have with you … this includes electronic devices … where searches are conducted, there is no requirement for a written notice of search to be provided to you.  Under certain circumstances, the officer can seize any property they find.’

What are these ‘certain circumstances’? When I protested at the fact that my computer was being taken from me, which would prevent me from working until it is returned, and when I offered to bring it to a police station the following day, the officer replied that it was out of the question that it would not be taken.  In other words, there are no ‘certain circumstances.’ The seizure of such devices is, on the contrary, the rule.

In a state of law, the Police can search someone’s property only with a search warrant. This is a document signed by a judge which authorises private property to be searched and seized. If you look up ‘search warrant’ in Wikipedia, it says, ‘In certain authoritarian nations, police officers may be allowed to search individuals and property without having to obtain court permission or provide justification for their actions.’  According to this standard, the UK is now an ‘authoritarian nation.’ 

It is precisely what separates a legal state from a dictatorship that the work of the police is not abused for political purposes, yet this is what occurred to me.

The officers questioned me about my work at the Institute of Democracy and Cooperation in Paris from 2008 to 2018 and about my work at the European Parliament since then, and more recently for FVD. All the information they wanted is available publicly, for instance on Wikipedia. The questioning was polite but amateurish.

I was asked about my political views. The officer said, ‘It is a free country, not everyone is so lucky.’ I believe this is what is called ‘the British sense of humour’.

The officers told me that they had had two or three hours to prepare. This means that they were alerted in London to my imminent arrival at the moment when my boarding pass was scanned in Budapest. Everyone should know this.

They spent those hours looking things up on the Internet. The officer questioning me seemed unsure of what he was really trying to find out. The Internet, as everyone should know, is a veritable cesspit of false information and there are endless claims on it about me which are untrue. Many of these have been repeated recently in the Dutch press, as journalists go online, find what they are looking for and repeat lies told earlier by others.  In my case, they never tire of telling the same fairy tale. 

It is bad enough when journalists do this but it is frightening to think that anti-terrorism police officers regard Google as a reliable source of information. One dreads to think how many genuinely hostile actors pass through the net if this is the Police’s idea of investigation. Unfortunately that is the state of the world today.

It is particularly symbolic that this should happen to me.  Ever since I started to get interested in international criminal law over 20 years ago, I have criticised the way in which international tribunals toss aside the myriad rules and procedures which have accumulated over the centuries to ensure due process. The British are traditionally proud of these procedures which have protected citizens against abusive state power for centuries. I have repeatedly warned that these dictatorial practices would soon percolate down into national jurisdictions and destroy the precious inheritance known as the rule of law. This has now happened.

Ever since the EU announced its Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime in December 2020, moreover, I have also pointed out that the EU has given itself the power to punish individuals by executive order. This is a very dangerous development.  Individuals are punished under this regime without any legal procedure (no trial) and without any means of defending themselves. So much for human rights! I have warned for two years now that citizens of Western states would themselves be the target of these sanctions. This duly happened in July when a British blogger, Graham Philipps, was sanctioned by the United Kingdom which has the same system as the EU and the US.

In other words I, who have been warning that these procedures, introduced at international level, would soon corrupt the criminal law in domestic jurisdictions, have now been proved horribly right by an example of this abuse of which I have now personally been a victim. It was a profoundly disturbing experience.

Shortly before it happened, FVD International tweeted its disapproval of the EU sanctions imposed on the philosopher, Alexander Dugin. As we showed with a screen shot of the relevant EU document, the European Council (i.e. the executive) sanctioned Dugin purely for his views. Nowhere it is alleged that he has actually participated in the invasion of Ukraine nor even that he is guilty of incitement. Instead, he is sanctioned for thoughtcrime. 

Some people who do not like Dugin are pleased at this. But they should understand that these are seriously abusive powers which can easily, as in my case, be directed against totally innocent people. To such people I can find no better response than the famous remarks by Pastor Martin Niemöller:

First they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the Socialists and I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew

Then they came for me.  And there was no one left to speak out for me.

Europe is sliding into dictatorship.  In fact, it is already there.

