The EU has failed to overcome its dependence on Russian energy, and needs a new plan to wean itself off Moscow’s supplies, the bloc’s new energy chief told Politico on Thursday.
In his first interview since taking the post, Dan Jorgensen highlighted the growth in Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) purchases.
The share of Russian LNG on the EU market reached 20% this year, according to the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators, despite Brussels’ pledge to stop consuming Russian fuel by 2027.
“It’s obvious to everybody that something new needs to happen because… now it’s beginning to go in the wrong direction,” the EU Energy commissioner said, while pledging to present “a tangible roadmap that will include efficient tools and means for us to solve the remaining part of the problem.”
The new measures will target “gas primarily, but also oil and nuclear” and will be formulated by mid-March, Jorgensen said, noting that five EU countries still rely on Russia for nuclear fuel.
The EU declared its intention to end its dependence on Russian energy supplies following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Supplies of higher-cost US fuel have replaced much of the cheap pipeline gas that was previously delivered by Russia.
However, efforts have stalled in recent months, and the EU continues to buy billions of euros’ worth of Russian gas each month. In 2024, the bloc is expected to import 10% more LNG from Russia than in 2023, according to energy analytics firm Kpler.
Politico noted, however, that any plan to sever energy ties with Russia in the next few years would be strongly opposed by EU members that are still heavily reliant the imports, particularly Hungary and Slovakia, whose leaders Viktor Orban and Robert Fico have resisted energy sanctions on Russia.
Jorgensen’s proposal is also likely to come just weeks after a long-term contract for Russian gas transit via Ukraine is set to expire, on December 31. The EU still receives around 5% of its gas from Russia via Ukraine’s gas transit network, according to the latest data.
Last month, Bloomberg warned of an imminent energy crisis in Western and Central Europe due to the latest US sanctions against Russia’s Gazprombank, the primary bank for energy-related transactions. The outlet said that rapidly depleting gas reserves and potential supply cuts from Russia threaten to exacerbate an already difficult situation.
Türkiye is currently in talks with the US to secure a sanctions waiver that would allow it to continue using Russia’s Gazprombank to pay for natural gas imports, the country’s Energy Minister Alparslan Bayraktar told reporters on Monday.
Last week, the US Treasury Department imposed restrictions on more than 50 Russian financial institutions, including Gazprombank, which is linked to the eponymous Russian gas giant, and six of its international subsidiaries. The sanctions have effectively cut off Russia’s primary bank for energy-related transactions from the SWIFT interbank messaging system, meaning it can no longer be used for dollar-based transactions.
According to Bayraktar, unless a special exemption is made, Türkiye, which imports nearly all of its gas, won’t be able to pay Moscow for natural resources. Russia currently accounts for more than 50% of the country’s pipeline imports, according to Reuters.
In his comments, Bayraktar pointed to a previous waiver granted to Ankara when Washington had sanctioned Iran in 2012. At the time, the sanctions against Tehran included a clause that allowed the US President to issue a special exemption if an oil-importing country faced “exceptional circumstances” that made it impossible to reduce Iranian oil imports. Bayraktar has argued that Türkiye now needs a similar waiver for Gazprombank in order to secure its supply of natural gas.
“These sanctions will affect Turkey. We cannot pay. If we cannot pay, we cannot buy the goods. The foreign ministry is in talks,” Bayraktar said.
The latest US sanctions have also sparked disdain among several other European buyers of Russian gas. Last week, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto accused Washington of trying to undermine energy security in the Central European region by imposing restrictions on Gazprombank.
In a post on Facebook, the diplomat stated that any attempts to jeopardize energy supplies to Hungary are “considered as an offence against our sovereignty” and stressed that Budapest denounces all such attacks and has vowed to “resist the pressure and pursue our national interests.”
He added that Hungary is currently in talks with other countries, such as Bulgaria, Serbia, Azerbaijan and Slovakia in hopes of finding a solution for securing energy supplies.
Meanwhile, despite the EU announcing plans to eliminate its dependence on Russian energy, it has remained one of the world’s major importers of Russian fossil fuels while its members have purchased record volumes of liquified natural gas (LNG) from Moscow.
