This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
It Begins: Gazprom Warns European Gas "Supply Disruptions" Possible
We had previously warned that Putin's "trump card" had yet to be played and with Obama (and a quickly dropping list of allies) preparing economic sanctions (given their limited escalation options otherwise), it was only a matter of time before the pressure was once again applied from the Russian side. As ITAR-TASS reports, Russia's Gazprom warned that not only could it cancel its "supply discount" as Ukraine's overdue payments reached $1.5 billion but that "simmering political tensions in Ukraine, that are aggravated by inadequate economic conditions, may cause disruptions of gas supplies to Europe." And with that one sentence, Europe will awaken to grave concerns over Russia's next steps should sanctions be applied.
It would appear this is the most important map in Europe once again...
Some recent history...
In late January, Ukraine asked Russia for deferral of payments for gas supplied in 2013 and in early 2014. President Vladimir Putin said Ukraine’s debt totalled $2.7 billion then.
and then...
On March 1, Gazprom’s spokesperson Sergai Kupriyanov said the gas holding could cancel its gas supply discount for Ukraine as its overdue debt for gas reached $1.5 billion. This figure includes debts not only for last year’s supplies, but also for the current deliveries.
"The situation with payments is worrying," said Andrei Kruglov, Gazprom's chief financial officer.
"Ukraine is paying but not as well as we would like it to. We are still thinking about whether to extend the pricing contract into the next quarter based on current prices."
And now today...
Russia’s gas giant Gazprom said on Monday it did not rule out possible disruptions of gas supplies to Europe over Ukraine’s political situation.
“Simmering political tensions in Ukraine, that are aggravated by inadequate economic conditions, may cause disruptions of gas supplies to Europe,” the monopoly said in its materials, adding that it would do its utmost to reduce export risks.
“We will further invest into other export-oriented projects such as South Stream and will enhance our LNG (liquefied natural gas) production and export capacity. We also increase our access to underground gas storage facilities in Europe.”
Andrei Kruglov, Gazprom’s chief financial officer, said at the moment Russia had been supplying gas to Ukraine according to schedule, although the latter failed to fulfil its debt obligations.
With that last sentence providing exactly the 'real world' cover Gazprom needs to cut its supplies "through" Ukraine and thus to Europe...
And, as The Guardian notes, this would...
not the first time Russia has used gas exports to put pressure on its neighbour – and "gas wars" between the two countries tend to be felt far beyond their borders. Russia, after all, still supplies around 30% of Europe's gas.
In late 2005, Gazprom said it planned to hike the price it charged Ukraine for natural gas from $50 per 1,000 cubic metres, to $230. The company, so important to Russia that it used to be a ministry and was once headed by the former president (and current prime minister) Dmitry Medvedev, said it simply wanted a fair market price; the move had nothing to do with Ukraine's increasingly strong ties with the European Union and Nato. Kiev, unsurprisingly, said it would not pay, and on 1 January 2006 – the two countries having spectacularly failed to reach an agreement – Gazprom turned off the taps.
The impact was immediate – and not just in Ukraine. The country is crossed by a network of Soviet-era pipelines that carry Russian natural gas to many European Union member states and beyond; more than a quarter of the EU's total gas needs were met by Russian gas, and some 80% of it came via Ukrainian pipelines. Austria, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy and Poland soon reported gas pressure in their own pipelines was down by as much as 30%.
Short of an actual war, the consensus appeared to be, Europe's gas supplies are unlikely to be seriously threatened (since Putin relies on those revenues)... that is clearly about to change with Gazprom's comments.
As the following image from Agence France Presse (created at the end of last year) indicates, things are about to get a lot more problemati for Germany, France, and Italy...
»
- 39826 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Are you saying you can get a hole-in-one with chess?
Drunken sailors are often known to do all sorts of bizarre things (even trying to come off as being intelligent).
Can you?
Gazprom to end gas discount for Ukraine in April.
Here we go...
It was always an eventuality. Again, China looks like the only major market left that can actually afford to pay for energy. Given the state of finances in Europe (now looking to absorb [most of] Ukraine) Russia would be stupid to continue with handouts.
Sadly, most in Europe will fail to undstand this as being a harbinger of their future.
That news is days (seemingly WEEKS) old. The discount pricing is subject to quarterly renewal (3/31)... So that has always been a drop dead date for installation of a more Russia-friendly regime in Kiev, which is a condition for renewal of the discounted prices (regardless of any interim maneuvering over the outstanding and pasty due bills).