October 12, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Europe’s Eerie Silence – The Curious Case of the Dog That Did Not Bark

By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 10, 2022

Western media is full of speculation whether, or not, we stand at the cusp of WW3. Actually, we are already there. The long war never stopped. In the wake of America’s 2008 Financial Crisis, the U.S. needed to reinforce its economy’s collateral resource base. For the Straussian current (the neocon hawks if you prefer), Russia’s then post-Cold War weakness was an ‘opportunity’ to open a new war front. The U.S. hawks wanted to kill two birds with one stone: to pillage Russia’s valuable resources to reinforce their own economy and to fracture Russia into a kaleidoscope of parts.

For the Straussians, the Cold War too never ended. The world remains binary – ‘us and them, good and evil’.

But the neoliberal pillage ultimately didn’t succeed – to the lasting chagrin of the Straussians. Since 2014 at least, (according to one senior Russian official), the Great Game has moved towards the attempt by the U.S. to control the flows and corridors of energy – and to set its price. And, on the other side, on Russia’s counter-measures to create fluid and dynamic transit networks through pipelines and Asian internal waterways – and to set the price of energy. (Now via OPEC+)

So, Putin holding the Ukraine referenda; mobilising Russian military forces; and reminding the world that he is open to talks, clearly ‘ups the ante’. Should the NATO-led Ukrainians push into these areas after next week, it will constitute a direct attack on Russian soil. This retaliation threat is backed up by the mobilisation of massive military deployments.

Then, the Nordstream pipelines were blown up. Put simply, this is a high-stakes game of chicken playing out centred around energy – and against the relative strengths and weaknesses of the western economy and the Russian economy. Biden releases 1 million per day from strategic reserves and OPEC+ seems set to cut by 1.5 million barrels per day.

On the one hand, the U.S. is a large resource-rich economy, but Europe isn’t and is much more dependent on imports of food and energy. And with the final bursting of the QE bubble, it is not clear that Central Bank intervention which created the $30+ trillion QE bubble will be able to provide a solution. Inflation changes the calculus. A return to QE becomes highly problematic in an inflationary environment.

One prescient financial commentator noted: “Bubbles bursting are not just about inflated prices falling, they’re about the recognition that an entire way of thinking was wrong”. Put simply, did the Straussians adequately think through their recent exaltation of the pipeline disruption? Blinken has just called the Nordstream sabotage and Europe’s consequent energy deficit a “tremendous opportunity” for the U.S.. Curiously, the sabotage coincided with reports suggesting that secret talks were afoot between Germany and Russia to resolve all Nordstream issues and to restart supply.

But what if the resultant crisis crashes the political structures in Europe? What if the U.S. turns out not to be immune to the type of financial leverage crisis facing the UK? Team Biden and the EU plainly didn’t think through the rush to sanctioning Russia. They also didn’t think through the consequences of their European ally losing Russia.

These ‘fin-war’ elements will likely become more a focus of attention than battlefield wins or reverses in Ukraine (where the rainy season has already begun), and it will not be until early November that the ground will freeze hard. The conflict is heading to a pause, just as the western attention span for the Ukraine war seems to be fading somewhat.

However, what is ‘curious’ for so many, is the eerie silence emanating out of Europe in the wake of their vital energy pipelines lying broken on the Baltic Sea floor at a time of financial crisis. This is the ‘dog’ that did not bark in the night – when you would expect it so to do. Hardly a word, or murmur, is to be heard about this matter in the European press – and nothing from Germany … It as if it never happened. Yet of course the Euro-élite know ‘who did it’.

To understand this paradox, we must look at the interplay of the three principal dynamics at work in Europe. Each thinks of theirs as ‘a winning hand’; the ‘be all, and end all’ of the future. But in reality, these two currents are but ‘useful tools’ in the eyes of those who ‘pull the levers’ and ‘sound the whistles’ – i.e. control the psyops from behind the curtain.

Furthermore, there is a sharp disparity of motives. For the Straussians, behind the curtain, they are at war – existential war to maintain their primacy. The second two currents are utopian projects which have shown themselves to be easily manipulated.

The ‘Straussians’ are the followers of Leo Strauss, the leading neo-con theorist. Many are former Trotskyists who morphed over, from Left to Right (call them Neocon ‘hawks’ if you prefer). Their message is a very simple doctrine about the maintenance of power: ‘Never let it slip’; block any rival from emerging; do whatever it takes.

