Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Irresponsible - and false - scaremongering on the FT's front page | 56 comments (56 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 0)

Given the amount of xenophobia, mafia, ex-KGP and just plain old corruption in the upper echelons of power over there, I wouldn't want to see my country reliant on Russia for its energy supplies.

Yes, you're only happy when Russia is supplying "cheap" energy to you, aren't you?  When the price goes up (according to the free market, which you hold so dear), all of a sudden Russia is "xenophobic, just plain old corrupt".

by slaboymni on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 06:04:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 0)
No, but when Gazprom threatened EU gas supply stability as a result of the Centrica bush with the UK, I thought to myself that we should think of the existing long-term gas contracts as buying the EU time to wean itself off gas.

Without making any judgements about Russia or the Russians, Russia is a distinct [neighbouring, related] geostrategic pole from the EU and is beginning to use gas and oil for political leverage.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 06:09:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 0)

No, but when Gazprom threatened EU gas supply stability as a result of the Centrica bush with the UK

This threat was mainly the result of Gazprom's frustration, as I believe Jerome has already mentioned, of the UK not playing by the rules.

That's my main point here at ET - there seems to be a different set of rules applied to Russia.  And these rules appear to change magically, and abruptly, to suit Europe's interests at the time.

The EU uses trade for political leverage.  How is using one's natural resources any different or worse, as you seem to imply?

by slaboymni on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 08:51:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 0)
So the EU found itself in the crossfire between Russia and the UK, which is exactly what my comment was about. And I'm not saying Russia using its resources for political leverage is wrong, I'm just saying that I'm not sure the EU wants to be on the receiving end of that leverage.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 09:01:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 1)
(a) Don't be personally offended mate, I've had many colleagues who have worked in oilfields in Russia found the officaldom to be very xenophobic. They don't want foreigners working their, period, because they don't like foreigners. I'm mainly refering to the government not necessarily the people.
(b) I don't hold the free market dear
(c) I think oil & gas are still "too cheap" to be valued properly by the market and indivuals, so I have no problem with them being more expensive
(d) My problem is with security of supply, not the cost of that supply. Would you be happy if, say, Russia was dependent on China for its energy supplies?
by Mike A on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 06:11:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 1)
I'm not personally offended :-)

However, have you thought that perhaps the Russians are not really xenophobic, but resent the fact that your expat friends are being paid 20000% more than they are for the same work?

Why exactly do you believe that Russia is not a reliable energy supplier?  Jerome oftens states that Gazprom has been extremely reliable for the past 30 years.

All I'm asking is that you don't fall into the anti-Russian propaganda trap so easily...

by slaboymni on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 06:21:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 1)
Well said slaboymni,

I think a lot of us occasionally fall back on reflex (Cold War) anti-Russian (or anti-American) responses.  It's a human failing.  As long as there are people to point out the fallacy, all's well.  Besides which it's a very easy political point for western leaders to score, and fear seems to be the political currency of choice in the UK at present.  This does not make for a well informed, rational debate about the choices that country faces, and the media are doing precisely nothing to improve the level of debate - as regularly demonstrated here.

Your comments on expats (I am one) struck a chord: how is it possible, and efficient for these pay differentials to exist?  Is local labour so completely disadvantaged in the wage bargaining process, and why does the same not apply to expats doing the same jobs?  

I will eventually get round to writing a diary on the analogous situation in Azerbaijan, where labour unrest has started to become a prominent factor in the oil extraction business.

by GreatGame2 (fishy_logic_at_yahoo.co.uk) on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 11:01:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 0)
The expat bonus is (supposedly) what you need to pay people to compensate them for the inconvenience of expatriating. Which means the number of expats should be really, really small and the need for expats restricted to managing roles. Not that it's like that in reality.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 11:12:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 0)
Good points, but people described (derogatorily, unfortunately) as economic migrants do not receive a similar bonus.  
by GreatGame2 (fishy_logic_at_yahoo.co.uk) on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 11:37:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 0)
Economic migrants have the least bargaining power because they are the most desperate for a job, while expats are sent abroad to fulfill the needs of the employer so they command a bonus. It's not the fact that you're abroad, but why and how you're abroad.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 11:43:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 0)
Thanks, GG2 -

I've always wondered what justification a company could possibly have to expatriate someone from the home office in the U.S. to Russia, for example.

I can't think of a single area of expertise in America that is not present in Russia, and at a lower price.

Are you in Azerbaijan?  I had two roommates in Russia.  One was from there and the other was Russian, but of Armenian heritage.  They got along great, though.

by slaboymni on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 11:35:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 0)
The only thing that it makes economic sense to expatriate from the US to Russia (or any other place with an educated workforce) is managers [including engineers as project managers or for training local engineers to work with specific American technology]. Anything else I'd attribute to cultural factors.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 11:46:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 0)
I would agree about expatriating managers back in the early 90's when Russia had no managers with, for example, significant retail experience.

But now, there are many highly qualified and experienced local managers.

Besides, we all know managers don't do anything ;-)

I still cannot understand why a company that would prosecute you for stealing a $10 stapler would willingly pay someone 10x more than they would have to pay a local.

by slaboymni on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 11:50:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 1)
What expatriates have which has real value is trust by the management in the head office, and knowledge, to some extent, of the politics of that office.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 11:55:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 0)
If you want to establish a new branch office or production facility it makes sense to send at least one of your own people to manage it who is familiar with your procedures. Then you can hire local managers if you need more than one manager. Or you can repatriate your expat after a few years.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 11:57:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Re: False - but necessary scaremongering? (none / 0)
It would seem to make more sense to recruit a local in the target country, bring them to the home country for extensive training, then send them back to the target country.  If necessary, a manager from the home country could visit on a regular basis to provide oversight/mentoring.

Being familiar with your company's procedures is absolutely useless abroad, as these procedures are based on the customs, laws, and best practices of the home country - none of which are the same in the target country.

Being an expat just seems to be a way to provide an employee with perks and compensation that would not be tolerated by shareholders in the home country.  My belief of this is reinforced by reading sites like www.expat.ru, as well as other country-specific sites.

by slaboymni on Tue Apr 25th, 2006 at 12:15:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Irresponsible - and false - scaremongering on the FT's front page | 56 comments (56 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: