Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on March 12, 2014
Ukraine: Challenging the pipelines narrative
As a former correspondent in Kiev, Moscow and Georgia at the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union, and as someone who has an ongoing interest in events in the former Soviet space, I would maintain that the attempt to link the Ukraine conflict with pipelines and natural resources is highly debatable. There are of course pipelines running through Ukraine transporting oil and gas from Russia to the West, and Crimea currently gets its oil, gas and much of its water from pipelines that flow from Ukraine, so they are important, but the idea that these pipelines, and natural resources in general, are in some way the cause of this conflict seems to me to be unfounded.
Most Moscow-watchers agree this conflict is about the limits of the Russian sphere of influence, the anxiety of Russia as it watches NATO and the EU expand up to its front door and stupid moves by the new Ukrainian government such as the dropping of the new language law. It’s about Russian pride, Putin’s vision of a Greater Russia, and Washington’s desire to keep pushing their views even when their interests are not really affected. It’s about competing nationalisms and Ukrainian clumsiness or worse.
Natural resources and pipelines are not causes, they are merely potential weapons – although who would actually win by using them can be hard to pin down. For example, Ukraine could stop Russia exporting gas to the West, or cut off gas and water to Crimea, but then Russia would close the stopcocks at the Ukrainian border thereby closing down Ukrainian businesses and making life unbearable in Ukrainian homes. Alternatively Russia could stop pumping gas to Ukraine, but then they would reduce their petro-euro earnings in Europe.
Most far-fetched of all is the idea that this conflict is in some way about Persian Gulf oil.
One article last week said Crimea would face difficulties without its connections to Ukraine. True, but those problems will be temporary and far fewer than the problems Ukraine is likely to experience. If Russia annexes Crimea, Crimea will, in time, be fine in terms of natural resources – just like Abkhazia and South Ossetia eventually were when they exited Georgia/were annexed by Russia. It may take a while, but Moscow will build a new bridge over the Kerch Strait that will carry water, oil, gas, goods, Russians and weapons. Until then the resources will arrive by boat and plane.
Ukraine, by contrast, will have enormous natural resource problems. Or rather Ukraine will have more problems than it already does because it has no natural resources except agricultural land.
A post-script on Crimea…
Of course, arguably Crimea is no more Russian than it is Ukrainian. The Cimmerians, Bulgars, Greeks, Scythians, Goths, Huns, Khazars, the state of Kievan Rus’, Byzantine Greeks, Kipchaks, Ottoman Turks, Golden Horde Tatars and the Mongols have all controlled Crimea. In the 13th century, it was partly controlled by the Venetians and by the Genoese. A Crimean Khanate emerged in the 15th century, which came under the protection of the Ottoman Empire until the 18th century when it became part of the Russian Empire. During the Russian Civil war it changed hands several times and was a stronghold and last stand of the anti-Bolshevik White Guard. From there it became part of the Russian Soviet Socialist Republic until Germany invaded during the Second World War. After the Germans were kicked out and Stalin had died, Crimea was transferred by Khrushchev to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic in 1954, where it stayed until becoming part of independent Ukraine with the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1991.
12 Comments on "Ukraine: Challenging the pipelines narrative"
Makati1 on Wed, 12th Mar 2014 7:32 am
Of course it is all about surrounding the last truly free countries that can actually stop the Empire. Russia and China. If they can get Russia out of their Crimean navy base, they have locked them into only North Atlantic/Arctic/North Pacific Ocean access. Plus, it allows NATO (US) missiles to be based on Russia’s border.
If they (the Elite) think that Russia is going to give it up without a fight, they are badly mistaken or what I see is totally BS. This could eventually bring out the nukes as Obama has already said he will strike first if he wants to. Putin may just beat him to the red button. I give it 50:50 at this point. Another Cuban missile crises in the works. Are you prepared?
Arthur on Wed, 12th Mar 2014 9:19 am
Exactly. What were they thinking when they tried to draw the Ukrainian carpet from under Putin’s feet? A few years ago, US Congress went in the panic mode over a Chinese take-over bid of a US harbor (I forgot which one) and turned it down. Sevastopol is the only warm water port Russia has and they are supposed to give that up, just because western NGO’s exploit the desperation of the dirt poor Ukrainians and fund a revolution with no other intention than to hurt Russia? Get real.
If Russia annexes Crimea, Crimea will, in time, be fine in terms of natural resources – just like Abkhazia and South Ossetia eventually were when they exited Georgia/were annexed by Russia.
That is true. More worrisome is that the Crimea could set an example for the Eastern Ukraine and turn that territory in the next Yugoslavia/Syria.
The remedy is that the EU (read: Germany) and Russia should sit around the table and hammer out an agreement concerning the Ukraine, define a new ‘virtual borderline’ separating EU and Russian sphere of influence (preferably the Djnepr river), leaving NATO completely out. The Ukraine should remain intact (except for the Crimea) and become a bilingual confederation, like Belgium or Canada. The EU and Russia should financially ‘adopt their part of the Ukraine’ and keep it afloat and form an intervention/peace keeping force, in case things go out of hand. Nice opportunity btw for European and Russian troops to initiate joint military exercises.
Paul Craig Roberts yesterday: t is astonishing that the only leadership the world has comes from Russia, China, and three or four countries in South America. The Western world no longer has diplomatic capability. Instead, the Western world relies on propaganda, threats, force, and schemes to overthrow governments that it first demonizes. Putin also knows that only Europe can prevent this final devastation. Therefore, Putin does not make provocative statements or take strong actions. He hopes that Europe will notice his reasonable behavior in contrast with the reckless behavior of Washington and realize that Europe and NATO must cease enabling Washington’s pursuit of hegemony, a pursuit that is driving the world to its destruction…
Amen to that. The story of the West is over. The future of Europe lies in Eurasia, that’s where the resources are and markets…
http://deepresource.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/strategicellipse.png
The 21st century is going to be dominated by two new giants: China (1300 million) and Greater Europe (Paris, Berlin, Moscow of 750 million), with potentially a Euro-American annex of 180 million, if the latter is lucky enough to escape from Washington, rather than become then next Brasil/third world country.
DC on Wed, 12th Mar 2014 9:34 am
Yes, President Putin’s low-key, restrained response to washingtons ceaseless aggression, does stand out in stark contrast to the belligerent, warlike statements coming from the mouth of the puppet Obomber, and dutifully amplified and dialed up to eleven by the empires corrupt corporate media. As always, I hope you are right Arthur, but through Mr Putins entire term, the uS has expended great efforts to keep Russia and Europe as far apart as possible. The poisonous amerikan meddling has made things-difficult I am sure you would agree.
The uS is pushing for war-a real war here. The question is, can the President and his gov’t avoid all the traps the uS is setting for his country? I guess well see….
Davy, Hermann, MO on Wed, 12th Mar 2014 1:25 pm
Russia is losing the battle impersonally through the financial markets. The US will not have to lift a hand. Check out this Article DC, Makati, and Arthur. Unfortunately for you all, your agenda does not stand up to reality. We are in a global economic system that does not care about your political bent and will reward or punch based upon risk and return!
http://www.marctomarket.com/2014/03/russia-economic-vulnerabilities.html
Arthur on Wed, 12th Mar 2014 3:02 pm
Hermann, I am not too impressed with the Russian strength either. Luckily for them they have a very potent neighbor in the West, that has good use for Russia’s raw materials and can give end products in return. Volkswagen at the moment is bigger in Russia than in Germany.
We are in a global economic system that does not care about your political bent and will reward or punch based upon risk and return!
You could have a point here. I always listen to Greg Hunter, who today had Paul Craig Roberts as his guest…
http://usawatchdog.com/united-states-definitely-wants-war-in-ukraine-paul-craig-roberts/
there is not a recovery. The U.S. is a busted state. It’s completely busted.”
It looks to me that there are quite a few losers around.
P.S. I am somewhat confused as how to call you… Davy? Hermann?
Keith_McClary on Wed, 12th Mar 2014 4:49 pm
“For example, Ukraine could stop Russia exporting gas to the West, or cut off gas and water to Crimea, but then Russia would close the stopcocks at the Ukrainian border thereby closing down Ukrainian businesses and making life unbearable in Ukrainian homes. Alternatively Russia could stop pumping gas to Ukraine, but then they would reduce their petro-euro earnings in Europe.”
Or Ukraine could just keep on tapping gas from the Russia-EU pipeline and not paying for it.
Arthur on Wed, 12th Mar 2014 4:56 pm
Or Ukraine could just keep on tapping gas from the Russia-EU pipeline and not paying for it.
The Ukraine has done that in the past and predictably Russia stopped pumping altogether, which the EU did not like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia%E2%80%93Ukraine_gas_disputes
In 1998, Gazprom and Naftohaz made a contract under which Gazprom would pay for the transit of volumes of gas, which established a link between gas prices and transit tariffs,[citation needed] but this contract did not resolve the issue of already incurred gas debts.[15] In 1998, Gazprom alleged that Ukraine had illegally diverted gas meant for export to other European countries and suspended exports of oil and electricity to Ukraine in 1999.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Wed, 12th Mar 2014 5:08 pm
Arthur, I am Davy from Hermann, MO. Google it and see my city. I only live there a fe days a month because I am on a 400 acre farm to the south 90 miles.
Arthur the world is busted with debt and unfunded liabilities and those not in this situation are by association in the global economy. No one will escape the coming contraction. Most countries with good current accounts or trade surpluses will end up poor also. It will be like a debt jubilee for the global world when the great contraction hits so it will not matter who is broke and who isn’t. In fact those sponging off the world like the US will come out ahead by milking the global economy until it dumps and everyone is poor.
On the Ukraine, I am with Orlov who says Ukraine would be far better off with Russia and that economic connection. Europe cannot afford to bail out yet another economy. Ukraine does not fit into the European economy like it does with Russia. Ukraine is a mess and it is just being used now as a political football by the great powers and the factions within the Ukraine.
Northwest Resident on Thu, 13th Mar 2014 4:46 am
Arthur — Here’s a conspiracy theory for you:
What are the chances that when all is said and done in Ukraine, Russia ends up controlling Crimea and Russian-speaking Eastern Ukraine, and Western Ukraine ends up absorbed into NATO and the West? And what are the chances that this is the intended outcome, planned from the beginning, with Putin and Obama and others just playing their roles, creating distraction and drama on the world stage to divert the masses’ attention from real problems as an added benefit. Reason: Just more jockeying by TPTB to get spheres of influence and areas of control locked down before things really start getting interesting, and keep the mob entertained at the same time. Any chance of that?
Arthur on Thu, 13th Mar 2014 9:29 am
I basically agree with what Davy and NRW are saying. Yes, I too expect a crash of the financial system, a debt Jubilee, substantial reduction of international trade, probably based on barter. But… There will be a life after the crash and (changing) international relations. The military will remain mobile, where Joe Sixpack/Jan Modaal will be busy scratching the potatoes from his backyard, like the Russians did between 1991-2005.
About the Ukraine… I’m pretty certain that there was no behind the scenes agreement between Obama and Putin to pull off a stunt over the Ukraine. Putin is really p***** off about the meddling of Western politicians in his backyard, precisely timed during the games in Sotchi.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Thu, 13th Mar 2014 10:00 am
I agree with Arthur here. I bet Putin was livid that his big Sochi party was almost crashed. It was bad enough having the terrorist threats.
Arthur said – About the Ukraine… I’m pretty certain that there was no behind the scenes agreement between Obama and Putin to pull off a stunt over the Ukraine. Putin is really p***** off about the meddling of Western politicians in his backyard, precisely timed during the games in Sotchi.
Arthur on Thu, 13th Mar 2014 3:31 pm
More undermining of the ‘Ukraine-Pipeline narrative’ here:
http://deepresource.wordpress.com/2014/03/13/the-organisations-behind-arseniy-yatsenyuk/
There is an old an a new version of the website of the organization of self-styled ‘prime minister’ and armed putschist Arseniy Yatsenyuk, or ‘Yats’ for short. The difference is very revealing and shows which information needs to be hidden. Also, please study the wikipedia page of Yats and more in particular his background to understand what’s going on here. It’s 1917-Petersburg, 2003-neocons-Iraq and 2004-Orange Revolution all over again. Same people, same methods: money from Wallstreet and the City, infiltration and overthrow of a sitting government, in this case even a legitimately democratically elected government.