Leading Straussian, Paul Wolfowitz, wrote this simple doctrine of ‘destroy any emergent rivals before they destroy you’ into the U.S. 1992 official Defence Planning Document – adding to it that Europe and Japan particularly were to be ‘discouraged’ from questioning U.S. global primacy. This skeleton doctrine, though re-packaged in subsequent Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations, continued with its essence unchanged.

And, since the message – ‘block any rival’ – is so direct and compelling, the Straussians flit easily from U.S. political party to party. They also have their ‘useful’ auxiliaries deeply burrowed within the U.S.’ élite class, and institutions of state power. The oldest and most trusty of these auxiliary forces however, is the Anglo-American intelligence and security alliance.

The ‘Straussians’ prefer to scheme from ‘behind the curtain’ and in certain U.S. think-tanks. They move with the times, ‘camping on’, yet never assimilating into whatever prevalent cultural trends are ‘out there’. Their alliances always remain temporary, opportunistic. They use these contemporary impulses primarily to craft fresh justifications for American exceptionalism.

The first such important impulse in the current reframing is liberal-woke, activist-driven, social justice-oriented identity politics. Why wokeism? Why should woke be of interest to the CIA and MI6? Because it is revolutionary. Identity politics was evolved during the French Revolution to upend the status quo; to overthrow its pantheon of hero-models, and to displace the existing élite and rotate a ‘new class’ into power. This definitely excites the interest of Straussians.

Biden likes to tout the exceptionalism of ‘our democracy’. Of course, Biden refers here, not to generic democracy in the wider meaning, but to America’s liberal-woke re-justification for global hegemony (defined as “our democracy”). “We have an obligation, a duty, a responsibility to defend, preserve, and protect ‘our democracy’…It is under threat”, he has said.

The second key dynamic – the Green Transition – is one that co-habits under the Biden Administration umbrella, together with the very radical and distinct philosophy of Silicon Valley – an eugenist and trans-human view that aligns in some respects with that of the ‘Davos’ crowd, as well as with the straight-forward Climate Emergency activists.

Just to be clear, these two distinct, but companion piece dynamics to ‘our democracy’, crossed the Atlantic to burrow deeply into the Brussels leadership class. And, put simply, the Euro-Version of liberal-woke activism keeps intact the Straussian doctrine of U.S. and western exceptionalism – together with its’ insistence that ‘enemies’ be portrayed in the most extreme Manichaean terms.

The aim of Manicheanism (since Carl Schmitt first made the point) is to foreclose on any mediation with rivals by portraying them as sufficiently ‘evil’ that discourse with them become pointless and morally defective.

The transition of liberal-woke politics across the Atlantic should come as no surprise. The EU’s regulation ‘trussed’ internal market was precisely devised to displace political debate with tech managerialism. But the very sterility of econ-tech discourse birthed the so-called ‘democracy gap’. With the latter becoming evermore the Union’s unmissable lacuna.

The Euro-élites thus were in desperate need of a Values System to fill the gap. So, they leaped onto the liberal-woke ‘train’. Drawing on this, and the Club of Rome’s ‘messianism’ for de-industrialisation, gave to the Euro-élites their shiny new sect of absolute purity, a Green Future, and stainless ‘European Values’ filling the democracy-gap lacuna.

Effectively, these latter two currents – identity politics and the Green Agenda – were and are very much in the lead within the EU with the Straussians standing behind the curtain, pulling the Intelligence-Security axis lever.

The new zealots were deeply entrenched into Europe’s élite class by the 1990s, particularly in the wake of Tony Blair’s importation of the Clinton worldview and were ready to cast down the Pantheon of the old order, so to establish a new ‘de-industrialised’ Green world that would wash away the western sins of racism, patriarchy, and heteronormativity.

It culminated in the mounting of ‘a revolutionary vanguard’, whose proselytizing fury is directed both at ‘the Other’ (which serendipitously happens to be America’s rivals), as well as towards those at home (whether in the U.S. or Europe) who are defined as extremists threatening ‘our (liberal) democracy’; or, the imperative need for a ‘Green Revolution’.

Here is the point: At the tip of the European ‘spear’ reside the Green zealots — particularly the truly revolutionary German, Green Party. They hold the leadership in Germany and are at the helm at the EU Commission. It is Green zealotry fused to ‘ruining Russia’ – an intoxicating mix.

The German Greens see themselves as legionaries in this new Trans-Atlantic imperial ‘army’, pulling down literally the pillars of European industrial society, redeeming its smoking ruins, and its unpayable debts, through a digitised financial system and a ‘renewables’ economic future.

And then, with Russia weakened sufficiently, and with Putin effected, the vultures would prey at the Russian carcass for resources – precisely as occurred in the 1990s.

But they forgot … They forgot that Straussians don’t have permanent ‘friends’: U.S. primacy always trumps the interests of allies.

What can the European Green zealots say? They wanted anyway to throw down the pillars of industrialised society. Well, they got it. The Nordstream ‘escape route’ out from economic catastrophe has gone. There is nothing else, but to mumble unconvincingly: ‘Putin did it’. And to contemplate the ruin of Europa and what that may mean.

What next? The hawks likely will now play their next hand in the high stakes game of WW3 ‘chicken’. The soaring dollar is one vector. The question is who holds the stronger cards? The West believes it holds the Ukraine card. Russia believes it has ace economic cards of food, energy, and resource security – and has a stable economy. Ukraine represents an entirely different battlespace: the long term Straussian ambition to strip Russia of its historic ‘safety belt’ that began in the wake of the Cold War with the fragmentation of the Soviet Union.

Much will depend on the fall-out from the Bubble burst. As that one commentator put it: “The moment has come for central bankers to tighten and to unwind their various market distortions: The impact has already been catastrophic,” said Lindsay Politi, a Fund manager. “And central banks aren’t done yet. Inflation changes the calculus: Many central banks simply don’t have the option of returning to QE anymore”.

October 11, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Russophobia, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Qatari and US gas won’t save Europe

By Vladimir Danilov – New Eastern Outlook – 11.10.2022 

Experts estimate that in order to avoid a catastrophic fall in GDP and the risk of a prolonged economic depression, the total public spending by European countries to mitigate the energy collapse unleashed by Washington will have to exceed €1 trillion!  A crisis of this magnitude would result in more bankruptcies and a domino effect in the finance sector, the scaling back of investment programs by businesses and a drop in consumer demand.  The main negative effect will be that a number of the most energy-intensive industries will become uncompetitive due to gas shortages and rising energy costs. Depending on what scenario will unfold, such industries would be forced to reduce production by up to 60% compared to 2021. In turn, the shutdown would result in job cuts that could affect upwards of 1.5 million people.

Under these circumstances, objective No. 1 for Europe is to make its way out of the energy crisis as quickly as possible along with finding gas suppliers to the EU market that are not affected by the anti-Russian sanctions imposed by the Europeans themselves.

Under pressure from Washington, Europe has ditched cheap and guaranteed pipeline gas supplied via Nord Streams 1 and 2. It even acquiesced to the terrorist attack by the US and its accomplices to undermine the two pipelines in the Baltic Sea. Under these circumstances, the EU has been forced to turn its attention to global LNG suppliers in the hope of improving its disastrous energy supply situation by increasing cooperation with them.

Qatar is famously the world’s leading LNG market now, accounting for 26.5% of all shipments. Australia is in second place with 26%, while the US (14.7%) and Russia (10%) are in third and fourth place, respectively.

However, the US, despite its pompous declaration when initiating the gas war with Russia that it would provide Europe with gas, after the Europeans did expel Russia from their market, has already declared that it in fact cannot provide the EU with gas. US shale investors have admitted that the amount of production they have so far is all they can hope for. Therefore, as The Financial Times reported, US shale oil and gas producers have already warned that they will not be able to increase production to help Europe deal with the energy crisis this winter.

As for Qatar, this small state in the Middle East prefers to trade gas with Asia rather than with Europe for a number of reasons. First, because there is a smaller shipment distance. And second, the Qatari leadership is highly sensitive to political demands from the EU regarding energy exporters. In addition, it is also important that China, the main consumer of Qatari gas, pays a premium for every 1,000 cubic meters of LNG.