We are in the basic logic of this dystopian Pax Americana age : WHEN THIEVES FALL OUT under the wayward global financial gun.
The whole position of Obammy is to impose on Putin, his ALTER EGO in hegemonial play in EUROASIA, that its either the American (US) way or its the HIGHWAY ! There cannot be TWO Caesars to run the world.
And Putin now replies based on his GAzprom/MIC Empire : NO WAY !
We have moved back to Cold War logic under the gun of dystopian financial crisis where debt = asset and where Nation States--drowning in debt-- are checkmated by Oligarchy Caymanista wealth all belonging to the Oligarchs of ALL NATIONS including the Ruskis; all based on that false logic that PAPER WEALTH is true economic wealth (and we in ZH university know it is NOT TRUE).
Now that Putin's allies Assad and Yanukovich have wrapped up Putin in their dirty linen they have OBLIGED Putin to go from PUSH to SHOVE.
And the FIRSt world is now caught up in this conundrum of having to navigate between diplomacy or OUTRIGHt MIC military logic.
We can see that the Merkel/Schroeder/Cameron camp have too much to lose if this goes the way the Neo-cons of US want it to (McCain logic).
So the First world is now faced with its own inherent contradictions like at Yalta and Potsdam after the fall of Hitler/Musso/Hirohito.
Only difference, the US of today is not the US of 1945; its drowning in debt and it can't afford to put boots on ground in the aftermath of a Neo-con twenty year disastrous strategy that has taken its troops in post traumatic disorder from Iraq/Afghan to Somalia and Libya and now caught in the crossfire of Al-Qaeda in Damascus. A totally phucked up military situation where you can't tell friend from foe! Game over, boots on ground logic !
Whither to financially convoluted Pax Americana and surrogate Euro tattered/Gazprom guzzling EU ?
Yeah, the lens is distorted because it's based on a world-view that no longer can exist (and was always to fail). Like I've been saying for eons, ALL WARS ARE ABOUT RESOURCES. This "exercise" may very well recraft the lens such that we can no longer pretend that resources are unlimited; and, if one considers that the only way forward, EVER, is to ADJUST to what is real, then this could prove to be a very key historical event.
Time to stop leaning on the "leaders" to lie to us, to tell us that we will always have growth and resources...
seer, "all wars about resources" well ah, sure, but also about international banks and raping of wealth to fatten the reptiles who run them, or do you disagree?
Not sure how to answer your question...
It's about power, and power can only be had through resources: yes, the psychological is employed, but eventually it requires backing by the physical. People were clubbing others over the head long before there was any concept of banks and such...
Wealth is subjective. Power, well, power tends to be a bit less cloudy.
They want to kill 80% anyways, so let the bombing begin bitchezz
NWO in full effect
Europe and the United States have dominated and often terrorized the rest of the world. For once, we threaten to be on the receiving end and we start crying like little babies. I don't believe in an escalation of this conflict, however Putins Russia wants to show the rest of the world they're a force to be reckoned with. So will China. In any case, I prefer a world with more than one superpower. It has been too unbalanced for a long time.
Very insightful for a snail.
I'll take door number three: NO super-power?
It's always about control over resources. And in the end, as always comes to pass, resources are exhausted and it all ends, even for the "victors."
Well, history has taught us that that's highly unlikely. Anyway, all these Obama bashers should learn that 50% of the resources for 5% of the population is impossible to maintain. What's happening now, is perfectly normal and would take place with or without Obama. Other nations are rising, they have tools to put us under pressure and they know it.
subliminal, one could only wonder what rock you live under. give up and obey, a motto for you to live by. not everyone is this submisive, go get a job.
Well... reading and spelling are not among your top qualities. I didn't say anything about giving up or obeying. I nearly pointed out the hypocrisy. Is Russia doing anything the US hasn't done the past 100 years? I don't think so. You might want to learn about 20th century policies in Latin America and the Middle East. Now, get yourself a brain upgrade before ever commenting again.
sub, (perhaps your IQ?)- no you are worried about who gets what - 5% /50% thingy...as hint deep thinker, native peoples sat on oil and coal for thousands of years, but it took more advanced peoples to get & use them, just as some badkward countries could not develope what they had, so you now come along and decry the injustice of it..not a mature viewpoint, but one commonly held by brain washed leftists. Obuma didn't do it subplot in your drivel is about as dumb as your world view.
"just as some badkward countries could not develope what they had"
Backward?
