The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
More troubling is the suggestion that Gazprom has ever cut gas deliveries to countries that were paying market prices and on time, and saying otherwise, however often, still does not make it true. Or are you suggesting that gas companies should generally not be allowed to cut deliveries to delinquent customers?
Hers's a quick exercise in Russian contracts. Go to toilet, take a healthy dump, then put your hands in and scoop out the deposit. Squish it around. You have a Russian contract on your hands.
THAT is how Kremlin views contracts. English law? Bullshit. The FIRST thing Kremlin would and will likely do in case of contract dispute is claim that they are being persecuted under English law due to the Litvenenko debacle and ongoing fallout from that. True or not is irrelevant.
They can and will do one of two things. One, they can cover with that and take Nigerian gas and do whatever they damned well please with it. Screw Europe or anyone else with "contractual agreements." Hell, UK won't even let slide one murder of a British citizen on British soil by a Rooskie spook, so how can Europe be trusted and why should they even matter? That's how Kremlin sees things.
Two, they can simply forego any pretenses and ignore contractual obligations altogether. In Nigeria? Is it possible? Nigeria is more corrupt than Russia, and that's saying something. Nigeria's goombahs are in it for cold, hard cash. Russia's goombahs want in because 1) they know perfectly well how corrupt Nigeria's guys are, and 2) they'll have their own gas supplies in Africa to be dealt the same way as Russian gas. I.e., contracts as described above. The latter is all about control of Europe, and that IS Russia's main point. If they get into Nigeria, there's nothing to prevent wholesale looting and diversion from anyone Kremlin doesn't like. Such as the free world, for example.
Kremlin is looking for energy hegemony, in my opinion. I think that's what this is about.
Meantime, note to Kremlin: please, please, please oh please don't invest your temporary fortune into an energy resource that has to be phased out (else global suicide) or you'll just be losing your money, go broke again, and have nothing else of much value on the world commodity market. Whatever you do, don't invest your cash wisely.
Now that they've been told not to do it or are being strongly contested in doing it, they will. Thus maybe a little more to this squabble than meets the eye at first glance.
The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.
by Luis de Sousa - Sep 22 3 comments
by Oui - Sep 23 9 comments
by ARGeezer - Sep 7 40 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 10 5 comments
by Cat - Sep 14 19 comments
by gmoke - Sep 19 1 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 2 57 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 26
by gmoke - Sep 24
by Oui - Sep 239 comments
by Luis de Sousa - Sep 223 comments
by gmoke - Sep 191 comment
by Cat - Sep 1419 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 105 comments
by ARGeezer - Sep 740 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Sep 257 comments
by THE Twank - Aug 3110 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 2757 comments
by Cat - Aug 2222 comments
by Cat - Aug 2225 comments
by Cat - Aug 185 comments