Against this background, as well as the imposition of sanctions against Russia and a significant reduction in Russian fuel supplies, the cost of gas in Europe continues to rise at a galloping rate. To do something about the rise, the EU has made the utopian decision of reducing gas consumption by 15% from August 1, 2022 to the end of March 2023, even though many Europeans refuse to do so. In addition, the European Commission head Ursula von der Leyen, who is far removed, among other things, from the economic laws in force in the world, has announced that the EU will consider introducing a ceiling price for imported Russian gas amid the energy crisis. However, as might be expected, so far the EU member states have not been able to agree on this measure, which runs counter to any supplier of goods, and indeed to WTO rules.

Under these circumstances, European leaders doubled down on their attempts to, at least on the individual country level, reach an agreement with Qatar on additional gas supplies. For this reason, a number of European politicians of various ranks have already paid repeated visits to Qatar over the past six months.

The US has become involved in persuading Qatar to supply more gas to Europe, including at the expense of its commitments to provide gas to Asia. According to “Washington’s strategists,” it is not difficult for the US to put pressure on Qatar, considering that the largest US military base in the entire Middle East is stationed in that country. This means there is no need to smuggle in, similar to the terrorist attacks against North Streams 1 and 2, appropriate “saboteurs,” explosives, organize the operation, etc. Furthermore, it was with the aim of fully tying Qatar to the US that, during the visit of the Emir of Qatar Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani to the White House in early February this year, US President Joe Biden called Qatar a “major non-NATO ally” and the Emir a “good friend and a reliable and capable partner.” In addition, the US leader promised that Qatar would soon be assigned a “major non-NATO ally” status.

Right now Qatar sells about 5-10 million tons of LNG to Europe. Over the next 5 to 10 years, as Saad al-Kaabi, Qatari Minister of Energy, promised at the Energy intelligence forum conference in London, 12-15 million tons of Qatari natural gas will flow steadily into Europe if the situation remains as it is and if European countries continue to struggle with other sources of energy. For its part, however, Qatar is demanding that the EU sign a long-term contract for LNG supplies, which Doha was encouraged to do by a recent 15-year agreement Germany signed on LNG supplies from the US. Doha is also being persuaded by Europe’s plans to find an alternative to gas from Russia, in which Qatar, with its plans to invest tens of billions of dollars in boosting production over the next five years, could be a key part of the solution. At the same time, Qatar imposes rather stringent conditions, giving buyers little scope to divert supplies, unlike contracts with the US. However, EU leaders have been demanding shorter contracts, demagogically explaining their position by the desire to reduce pollution, which has already brought negotiations on import deadlines to a standstill since March. And as for the EU’s “drive to reduce pollution,” this demagogy by European leaders is nothing short of hilarious, given that more and more EU countries are actively switching to coal.

In a bid to reach a gas deal with Europe, the Emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, came to the Czech Republic on October 5 at an official invitation from President Miloš Zeman. This meeting with the Emir of Qatar was important for the Czech and European authorities at large, as the EU hoped that, if the negotiations turned out to be successful, they could establish alternative routes for gas supplies amid the energy crisis. Alternative to Russia, that is. In this regard, the Qatari leader was also scheduled to speak at an informal meeting with EU member state leaders on October 7, and the visit itself was to last several days. However, the meeting turned into a major scandal: on October 5 the sheikh only had time to meet with Miloš Zeman immediately after his arrival in the country and Prime Minister Petr Fialla, before his plane left Prague. As Czech diplomatic sources explained, “the Qatari side has put forward demands that the Czech side cannot meet.”

To further clarify the situation, it should be recalled that Qatar’s geographical location gives it leeway in terms of gas supply channels. Today, up to 68% of Qatar’s LNG production is destined for Asia and 27% for Europe. Europe consumes about 450 billion cubic meters of gas a year, and Russia used to supply about half that volume. Therefore, the US proposal of 15 billion cubic meters of LNG (at higher prices than pipeline Russian gas) as an alternative to Russian gas, made back when starting the gas war in the European market, can only be regarded as a mockery and as a clear non-competitive struggle for the European gas market. Thus, it was already back then clear to everyone, except for some EU leaders like Ursula von der Leyen, Charles Michel and Josep Borrell who are explicitly subsidized by the US, that the US was firmly putting the EU on the line by forcing it to give up Russian gas altogether.