Does the term "human hubris" mean anything to you?
Are you aware of Jevons Paradox?
You don't even know my worldview, dumbo. You can not export your industrial capacity and jeopardize your own currency that gives you so many privileges and expect the rest of the world to just sit and watch.
I guess you're American and you think the rest of the world is a backward (yes, that's how you spell it) place. Actually, it's not. Russia and China can't be compared to what they were 50 years ago. They want to secure their resources their piece of the pie and they're going to take it.
we agree on this :"they want to secure their resources their piece of the pie and they're going to take it."
but, how is that any diff from what you say the USA is guilty of?
I never said it was different. It's just standard foreign policy. Governments are as violent as their situation allows them to be.
ok sub, we may agree .govs become more violent as they become larger and obtain more power over their people, violence is just easier when they can paint "others" as the enemy. but you seem to give Obuma a pass on his dictatorial crimes, wonder why?
No, I don't give Obama a pass. He's just a politician like any other. However, we shouldn't forget that the current policies started under Reagans presidency. That's when the debts started to rise. GW Bush probably caused more damage than any other US president. He squandered all the credit the US had after 9/11 and escalated the fiscal deficits.
The economic situation that Obama inherited was pretty horrible and he did exactly what any other president would do. Take the easy way out to get re-elected and not worry about the long term consequences.
It's also perfectly normal that governments in Europe and the US become larger. All those lost jobs because we outsourced our manufacturing jobs have to be replaced and as long as the deficits weren't too high, government jobs were a good solution. Unfortunately, we're reaching the end of the line. It's going to be painful.
I guess this is all going to continue until one of the major players is going to fail. Japan is looking bad, as is most of Europe and China and the US have their own problems. We shouldn't forget that the Russia's revival has a lot do with their crisis in the nineties. We might face something similar (debt restructuring and currency issues) and rise again.
One thing appears to be clear. One single state with the power the US had after second world war will not emerge soon.
sub, i still think you are giving obuma a pass. he is by no means a "politician like any other"..he is an self described person who's upbringing is based on lies and secrets held close, prior presidents backrounds were open books vs his. i.e british father, young barry a indoneasian citizen, higher education as non us national, missing history for much of his life. close ties to the like of bill ayers an admitted terrorist bomber, might add his total disreguard for the constitution and seperation of powers it holds is beyond what past presidents have held.
Your other points are very valid, execpt that you expect larger and larger government. I hold that smaller government, with local control, would be better for all..can't have super powers(and the evil they bring) when you have small .gov.
If you accuse Pary Pussies of Obama-bashing this is the sort of thing that you'll end up with.
Not understanding why the down-votes. I suspect that the idiots out there are being baited by the words "Obama bashers" (nothing wrong with this, as long as, that is, people apply the same tests across the board [and I usually find that most do not- hence my use of "Party Pussy"]).
To the victor goes the spoils.
Except,To many victors have used up all the spoils.
Thus... to the victor goes the debt.
Large oil refinery in Russia on fire
http://englishrussia.com/2014/03/03/largest-oil-refinery-in-europe-is-on...
Nothing against you, Reptil, but why are people up-voting this? Is it in appreciation of you providing information? Or, is it because oil refineries are on fire? Confused...
(Ras)Putin used some pawns to checkmate BO.
The game is over now.
What really angers me is this:
Starbucks roasts coffee to perfection only to ruin nearly every roasted bean by trying to make them into an undrinkable liquid that nobody can positively identify.
Starbucks should be forced to not make another undrinkable coffee flavored unidentifiable liquid ever again.
If only the US didn't have restrictions on the export quantiities of NGLs, we could throw a wrench into Russia's natural gas threat. If only the white house had approved the Keystone pipeline back in 2009, we'd be shipping diesel fuel to Europe.
Question ; According to this post the Euro gas transiting via Ukraine is 66% of consumption (AFP).
The SAME source indicates that OVERALL euro dependence on Russian gas varies from country to country.
Also according to AFP Overall gas consumption of Russian gas into Europe is 30 % of total gas consumption (ex : in France 15%, in Germany 50%, in Finland >70%) of which 50% is via North Stream.
In other words according to this source the amount of Russian gas transiting thru Ukraine consumed by EU is 15% of overall euro consumption (and not 66% as stated here).
As we approach summer months the stock of gas is at maximum. So in the case of crisis Russian gas will not be required for local consumption BEFORE autumn (as also witnessed in the 2010/2011 past crisis before North Stream came onstream).
Just for the record...