"I believe that in the end both sides will have to compromise. Ukraine is ready to pay more, but what Russia is proposing [...] seems to be political pressure. Such a [sudden and] large increase does not seem to have any economic justification.
A lot will depend on the stance of the European countries. I constantly watch Russian TV and all the channels are propagating the idea that Ukraine is not ready for any compromise, but rather is stealing gas from the pipelines, which threatens to cause an energy crisis in the entire EU. If the West comes to believe that, it will be very bad.
The legal arguments are on our side - Russia signed a long term agreement with Ukraine on gas delivery before the Orange Revolution. It is true that that agreement was extremely advantageous for us [...] but no one abrogated it. If we were to insist on arbitration at the Stockholm Tribunal - which is seriously being considered in Kiev - we should win the case. The problem is that the proceedings will take months or even years.
The other issue is that it is Russia that is obliged to provide gas to the western countries, not us. Yet Moscow has still not established any agreement with us on the conditions of the transit of gas through the Ukraine for this year. Starting Jan. 1, Moscow is sending gas through the Ukraine illegally. That's not just our problem, but the problem of Moscow's relations with European countries.
[...]
What do you expect from the West?
Zachód może albo się w ogóle nie wtrącać, albo zachęcać obie strony do rozumnego kompromisu. Moim zdaniem ta druga postawa jest oczywiście lepsza. Z wielką nadzieją patrzę na środowe spotkanie Unii Europejskiej w Brukseli w sprawie tego kryzysu. The West can either stay out of it completely, or urge both sides to a compromise. IMO the latter option is better. [...]
How will this crisis affect the political situation in Ukraine? Could it change the result of the March parliamentary elections?
That will depend on the course of events, primarily on whether the government will manage to maintain a more or less stable gas prise. The government claims there shouldn't be a problem in the first quarter, but that's debatable. Part of the electorate will vote for the pro-Russian Regional Party of ex PM Janukowycz as a result of the crisis. On the other hand it was Janukowycz who signed the gas agreement with Russia in 2004. If it was such a good one why does Russia wish to change it? [I assume the good prof is engaging in a bit of snarkiness here]
Radykalne działania Rosji mogą wywołać negatywną reakcję części elektoratu, który na co dzień jest raczej prorosyjski. Dyplomacja rosyjska nie zmieniła, niestety, swojego podejścia do Ukrainy z czasów pomarańczowej rewolucji. A wtedy Rosja swoim zachowaniem bardzo dużo straciła w oczach przeciętnych Ukraińców. Niewykluczone, że teraz będzie podobnie. Ludzie nie są głupi, by uwierzyć, że trzykrotna podwyżka cen gazu nie ma podtekstu politycznego. W dodatku podwyżce towarzyszy antyukraińska kampania w mediach rosyjskich. To wszystko nie sprzyja stabilnym i przyjaznym stosunkom między naszymi krajami. The radical actions by Russia could cause a negative reaction among the generally pro-Russian part of the electorate. Russian diplomacy has unfortunately not changed its approach to Ukraine from the times of the Orange Revolution. Back then Russia's actions cost it a lot of support among ordinary Ukrainians. It may be the same this time round. [...] All of this does not help the chances for a stable and friendly relationship with the two countries. [...]
Interview with Prof. Haran
Here is the main quote I want you to see -> "One of these anti-Russian nationalists was then-Deputy Prime Minister for energy policy Alexiy Ivchenko (since then demoted to a lesser-job as a chief of the NaftaGas consortium). When he visited Russia for crucial talks back in March of 2005, he brought with him a Russian-Ukrainian translator. Since some 95% of Ukrainians speak fluent (if accented) Russian - and those who don't are overwhelmingly village hicks from Galicia - so the decision to only speak to his Russian counterpart through a translator had the main effect of pissing off the counterparty right from the start. But this was only the beginning. Claiming to "break the Russian shackles" and bring in a new, more pragmatic era in joint relations, Ivchenko declared that the Ukraine want to scrap the previous arrangements on gas deliveries, based on barter trade and reduced prices.
Since the previous agreement, valid until at least 2009, was in fact hugely favorable to Ukraine, Russians could not believe their luck. "Are you sure you want to do this?" they asked Ivchenko.
"Of course we do, we're a proud, independent Ukraine," was the essence of Ivchenko's reply.
"Then so be it, we'll start market-pricing gas exports and transit through the Ukraine." The details of the new "realistic" terms remained vague and the issue was shelved - until a couple of months ago, when Gazprom announced a big price hike for the gas supplies to Ukraine, though still well below the European prices."
And here's what Jerome had to say about veracity of eXile's work in a DailyKos comment -> "That sounds (none / 0)
very much possible, and the exile has often been well informed about such tidbits.
In the long run, we're all dead (Keynes) Read more on the European Tribune - bringing dKos to Europe
by Jerome a Paris on Mon Jan 02, 2006 at 11:24:27 AM PDT"
Link for above Jerome comment -> Jerome DKos comment in this diary
Jerome - Why don't you mention this here?
BTW your English grammar is near perfect, where have you mastered the language?
Name: Кристофер Тессон Website: blog (english) Location: Carbondale IL, Russian Federation Birthdate: 1982-06-26
"Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason."
▼▼▼ READ MY DIARY ▼
Скиталец you are most probably a well-travelled person, like many of us here!
And skitalets, your opinion is interesting. I would tend to favour Jérôme's opinion for him being experienced in this field, but I dare say that it's possible that both of you, correction all of us, are way over our heads in this Gazprom matter, and that it's important that we stick around and talk even if sometimes we don't like some things said (for example I usually get goose bumps when people start saying that the French unemployment rate is high, I puff and huff and quickly say "it's been the same for 20 years, you punks", then I slowly start reaching for my gun, which gives ample time for people to retract their comment).
My own response to myself : grow up ! You people on ET are so moderate in your comments, not over-reacting and all that stuff, I'll start to believe you are old middle-aged people (ie above their thirties). Snark When through hell, just keep going. W. Churchill
Well about how to learn control on such issues as "someone else's understanding of your country", I was just lucky to be a member of the original fuckfrance.com when it started, shortly around the beginning of the war in Iraq. I first went there by curiosity, but ended up fighting verbally with the most conservative republican pricks in the world. Ex-marine officers who hated arabs and French people. Average joe schmoes who didn't hate anyone in particular but still believed that France was evil. French people who agreed that France was evil and who were totally pro-Bush.
To fight them I had to turn into them, it was very ugly. But one day, bam! I managed to make peace with some of them, and that day I started liking the place.
(but shortly after that a new wave of idiots joined and started harrassing again and at that point I left, too tired to have to go through the same stuff over and over again).
One thing I learned over there, is how to get people annoyed and angry. It's actually very easy to get people on the defensive. You, for example, can 1) gang up. This consists of teaming up with another person or two and start claiming that "you just owned the other guy haha what an idiot we really got him haha", when in fact the person you're attacking has been carefully arguing, documenting his claims. this gets carefully debating people very angry, particularly when you on the other hand have just been superficial and insulting. Or 2) claim that you've already been through this and that the person in question is boring and invite him/her to re-read everything on the forum. etc etc
And learning all of this, makes you more prepared for it.
I don't recommend this website, if it still exists, for people who are nice, gentle and who think that all of humanity can just get along. It's not full of harmless people. Some people over there really hated our guts and were ready to bomb the shit out of France. Some French people there hated America so much they were ready to go all-out nuclear with them too. A really ugly website. But a good place to learn how to take it easy.
So in essence, you were screwed. Either you retaliated and were no better than them. Or you tried being calm and you were a French surrender monkey.
It took me a few months to find the middle path. Which consisted of ignoring the ones in it for a fight, and trying to settle differences, in a calm manner, with those not in it for a fight. But like I said, I eventually quit because the ones looking for a fight kept on coming, and coming and coming ... endless masses of adversaries. Way too much to handle. The ratio was like 1 Frenchman against 10 Conservative Republicans, and in such circumstances it quickly gets too tedious.
disclaimer: I'm not zen at all, I'm just beginning to get good at knowing how to avoid getting into trouble.
The link to the dKos thread is near the top of this thread.
That Ukrainian guy does indeed sound especialyl stupid, but the Russians had no reason to want to change the terms of the deal, as it is, despite appearances, advantageous to them. You may not believe me when I write this (and it is true that it becomes slightly less advantageous as prices for gas inrease, but it is still a good deal for Gazprom), but I really believe it and I have no agenda in this. I don't work with Russian clients anymore, I have not been in Ukraine in more than 10 years. I am just providing what I think is a reasonably well informed opinion (information on Ukriane, and information on how pipelines tariffs are set elsewhare in the world).
As I said, I'd love to learn from you if you are in a position to comment with insider-y information or simply your Russian perspective. That's what this site is about - everybody can provide information and opinion, and if it's interesting or useful, it is noticed and acknowledged. I certainly don't hold the sole source of wisdom on this site. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Furthermore, he used to write some exercises on politics, but knowing his words about Putin’s election: “ Since the old tune about “wild bears prowling snow-covered streets of Moscow” is getting a bit stale and little harder to believe these days, a new spin cycle was uniformly adopted by journalistic corps. OK, perhaps Moscow is booming, but if you ever dare to go beyond the Ring Road [insert gloomy and menacing sound-effects here…], there is absolutely nothing but abject poverty and alcohol fumes, and total hopelessness - which, of course, signifies a complete failure of Evil Putin’s resurgent KGB-inspired policies. You might think it is some kind of Sierra-Leone out there – only with much colder climate.”
So, I couldn’t believe that he wrote this paper “Gas Attack! The Ukraine...» Then who wrote this paper? It is evidently that the grandsons of KGB. The text of it is about the same as in the former Soviet newspapers (before Afghanistan aggression in 1979). Knowing Russian, you can see the forums in the electronic version of the main former Soviet gazette “Izvestiya”. The new FSB tactics in Russian is to provocate normal people, using indignant words etc. in forums and desinformations.
PS: Sorry for pigeon English. Per aspera ad astra