It is also no secret that Russia has been supplying LNG by tankers to the very Klaipeda, Lithuania, which claims it is receiving Qatari gas. In reality, however, Russia and Qatar have a very simple agreement – Russia supplies LNG from Yamal to Lithuania and it is considered Qatari, while Qatar supplies its LNG to China and it is considered Russian. The scheme benefits Qatar because it saves on transport costs and, in these circumstances, Doha will not abandon it for the “noble idea” of saving Europe.

Furthermore, it should not be forgotten that the average volume of standard gas carriers used to transport liquefied gas over long distances is 145,000 cubic meters. From this volume of LNG, 90 million cubic meters of gas are produced after regasification. Each shipping voyage lasts up to 14 days. However, one gas carrier can only make one voyage per month, and the transport itself costs several hundred thousand dollars, which includes fuel, crew salaries and the ship’s rent.

The US does not have that many specialized tankers in principle to at least compensate the EU for Nord Stream 2. Therefore, the people of Europe need to seriously investigate this shady deal by the US to initiate an energy crisis in Europe, namely who was the executor of these blatantly anti-European plans of Washington and how much personal profit have they made from the poverty and misery of ordinary Europeans.

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

Ukraine halts electricity exports to EU

Samizdat | October 11, 2022

Damage to energy infrastructure caused by Moscow’s air strikes has forced Ukraine’s government to cut off electricity exports to the European Union, taking away a supply source that Kiev claims helped its partners reduce their reliance on power generated with Russian natural gas.

“Today’s missile strikes, which hit the thermal generation and electrical substations, forced Ukraine to suspend electricity exports from October 11, 2022, to stabilize its own energy system,” the Ukrainian energy ministry said on Monday in a statement.

The ministry noted that even after losing control of the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant to Russian forces in March, Kiev had been able to meet its export commitments to European partners, but Monday’s attacks were the largest of the entire conflict. “The cynicism is that the entire supply chain has been hit,” Energy Minister German Galushchenko said. “It’s both electricity distribution systems and generation. The enemy’s goal is to make it difficult to reconnect electricity supplies from other sources.”

Russian President Vladimir Putin said Monday’s air strikes on Kiev and other major Ukrainian cities – targeting military, energy and communications infrastructure – came in response to Ukraine’s attack on the strategic Crimean Bridge on Saturday.

“If there are further attempts to conduct terrorist attacks on our soil, Russia will respond firmly and on a scale corresponding to the threats created against Russia,” Putin announced.

Galushchenko, however, accused Moscow of waging “energy terror” in retaliation for Kiev helping other countries reduce their dependence on Russia. After joining European energy system ENTSO-E back in June, Kiev said it expected to earn some €1.5 billion from electricity exports to the EU by the end of the year.

“That is why Russia is destroying our energy system, killing the very possibility of exporting electricity from Ukraine,” the energy minister claimed.

Ukrenergo, the national power grid operator, claimed its specialists have been “engaging backup supply schemes” and repaired some of the damage by Monday night.

In the meantime the ministry urged “all citizens of Ukraine to unite” and minimize their energy use during the peak demand hours, arguing that not only Ukraine is implementing measures to reduce power consumption, but the “whole of Europe is doing this now.”

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

NetZero destroys NetZero: Europe can’t make solar panels because green electricity costs too much

By Jo Nova | October 9, 2022

Ironies don’t get better than this: Thanks to the renewable energy transition, Europe can’t afford to make renewable energy.

When will the message get through that renewable energy is not sustainable?

European photovoltaic plants and battery cell factors are temporarily closing or quitting altogether because of obscenely high electricity prices. When the plants were built they expected to pay €50/MWh, but now they are €300 – 400/MWh. And the situation may last another couple of years, so it’s hard to see how these manufacturers can avoid leaving permanently.

So much for all the solar jobs. Europeans are being reduced to being installers while the production of panels shifts to coal fired China because electricity is so much cheaper. Most of the wind turbine industry has already moved to China.

European solar PV manufacturing at risk from soaring power prices – Rystad

By Jules Scully, PV Tech

Around 35GW of PV manufacturing projects in Europe are at risk of being mothballed as elevated power prices damage the continent’s efforts to build a solar supply chain, research from Rystad Energy suggests.

The consultancy noted that the energy-intensive nature of both solar PV and battery cell manufacturing processes is leading some operators to temporarily close or abandon production facilities as the cost of doing business escalates.

It’s not the only thing in jeopardy:

“Building a reliable domestic low-carbon supply chain is essential if the continent is going to stick to its goals, including the REPowerEU plan, but as things stand, that is in serious jeopardy,” [said Audun Martinsen, Rystad Energy’s head of energy service research].

Tell us what “affordable means:

The consultancy revealed that while power prices in Europe have retreated significantly since record highs in August, rates remain in the €300 – 400/MWh (US$297 – 396/MWh) range, many multiples above pre-energy crisis norms.

While Europeans have benefitted from reliable and affordable electricity, the research suggested that low-carbon manufacturers have based their build-up of production capacity on stable power prices of around €50/MWh.

And the country with the most fossil fuels wins:

The high costs of European PV manufacturing were revealed in a recent report from the International Energy Agency (IEA), which found China is the most cost-competitive location to manufacture all components of the solar PV supply chain, with costs in the country 35% lower than in Europe.


Eric Worrall | What’s Up With That? | October 9, 2022

… Shortly after the above was published, a French solar module plant was closed;

Maxeon closes French solar module manufacturing plant

The obvious question, if renewables are so cheap, why don’t these plants relocate to a large plot of land, disconnect from the grid, and power their manufacturing facilities from their own low cost renewable energy products?

Seems an obvious solution – but for some reason renewable manufacturers seem to be choosing to shutter their plants, rather than switching to consuming their own product.

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

Will Lebanon and Israel go to war over the maritime border dispute?

By Robert Inlakesh | Samizdat | October 8, 2022

Israel has announced its readiness for war with Lebanon, as the ongoing US-mediated maritime border demarcation talks head towards a dead end. The issue, however, is not just causing dispute between Beirut and Tel Aviv, but also becoming more prevalent within Israeli politics as it heads into another round of general elections.

On Thursday, Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid rejected Lebanese amendments to a US-proposed maritime border demarcation agreement. The previous day, Israeli officials had reportedly been briefed on the deal, which was the cause of much optimism, with an unnamed source telling Axios news that Lapid “made it clear that Israel will not compromise on its security and economic interests, even if that means that there will be no agreement soon.”

Later on Wednesday, Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz ordered the military establishment to prepare for an armed confrontation with Lebanon. A four-hour cabinet meeting, which was said to have been attended by major Israeli security establishment figures, was then concluded with a public announcement that the prime minister and defense minister had been granted permission to strike Lebanon without further cabinet approval.

Why are Lebanon and Israel on the verge of war?

In early June, a ship owned by the gas company Energean arrived at the resource-rich Karish field in the Eastern Mediterranean to begin preparations for natural gas production for Israel. Lebanese President Michel Aoun condemned the arrival, warning Tel Aviv against taking any further “aggressive action.” The Karish field, as well as the nearby Qana field, have for years been central to on-off US-mediated negotiations between Lebanon and Israel. The two nations have still not come to any agreement on the demarcation of their maritime borders, with Beirut seeing Karish and Qana as vital to reviving its collapsing economy.

While Lebanon maintains, due to legal arguments put forth in previous negotiations, that the entire area is to be considered ‘disputed waters,’ Israel has maintained that all of the Karish field and the majority of the Qana field are within its own ‘Exclusive Economic Zone’. The Lebanese political and military party Hezbollah, which claims to have 100,000 battle-ready troops at its disposal, then weighed in on the debate, vowing to protect Lebanon’s rights to its oil and gas.

Secretary General of Lebanese Hezbollah Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah declared that if no maritime border deal were reached and Lebanon is not able to secure its rights, then military action will be taken. Nasrallah vowed that the new reality would be “If we can’t have our resources, nobody can.” Hezbollah’s red line is Israeli extraction from the Karish field before any agreement is signed – if this happens, the group has threatened to strike not only Tel Aviv’s infrastructure at site, but every other Israeli oil and gas facility in the Mediterranean.

Israel has since responded with threats of its own, which have ranged from a vow to eliminate the entire densely populated Beirut suburb that serves as Hezbollah’s stronghold, to Benny Gantz’s recent warning that the whole of Lebanon would “pay a heavy price” for any military action by Hezbollah. Now that the negotiations have reached a “make or break” point, there are significant fears that military action will be taken, either by Israel or Hezbollah.

Empty threats?

The most recent threats issued by the military and political leadership in Tel Aviv have caused panic among Israelis living near the Lebanese border. However, there is a significant possibility that the rhetoric is aimed at a domestic audience. Israel will enter into a new round of national elections in November and the demarcation of maritime borders has recently been weaponized against the current Israeli leadership, causing ministers to act in order to save face.

Israeli opposition leader and former long-time prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu began to lash out at interim-PM Yair Lapid back in September, releasing a video in which he claimed that Lapid had “totally folded in the face of Nasrallah’s threats” and that Hezbollah had forced him to delay extraction from the Karish field. Netanyahu has continued to heavily criticize his political opponents’ handling of the demarcation-line issue, with similar claims that Israel is backing down over the threats issued by Lebanese Hezbollah.

Netanyahu’s words ring true in that Lapid has clearly been forced to take the issue of demarcation of maritime borders very seriously and has conceded on positions held by Tel Aviv in the past. In addition to this, the extraction of gas from the Karish field has also been delayed, as Energean, which owns the rights to extract from the site, was initially prepared to begin operations in late September and has so far refrained from doing so. However, had Netanyahu remained as PM, he would hardly have had any other choice but to do the same.

The threats made by Hezbollah are very serious, and the group apparently has the capacity to follow through with them and destroy all of Israel’s oil and gas facilities. At this time, however, the Israeli far-right camp headed by Netanyahu is blaming the situation on Lapid’s weak governance, saying he is prepared to give away territory that belongs to Israel. For this reason, it is likely that Yair Lapid will attempt to delay extraction of gas from the Karish field in order to sideline the issue until after the elections.

The necessity of a deal for Lebanon

Lebanon sees the Karish and Qana issue as integral to its survival. Some UN experts put the percentage of Lebanese living in poverty at around 80%, while the country endures round-the-clock blackouts, a rising crime rate, and civil instability. Some people have even been spotted searching for food in garbage bins, as well as fighting over loaves of bread at bakeries. Getting its hands on a possible multi-billion-dollar oil and gas field is a matter of life or death for Beirut – but not for Tel Aviv, which enjoys far more economic stability.

The US mediator in the Lebanon-Israel talks, Amos Hochstein, gave an interview to the American owned al-Hurra TV in June, laughing when asked about the prospect of trading the Karish field for Qana. Months later, after Hezbollah upped its threats and the group’s leader, Nasrallah, stated that the Lebanese people would not be laughed at, this issue has become a rather grave one. The US, which has a clear pro-Israeli bias, is now being forced to take the talks much more seriously.

Earlier this year, as the European Union looked for alternative gas suppliers, a deal was inked between Tel Aviv and Brussels, under which Israel would send gas through pipelines to Europe via Egypt. This has encouraged Tel Aviv to announce its plans to double its gas output, and the Karish field is key to achieving this.

The Qana field, however, has not yet been explored and will take time to develop. Despite this, one of the key reasons for Israel’s rejection of the Lebanese proposal is that Beirut refuses to pay Tel Aviv royalties for the gas it would extract from the Qana field should it be handed to Lebanon. Beirut cannot commit itself to such an agreement, because this would mean normalizing ties with the Tel Aviv regime, which still occupies Shebaa farms – an area that Lebanon claims as its rightful territory.

Whether war happens will now boil down to whether bickering between Israeli political parties and individual officials will cause Tel Aviv to adopt a belligerent approach and push forward with gas production in the disputed fields before an agreement is reached. If it does, there can be little doubt that Hezbollah will open fire if its red line is crossed. Israel’s stake in the matter is additional energy revenues, while for Lebanon it is potentially a matter of life or death. Neither side wants war, but one has much to gain and the other has everything to lose.

Robert Inlakesh is a political analyst, journalist and documentary filmmaker currently based in London, UK. He has reported from and lived in the Palestinian territories and currently works with Quds News.

October 8, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Illegal Occupation | , , , , , | Leave a comment