Washington’s decision to blacklist Russia’s Gazprombank, a key conduit for gas purchases from Russia, is aimed at undermining energy security in the Central European region, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has claimed.
Earlier this week, the US Treasury Department imposed blocking sanctions on more than 50 Russian financial institutions, including Gazprombank, linked to the eponymous Russian gas giant, and six of its international subsidiaries.
The newly introduced restrictions effectively cut off Russia’s primary bank for energy-related transactions from the SWIFT interbank messaging system, meaning it can no longer conduct dollar-based transactions.
“Including Gazprombank to the sanctions list is a decision that deliberately puts some Central European countries in a difficult situation, and deliberately jeopardizes the security of energy supplies” to several nations in the region, Szijjarto wrote on Facebook on Friday.
The Hungarian diplomat stated that any attempts to jeopardize energy supplies to Hungary “either by imposing sanctions or by cutting off transit supplies are considered as an offence against our sovereignty.”
“We reject all the attacks of the kind against our sovereignty, resist the pressure, and pursue our national interests,” he said.
Szijjarto added that he discussed the issue of gas supplies to Hungary with the first deputy head of the Russian Energy Ministry, Pavel Sorokin, on the sidelines of the Istanbul Energy Forum, which convened in Türkiye on November 22.
“We reviewed the situation in the field of gas transportation and confirmed that we will support necessary cooperation for secure energy supplies to Hungary,” he stated.
Budapest is also discussing the situation with the energy ministers of Türkiye, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, and Serbia, and consulting with Slovakia to find a solution for securing energy supplies, Szijjarto added.
EU nations are still purchasing record volumes of liquified natural gas (LNG) from Russia. Despite the bloc’s plans to eliminate its dependence Russian energy, it remains one of the world’s major importers of Russian fossil fuels.
In August, pipeline gas comprised the largest share of the EU’s purchases of Russian fossil fuels (54%), followed by LNG (25%), according to the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA).
Former European Central Bank chief Mario Draghi recently presented a comprehensive report to the European Union that demonstrates how Europeans are falling behind Americans – and even Asians – on key issues of economic development.
While in 1990, GDP per capita in the United States was 16% higher than in the eurozone, by 2023 that gap had already grown to more than 30%. This means that Americans are increasingly richer than Europeans.
But the gap between the richest men in the United States and Europe is also widening. Only 10% of high-tech entrepreneurs in the top 30 and top 500 of the market capitalization rankings are European. By comparison, 73% in the first and 56% in the second are American.
These new figures once again reveal the economic devastation of Europe. And its origins are directly linked to American power.
By the 1930s, the United States had lost all the advantage it had gained over its European competitors at the end of World War I. Europe was devastated and Washington had emerged as the world’s great economic superpower. However, the 1929 crisis brought this strength to an end. The Great Depression seemed to have put an end to the American dream.
Just as World War I was a dispute between imperialist powers over the world market, the future World War II needed to be unleashed so that the Americans could regain control – partially lost to Germany and Japan in the wake of the 1930s crisis. Franklin D. Roosevelt led the reorganization of the American economy, vastly expanding federal spending and making large public investments thanks to a dictatorial centralization of economic power in the hands of a small corporate monopoly.
The result was an unimaginable increase in industrial production – focused almost exclusively on the war. Pearl Harbor came in very handy: it was the excuse the regime needed to eliminate opposition to its entry into the conflict. Between 1941 and 1944, U.S. war production more than tripled, and by 1944 its factories were producing twice as much as Germany, Italy and Japan.
American industrial production served two intertwined strategic objectives: to destroy Europe and to rebuild it in its image and likeness. The U.S. equipped Britain with the weapons needed to confront Germany, and both carried out an intense bombing campaign with the explicit intention of destroying the German economy, the industrial engine of Europe. Almost 2.7 million tons of bombs were dropped on Germany and the Nazi-occupied regions of other countries, particularly France and Belgium (completing the industrial heartland of Europe). American and British aerial bombings killed 305,000 Germans, injured almost 800,000, totally or partially destroyed 5.5 million homes, and left 20 million without essential public services.
It was genocide. Added to the immediate slaughter of 330,000 civilians in Japan by the atomic bombs of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the U.S. bombings took the lives of 635,000 people.
The U.S. destruction of Europe was a big deal that benefited the United States decisively in securing its total supremacy in the new postwar world order. The deficit of foreign countries in 1946-47 was more than $19 billion. The U.S., which was intact, offered loans to begin the reconstruction of Europe as a soft form of colonization, while at the same time punishing those countries severely. In the words of the unsuspecting establishment historian Arthur S. Link, “the American government, even during the bitter days of Reconstruction, had never taken such terrible revenge on former enemies.” The German people and institutions were reformed “in the image of the United States.”
The Truman Doctrine and, mainly, the Marshall Plan, were the pillars of the U.S.’s post-World War II policy of colonizing Europe: the first transformed all of Western Europe and part of its southeast into a huge American military base, through NATO, policing the politics of these countries. The second began as a clientelist policy, granting handouts to starving Europeans (11 billion dollars) that were later returned with interest, beginning the process of economic, political and social dependence on Europe. Between 1948 and 1951, another 12 billion dollars had been spent in this regard.
Combating the false threat of the Soviet Union was the excuse found by the American government to capture Europe. “The greatest nation on earth,” declared the Republican Arthur Vandenberg before the Senate, “will have to justify or abandon its leadership.” This was how the United States managed to overcome a crisis of overproduction and sell its goods and weapons, while at the same time leaving the Europeans hostage to their accumulated debts. American products invaded Europe and NATO began to control the national armies.
On the one hand, the post-World War II subjugation of Europe resulted in relative well-being for the population, which resulted in social stability. However, following the second major American colonization strategy – deindustrialization with the imposition of neoliberal policies in the 1980s and 1990s – this welfare state was dismantled, leaving Europeans completely hostage to the United States.
In all countries around the world, the main body responsible for scientific research and development is the armed forces. However, Europe’s armies have become vassals of the United States through NATO and their capacity has been reduced to increase that of the American forces on the continent. The report commissioned by the EU from Draghi highlights the harmful consequences of this subjugation for Europe.
According to the report, Europeans spend half as much as Americans on research and development in relation to GDP, and many European businesspeople prefer to migrate to the United States to develop these activities. R&D spending relative to GDP in the European Union is also lower than that of China, the United Kingdom, Taiwan and South Korea. The EU has already been overtaken by China in the number of articles published in leading scientific journals, and Japan and India are hot on its heels – while the U.S. remains ahead. Europe’s economic capacity for innovation also remains below that of the U.S. and Japan. It has already fallen behind in the development of digital technology.
Draghi suggests a series of “drastic measures” to combat the growing gap between the U.S. and Europe, according to Politico. However, these measures are unlikely to have any effect, since the EU’s policy remains absolutely aligned (i.e. dependent) on that of the United States and no significant measures have been adopted recently that indicate a different path from that taken in recent decades.
This is why there is growing discontent, not only among ordinary people in the bloc’s countries, but also among influential sectors of the European political and economic elites. The growth of the far right in Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Austria, as well as the quest by the governments of Hungary and Slovakia for greater sovereignty, are clear reflections of this trend.
Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has revealed that he faced a suspected second assassination attempt due to his stance on the Ukraine conflict. The incident earlier this month came after Fico survived a shooting in May by an individual who was reportedly sympathetic towards Kiev.
Another armed man was detained at an event commemorating a World War II battle in eastern Slovakia in early October, the prime minister said in an interview to Bratislava-based internet outlet Standard on Sunday.
Fico said the man “hates” him because of his “attitudes towards Ukraine.” According to the prime minister, “a fully loaded weapon” was found on the suspect when he passed through a metal detector.
The event in question was held on October 6 to mark the 80th anniversary of the Battle of the Dukla Pass between German and Soviet forces on the border with Poland. The celebrations were attended by Fico, Slovak President Peter Pellegrini, and members of the government and parliament.
Fico has been an outspoken critic of the EU’s policy of providing lethal aid to Ukraine in its fight with Russia, calling instead for a diplomatic solution to the conflict.
In May, Fico was shot four times at close range by a man who, according to Slovakia’s Special Criminal Court, was largely motivated by the decision by the prime minister and his government not to send arms to Ukraine.
“I was lucky,” Fico told Standard, commenting on the shooting. He went on to describe the alleged shooter, Juraj Cintula, as a political activist who had attended Fico’s public meetings while “probably” planning the attack.
Following the shooting, Fico argued that the assassination attempt emanated from foreign-backed politicians who refuse to accept his government’s policies that prioritize Slovakia’s interests over the agendas of major Western powers.
Slovak government commissioner for pandemic research Peter Kotlar considers mRNA vaccines dangerous and calls for a ban. He also questions the COVID pandemic itself. In Slovakia, Health Minister Zuzana Dolinkova has resigned, and Kotlar’s report on the investigation into the COVID pandemic, which he presented a week ago, may have been the decisive factor in her decision.
Kotlar’s findings, supported by Prime Minister Robert Fico, reflect a growing concern about the safety of these experimental vaccines, particularly the mRNA formulations developed by Western companies such as Pfizer and Moderna. In his report, Kotlar goes beyond questioning the safety of the vaccines—he challenges the very foundation of the COVID pandemic, calling it a “fabricated operation” designed to manipulate and control the global population.
Prime Minister Fico, long a critic of the vaccines, has taken a firm stand in support of Kotlar’s call for a ban. “These experimental injections have caused significant harm to many, and it’s time we acknowledge the dangers they pose,” Fico stated. His government has already taken bold steps by cutting ties with the World Health Organization (WHO) on COVID-related matters, signaling Slovakia’s departure from global consensus on pandemic management.
Fico’s leadership reflects a commitment to protecting the health and safety of Slovakians, even in the face of international criticism. While health officials and scientists across the world continue to praise mRNA technology, Fico’s administration prioritizes caution and skepticism, ensuring that Slovakia does not fall victim to corporate interests that have pushed these vaccines without fully understanding their long-term consequences.
As the Fico government pushes forward with its investigation into the financial dealings surrounding the procurement of vaccines, Slovakia stands out as a nation willing to challenge the dominant narrative and protect its citizens from dangerous medical experimentation.
After Russian intervention in Ukraine in 2022, the United States pressured its European vassals to end all trade with Russia, and later China to slow its economic growth that outperforms the United States. This has led to three years of economic decline in European Union economic bloc, known as the EU, as energy prices to tripled.
Europeans are angry, so if victorious Russian troops arrive on Ukraine’s western border, several EU nations may leave the dying EU to relink to prospering Asia and access to cheap Russian energy.
Leaders of some EU nations are openly critical of mandates banning trade and allowing mass immigration. Leaders of Hungary, Slovakia, Austria, and Croatia are quietly discussing the advantages of leaving the EU. These nations were once united into the powerful Austro-Hungarian empire until it was dissolved by victorious France and Britain in 1919. Political, business, and cultural ties remain, so they may form their own economic block. Serbia never joined NATO nor the EU and remains friendly with Russia, so would join this union.
A new Balkan economic block would prosper by allowing trade with Russia, China, Russian controlled Ukraine, and could join forces to guard borders from mass illegal immigration.
________________________________________
“Resurgent far-right conjures Austria-Hungary headache for EU on Ukraine”; Francois Murphy; Reuters; August 4, 2024; https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/…
“Austrian Right-Wing Freedom Party Scores Historic Victory In National Elections”; Tyler Durden; Zero Hedge; September 30, 2024; https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/aus…
“Ukraine to end gas transit agreement with Russia, PM Shmyhal”; Energy pipelines to central Europe may shutdown soon; Remix; Oct. 7, 2024; https://rmx.news/article/ukraine-to-e…
Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico has said that his country would not allow Ukraine to join NATO as long as he stays in power. Admitting Kiev into the US-led military alliance would trigger a new world war, he warned in an interview with the broadcaster STVR on Sunday.
“As long as I am the prime minister of the Slovak Republic, I will lead the legislators, whom I have control over as a party chairman, to never agree to Ukraine’s membership in NATO,” Fico said. “Ukraine’s entry into NATO would serve as a good basis for a third world war.”
Fico, a longtime critic of Western military and financial aid to Ukraine, has insisted that the conflict must be resolved through diplomatic means. He repeatedly warned against further escalation with Moscow.
The accession of new countries must be approved by all of NATO’s 32 existing members, with national parliaments voting in favor or against new candidates.
Kiev formally applied to join NATO in September 2022, citing the ongoing conflict with Russia. While many Western states publicly backed Ukraine’s aspirations, they have refused to provide a concrete roadmap or a timetable for accession. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zenesky acknowledged in July that “we will not be in NATO until the war is over in Ukraine.”
Russia views NATO’s expansion eastward as a security threat and has cited Ukraine’s cooperation with the alliance as one of the main reasons behind the conflict.
President Vladimir Putin warned last month that using Western-supplied longer-range weapons for strikes deep inside Russia would be tantamount to “direct involvement” of NATO in the fighting.
The West is deliberately fueling the fighting in Ukraine because its ultimate goal is to weaken Russia, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has said.
In an interview with Slovak broadcaster STVR on Sunday, Fico expressed concern over the EU’s increasing involvement in the ongoing hostilities between Moscow and Kiev, arguing that the conflict cannot be resolved on the battlefield.
“There is a military conflict in a neighboring country where Slavs are killing each other, and Europe is significantly supporting this killing, which I just don’t understand,” Fico said. He added that the fighting “continues only because it is being strongly supported by the West.”
“The sooner it ends, the better it will be,” he stressed, arguing that the Western efforts to use the conflict to defeat Moscow would fail.
“Everyone thinks that through Ukraine we will bring the Russians to their knees, but this Russophobia does not work. It turns out that this problem cannot be solved militarily,” Fico stated.
Fico, a longtime critic of Western military aid to Kiev, promised to block Ukraine from ever joining NATO. Such a step could lay the groundwork for a potential World War III, he argued.
After winning the parliamentary election last year, Fico’s Smer-SD party has halted the delivery of weapons to Ukraine and has repeatedly called for a diplomatic resolution of the conflict. He pledged to restore trade and political ties with Moscow once the fighting ends, arguing that “the EU needs Russia, and Russia needs the EU.”
Moscow has denounced Western aid to Kiev, insisting that no amount of foreign aid would stop its troops in Ukraine.
The EU is reportedly moving forward with its threat to withhold funds from Slovakia in retaliation over Bratislava’s removal of a special graft prosecutor in a recent round of criminal code reforms. Prime Minister Robert Fico has accused Brussels of political bias.
Sources cited by Bloomberg on Sunday said the European Commission is considering several options to penalize Bratislava financially. One proposal would involve a so-called conditionality mechanism, allowing the freezing of some the €12.8 billion ($14.2 bn) allocated to Slovakia under the EU’s cohesion program. Brussels may also “claw back” all or part of the €2.7 billion ($3 bn) in Covid-19 grants Bratislava has received from the bloc.
Slovakia’s special prosecution unit, the USP, was created in 2004 and shut down in March of this year. Its last leader, Daniel Lipsic, also served as the justice minister in the government that ousted Fico’s first cabinet from power in 2010. During his successful run to become prime minister for a third time in 2023, Fico accused the USP of targeting his nationalist Smer-SD party with politically motivated probes.
”This evil in the form of Lipsic must end, and we are doing that forcefully and thoroughly,” Fico told journalists in December 2023, after winning the election.
Opposition party Progressive Slovakia accused the premier of seeking “impunity and revenge” with a “blitzkrieg against the rule of law”.
The European Commission warned Bratislava in February that its reform would have “a direct and significant negative impact on EU law and the Union’s financial interests,” according to a letter to Slovak Justice Minister Boris Susko, quoted by the media.
Brussels previously used the conditionality mechanism to punish Hungary for perceived backsliding on the rule of law. Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Fico have both accused Brussels of infringing on the sovereignty of member states and mishandling the Ukraine crisis.
After the Slovakian anti-graft body was scrapped, EU sources indicated that the bloc would not be hasty in punishing Bratislava.
”Currently, we don’t see Slovakia as a major problem in foreign affairs, as regards handling Ukraine for example,” an EU diplomat told Reuters at the time. Another official said Hungary’s alienation served as an example for the bloc.
The wider Slovakian reform was suspended for months, while the Constitutional Court deliberated on the issue. After it approved most of the changes in early June, parliament tweaked the legislation in what Susko called an attempt to mitigate the risk of retaliation by the EU.
Hungary cannot survive without Russian oil, Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has warned, stressing that Ukraine’s decision to suspend transit poses a serious challenge for Budapest.
Kiev halted the transit of crude supplied by Russian energy giant Lukoil via the Druzhba pipeline in June, citing sanctions. The measure has directly hit landlocked Hungary and Slovakia, depriving them of oil previously exported by Lukoil through Ukrainian territory.
In an interview with Russian business daily RBK on Monday, Szijjarto said Hungary will be completely deprived of oil without supplies from Russia.
“We will not be able to feed the country in a broad sense. We simply will not be able to meet the demand for fuel… because we do not have sufficient alternative infrastructure,” the diplomat said.
“You just have to look at the numbers… We do not want to take such risks,” Szijjarto added. “Therefore, the fact that Ukraine has made such a decision is a very serious challenge for us. It affects about a third of our imports from Russia. In Slovakia, the situation is even worse, these supplies account for about 40% there,” he stressed.
Kiev imposed sanctions on Lukoil in 2018, having banned the company from divesting its business in the country, as well as prohibiting trade operations and participation in the privatization or leasing of state property. Lukoil still sent crude via the southern arm of the Druzhba pipeline as EU sanctions did not target these flows.
The EU prohibited transport of Russian crude oil by sea in December 2022 as part of far-reaching sanctions on Moscow over the Ukraine conflict. Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic have been granted exemptions by Brussels as they source alternative supplies.
Slovakia and Hungary are the only EU member states that have rejected the bloc’s policies on supplying Kiev with military aid amid the conflict with Moscow. Both states have repeatedly called for the crisis to be solved through diplomacy.
Last week, Politico reported that Budapest had proposed a solution for the restoration of halted Russian oil flows by rebranding Lukoil products. That way, the crude shipped via Ukraine could be officially sold to Hungarian energy giant MOL before it crosses the border. The arrangement could reportedly mean paying an additional $1.50 per barrel to secure transit outside of previous agreements.
Szijjarto told RBK that a temporary solution to the crisis situation could be found, stressing that “in the long term, we need to look for another, legally significant solution.”
The Hungarian diplomat traveled to Russia last week to discuss energy security issues. Budapest is “satisfied with Russian energy cooperation, which is one of the guarantees of the country’s food security,” Szijjarto wrote on Facebook after meeting with the head of Russian energy giant Gazprom, Aleksey Miller.
Volodymyr Zelensky warned on Tuesday that Kiev has no plans to “extend the [gas transit] agreement with Russia” after the current arrangement expires December 31. Unable to find alternatives to Russian energy, landlocked Hungary, Slovakia, Austria and the Czech Republic have expressed serious concerns about the fate of the Gazprom-Naftogaz deal.
A decision by Ukraine to cut Central Europe off from access to Russian natural gas via Russia’s only remaining operational gas pipeline to the region “will seriously harm the interests of European consumers who still want to buy Russian gas,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on Wednesday.
“They will simply have to pay much more, which will make their industry less competitive,” Peskov said.
The five-year Gazprom-Naftogaz transit agreement signed in 2019 is set to expire at the end of the year, and Kiev has announced that it has no plans to extend it.
“After the Hungarians, the Slovaks, the Austrians, the Italians, and even the Germans are beginning to realize that it is not profitable to go to war with Russia, pump money into Ukraine, and cut the umbilical cord between the eastern and western half of Europe,” Hungarian Community for Peace president Endre Simo told Sputnik, commenting on Kiev’s threats.
“The European Union has fallen victim to its own policy, as the announcement by… Zelensky fits perfectly into the European Union’s policy of sanctions against Russia,” Simo said.
“Nevertheless, Kiev will probably not be thanked for the move, since the gas will bypass Ukraine, presumably through Turkiye, and from there through the Balkans and Hungary to EU western countries, and will be much more expensive. As a result, consumer goods and services will become even more expensive. Its price will be paid by Western European consumers. It is a question of how much they will accept the further reduction of their purchasing power and the further deterioration of their standard of living,” he added.
