Russia to stop gas supplies to Europe (1/4/22)

[yield]

Nord Stream insurers deny policies covered war risks in UK lawsuit

MOSCOW/LONDON, April 18 (Reuters) - Nord Stream's insurers have denied that their policies provide cover for gas pipelines damaged by blasts in 2022 because the damage was caused by war, in their written defence to a lawsuit filed at London's High Court.
Nord Stream is seeking more than 400 million euros ($427 million) from its insurers over the explosions which ruptured pipelines designed to transport Russian gas to Germany.

It named Lloyd's Insurance Company and Arch Insurance (EU) DAC (ACGL.O)
Sweden – which in February dropped its investigation – and Germany have both found traces of explosives relating to the incident that ruptured the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 pipelines, suggesting it was a deliberate act.

In their written defence, dated April 8 and first reported by Kommersant daily on Thursday, the insurers said Nord Stream's policy did not cover damage "directly or indirectly" resulting from war, military actions or the detonation of explosives.
The insurers also stated that the policy does not cover any damage which happened "under the order of any government".
"The defendants will rely on ... the fact that the explosion damage could only have – or, at least, was more likely than not to have – been inflicted by or under the order of a government," the insurers' lawyer said.

 

[yield]

Polish leader urges Nord Stream patrons to 'keep quiet' as pipeline mystery returns to spotlight

Poland's prime minister has reacted to reports that revived speculation about who blew up the Nord Stream pipelines in 2022.

apnews.com

Polish leader urges Nord Stream patrons to ‘keep quiet’ as pipeline mystery returns to spotlight

WARSAW, Poland (AP) — Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk on Saturday reacted to reports that revived questions about who blew up the Nord Stream pipelines in 2022, saying the initiators of the gas pipeline project should “apologize and keep quiet.” That comment came after one of his deputies denied a claim that Warsaw was partly responsible for its damage.

 

[MrCurry]

It sure seems like there’s a lot about nordstream which is not in the public sphere.

Perhaps Germany’s position as the biggest contributor to Ukrainian aid reflects them having been forced to accept their share of responsibility for causing the situation which led to the Russian invasion. Or is it heresy to say that?

 

[Pickman's model]

It sure seems like there’s a lot about nordstream which is not in the public sphere.

Perhaps Germany’s position as the biggest contributor to Ukrainian aid reflects them having been forced to accept their share of responsibility for causing the situation which led to the Russian invasion. Or is it heresy to say that?

It's not heresy but it requires rather more in the way of evidence not to be dismissed with scoffing and disparagement

 

[MrCurry]

It's not heresy but it requires rather more in the way of evidence not to be dismissed with scoffing and disparagement

If the hypothesis is that it was wrangling over Nordstream that’s behind the Ukraine invasion and that this has been kept out of public view by both sides, then by definition I’m going to have trouble proving it as the evidence will not be in the public domain. Perhaps you should ask Donald Tusk, as he seems to have things he wishes he could say about the role of Germany in the pipeline project and problems it may have caused.

The chronology might be the best way of looking for links, circumstantial though that might be in evidential terms. And bear in mind I’m not a Russia analyst, I’m just Joe Public noticing a remarkable correlation between events in the history of Nordstream 2 and the build up to the Ukraine invasion.


January 2021 US sanctions against NS2 construction vessel
March 21 Rus troop build up then in Apr 21 withdrawal
May 21 us waives sanctions
Sept 2021 NS2 complete
Nov 21 NS2 certification delayed
7/2/22 RU build up UKR border
23/2/22 Germany cancels NS2 certification
24/2/22 invasion of Ukraine

Every step of the way it seems that setbacks in the Nordstream 2 plan were followed by a ramping up of the Ukraine situation. Was the May 21 waiving of sanctions the price being paid for talking Putin into pulling his troops back in Apr? The ultimate invasion proceeded literally the day after Germany announced measures to make it all but impossible for pipeline certification to proceed for a very long time.

If one were to go further back one could speculate a link between Putin’s much publicised absence from public view the year after the annexation of Crimea and the subsequent reanimation of the NS2 project which had been on hold due to sanctions relating to crimea. Did Putin in March 2015 finalise and sign off the plans for completing project Ukraine and the first results of that were the military exercises which began directly after his first public appearance and the June announcement of NS2 recommending? Maybe the Ukraine plan was to forge ahead with isolating and weakening Ukraine by cutting it off from gas transit fees and if that failed then it would be “send in the troops”?

March 2015 Putin returns to view
June 2015 NS2 to go ahead

Nothing is smoking gun, but it is a lot more persuasive to me as a motivation than “NATO is threatening us”!

 

[yield]

Explainer: What happens when Russian gas to Europe via Ukraine stops?
October 8, 2024

MOSCOW, Oct 8 (Reuters) - Ukraine will not extend its gas transit agreement with Russia after it expires after Dec. 31 2024, Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal told Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico.
Here is what happens if gas is turned off and who will be affected most.

HOW BIG ARE THE VOLUMES?

Russian gas supplies to Europe via Ukraine are relatively small. Russia shipped about 15 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas via Ukraine in 2023 - only 8% of peak Russian gas flows to Europe via various routes in 2018-2019.
Russia spent half a century building its European gas market share, which at its peak stood at 35%.

Moscow lost its share to rivals such as Norway, the United States and Qatar since the invasion of Ukraine in 2022, prompting the EU to cut its dependence on Russian gas.

EU gas prices rallied in 2022 to record highs after the loss of Russian supplies. The rally won't be repeated given modest volumes and a small number of customers for the remaining volumes, according to EU officials and traders.

UKRAINIAN ROUTE

The Soviet-era Urengoy-Pomary-Uzhgorod pipeline brings gas from Siberia via the town of Sudzha - now under control of Ukrainian military forces - in Russia's Kursk region. It then flows through Ukraine to Slovakia.

In Slovakia, the gas pipeline splits into branches going to the Czech Republic and Austria.

Austria still receives most of its gas via Ukraine, while Russia accounts for around two-thirds of Hungary's gas imports.

Slovakia takes around 3 bcm from energy giant Gazprom per year, also about two-thirds of its needs.

Czech Republic almost completely cut gas imports from the east last year, but has started taking gas from Russia in 2024.

Most other Russian gas routes to Europe are shut including Yamal-Europe via Belarus and Nord Stream under the Baltic.

The only other operational Russian gas pipeline route to Europe is the Blue Stream and TurkStream to Turkey under the Black Sea. Turkey sends some Russian gas volumes onward to Europe including to Hungary.

 

[TopCat]

Explainer: What happens when Russian gas to Europe via Ukraine stops?
October 8, 2024

How do Slovakia feel about this? Are they about to face elections?!

 

[TopCat]

Reuters report on Slovakia and their views on gas supplies

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/slovakia-says-it-has-strong-interest-maintaining-transit-russian-oil-gas-via-2024-10-03/

 

[Dogsauce]

Slovakia had elections in the last couple of years, with a little help from Orban they’ve got Russia-friendly nationalists in power and like Orban have been obstructive to Ukraine, although they supply a lot of ammunition to Ukraine which they are paid for. Fico (who survived a recent assassination attempt) has to balance keeping Russia happy (for the political sponsorship) with not pissing off Ukraine enough that they shut off the gas. If that gas is going off anyway maybe he’ll no longer need to do that, although there is a domestic risk if the gas goes and he hasn’t made enough concessions to persuade Ukraine to continue the contract.

I guess there is also likely to be an effect when Trumo gets in, as if he as expected throws Ukraine under the bus it’ll change a lot of relationships in the region.