“We actually owe Zelensky a debt of gratitude for his decision, as he proved to the country and the world who is a reliable economic partner and who is not. While Ukraine stops the gas supply for political reasons, Russia sees no obstacle to continuing it in other ways,” Simo suggested, emphasizing that the EU will never turn away from Russian gas completely, even if it becomes more expensive thanks to Kiev’s decision, since it will “still” be “cheaper than American liquefied gas.”
The European Commission (EC) has rejected complaints by Hungary and Slovakia over Ukraine’s suspension of Russian energy supply through pipelines on its territory, advising the two EU member states to look for alternative suppliers.
The Hungarian and Slovak governments had earlier asked the EC to intervene in their dispute with Kiev, after the latter placed sanctions on Russian energy company Lukoil, depriving the two landlocked countries of crude supplies via a pipeline through Ukraine. Last month, Budapest and Bratislava sent a letter to the EU executive, urging it to open emergency consultations with Ukraine over the move, which they insist violates Kiev’s 2014 trade agreement with Brussels.
On Thursday, EC spokesperson Balazs Ujvari stated, as quoted by Politico, that urgent consultations “do not appear to be guaranteed.” He argued that in the commission’s preliminary assessment, the sanctions didn’t pose “an immediate risk to [both countries’] security of supply.”
In a letter to Budapest and Bratislava seen by the Financial Times, EU trade commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis said that they could use an existing pipeline bringing shipborne crude from Croatia, adding that “diversification away from Russian fossil fuels should be actively pursued.”
In June, Ukraine blocked the pipeline transit of Russian crude sold by Lukoil to Central Europe. Kiev imposed sanctions on Lukoil in 2018, having banned the company from divesting its business in the country, as well as prohibiting trade operations and participation in the privatization or leasing of state property. Lukoil still sent crude via the southern arm of the Druzhba pipeline as the EU sanctions did not target these flows.
Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic had sanctions exemptions set up by Brussels to give countries reliant on Russian oil extra time to find alternative supplies.
On Tuesday, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto claimed that the EC may be behind the suspension of the Russian oil supplies through Ukraine. The move could be directly targeted at Budapest and Bratislava, he suggested.
Slovakia and Hungary are the only EU members that have refused to back the bloc’s policy of supplying Kiev with military aid amid the conflict with Russia. Both have repeatedly called for a diplomatic solution to the crisis.
Kremlin Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov accused Ukraine of making a “political decision” and claimed the situation is “critical” for those still buying Russian oil.
By Prof. Tony Hall | American Herald Tribune | July 17, 2016
The Kevin Barrett-Chomsky Dispute in Historical Perspective – Fourth part of the series titled “9/11 and the Zionist Question”
Back in 2006 all but a prescient few, such as Christopher Bollyn, perceived it as premature to try to identify and bring to justice the actual perpetrators of the 9/11 crimes. There was still some residue of confidence that responsible officials in government, law enforcement, media and the universities could and would respond in good faith to multiple revelations that great frauds had occurred in interpreting 9/11 for the public.
Accordingly, the main methodology of public intellectuals like Dr. Kevin Barrett or, for instance, Professors David Ray Griffin, Steven E. Jones, Peter Dale Scott, Graeme MacQueen, John McMurtry, Michael Keefer, Richard B. Lee, A.K. Dewdney, Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed, and Michel Chossudovsky, was to marshal evidence demonstrating that the official narrative of 9/11 could not be true.
The marshaling of evidence was spurred on by observations coming from government insiders like Eckehardt Wertherbach, a former head of Germany’s intelligence service. In a meeting in Germany with Christopher Bollyn and Dr. Andreas von Bülow, Wertherbach pointed out that, “an attack of this magnitude and precision would have required years of planning. Such a sophisticated operation would require the fixed frame of a state intelligence organization, something not found in a loose group like the one led by the student Mohammed Atta in Hamburg.”
Andreas von Bülow was a German parliamentarian and Defense Ministry official. He confirmed this assessment in his book on the CIA and 9/11. In the text von Bülow remarked that the execution of the 9/11 plan “would have been unthinkable without backing from secret apparatuses of state and industry.” The author spoke of the “invented story of 19 Muslims working with Osama bin Laden in order the hide the truth” of the real perpetrators’ identity. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
Aletho News 