Ukraine

[Casually Red]

even during the cold war the gas was never turned off . Once this talk of sanctions isolation and Russian ruin started there was a Sino Russian gas deal worth squillons within weeks..chinas desperate to move away from its dirty coal energy . They can actually do it and not suffer all that badly . Theres a massive alternative customer ready to take it and the deals are signed and extra pipelines on the way . Most of Europe would be ruined. n fact that could start wars.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/21/russia-30-year-400bn-gas-deal-china

400 billion s a lot of dosh . And there s likely to be further deals once the infrastructure in Siberia is in place . And the yanks could be hurt too because they may well conduct that trade in their own currencies and fuc the dollar.

Theres a lot of ways Russa can be hurt but they can seriously hurt back too . Ultimately they dont really need the west half as much as the west needs them . And theyre a people who have survived revolutions..all sorts of deprivations Hitler and Stalin . They arent going to panic over sanctions..its a fruitless exercise that wont change a single thing.

Suffering quite badly at the minute are countless farmers all over Europe whose produce is now banned in counter sanctions . Russias replacing them with Latin American and other suppliers while beefing up its own food security from the domestic market. And pointing out that if this is still going on a year later then those new suppliers will simply be regarded as the most reliable with favoured status and the former trade will never be re established. That means ruin for a lot of people already.

While Cameron and co are willy waving to do Obamas bidding

 

[tbtommyb]

Russia is courting Asian energy customers because it has a lot of reserves far away from European markets so it makes more sense to export there. They can't suddenly switch from Europe to Asia. What would happen is that they gradually export less to Europe and more to Asia, but this is driven more by the geographical distribution of reserves than by politics, though it might speed it up a little.

 

[pocketscience]

but this is driven more by the geographical distribution of reserves than by politics

Look at the timing: The first round of western sanction came in March. The second round in April. Then in May Russia & China sign a deal. Coincidence? I think not.. It's 100% politically driven.
The fact that the Siberian reserves are geographically closer to china is an added convenience which provides quicker ROIs.

 

[tbtommyb]

Look at the timing: The first round of western sanction came in March. The second round in April. Then in May Russia & China sign a deal. Coincidence? I think not.. It's 100% politically driven.
The fact that the Siberian reserves are geographically closer to china is an added convenience which provides quicker ROIs.

yeah, undoubtedly, but the fact that they are far closer to China makes it a natural deal, not the politics. Presumably Russia was forced to concede on the price. the politics are definitely accelerating things along the path they would have eventually followed. but it's not as if Russia can suddenly decide to stop exporting to europe because of politics and export everything to china instead.

 

[pocketscience]

yeah, undoubtedly, but the fact that they are far closer to China makes it a natural deal, not the politics. Presumably Russia was forced to concede on the price. the politics are definitely accelerating things along the path they would have eventually followed. but it's not as if Russia can suddenly decide to stop exporting to europe because of politics and export everything to china instead.

The Chinese built about 800kms of bridges between 2007 & 2011.
Lets assume that building bridges is a few dozen times more complex (intentionally underestimated) than sinking some wells and bolting/welding some pipes together...

They plan to be online in 2018. With a few more workers I reckon they could easily reduce that timeline.

eta
Russia could easily survive those 4 years on their current resources. On the flip side, Europe would be completely fucked

 

[DairyQueen]

I still think this idea that western Europe (except Britain) want to get in a pointless conflict with Russia is far from the truth. There will have to be a peace deal soon. If there isn't, it would be hugely destabilising, and far more to the EU than to Russia.

 

[SovietArmy]

As much I don't like it but Russia is probably is finish, the NATO bastards are strong and Russia is now capitalist society don't give fuck about people, capitalism will eat people in life.

 

[Casually Red]

Look at the timing: The first round of western sanction came in March. The second round in April. Then in May Russia & China sign a deal. Coincidence? I think not.. It's 100% politically driven.
.

and then right after that this happened..the beginning of an alternative to the World Bank IMF and global dependency on the dollar. Putin and the Chinese had a busy few months there.

http://thediplomat.com/2014/07/brics-announce-new-development-bank/

 

[tbtommyb]

The Chinese built about 800kms of bridges between 2007 & 2011.
Lets assume that building bridges is a few dozen times more complex (intentionally underestimated) than sinking some wells and bolting/welding some pipes together...

They plan to be online in 2018. With a few more workers I reckon they could easily reduce that timeline.

eta
Russia could easily survive those 4 years on their current resources. On the flip side, Europe would be completely fucked

and 800km is what, a quarter of the distance between the major gas fields in the north and west of russia? plus the cost of transit, leakage, etc.

Russia wants to export its gas in the north and west to countries in the north and west and its gas in the east to countries in the east. recent events have made the later happen faster (at a lower price for Russia), but I don't think they mean that Russia can reorientate all its infrastructure towards asia.

 

[pocketscience]

and 800km is what, a quarter of the distance between the major gas fields in the north and west of russia? plus the cost of transit, leakage, etc.

I don't think you quite grasp the enormity & complexity of some of the projects china is engaged in at the moment, let alone the speed in which they do it.
Take the Beijing-Shanghai High Speed rail line. It's 1300km long and 87% elevated, has 244 bridges, one alone being 164km long, another viaduct 114km long. All has a lovely shiny high speed rail with junction boxes, signals, lighting etc, shiny new trains actually traverse it too.
A gas pipeline from Russia wont be giving their engineers any sleepless nights.

Russia wants to export its gas in the north and west to countries in the north and west and its gas in the east to countries in the east. recent events have made the later happen faster (at a lower price for Russia), but I don't think they mean that Russia can reorientate all its infrastructure towards asia.

I'm no Garry Kasparov, but I guess the Russian strategy would go something like: Eastern gas goes east to asia and western gas stays domestic, whilst Europe freezes until it stops dicking around with sanctions.

 

[tbtommyb]

I don't think you quite grasp the enormity & complexity of some of the projects china is engaged in at the moment, let alone the speed in which they do it.
Take the Beijing-Shanghai High Speed rail line. It's 1300km long and 87% elevated, has 244 bridges, one alone being 164km long, another viaduct 114km long. All has a lovely shiny high speed rail with junction boxes, signals, lighting etc, shiny new trains actually traverse it too.
A gas pipeline from Russia wont be giving their engineers any sleepless nights.

True, but would gas still be economic after paying for infrastructure crossing the width of Russia?

I'm no Garry Kasparov, but I guess the Russian strategy would go something like: Eastern gas goes east to asia and western gas stays domestic, whilst Europe freezes until it stops dicking around with sanctions.

but that won't work if the gas exported east is at a significant discount.

 

[Casually Red]

I'm no Garry Kasparov, but I guess the Russian strategy would go something like: Eastern gas goes east to asia and western gas stays domestic, whilst Europe freezes until it stops dicking around with sanctions.

it wont plan to totally cut off its western supply . A total freeze out would leave no room for splitting the west. What Putin ultimately wants is western europe to make a choice between beng nice neighbors with a reliable gas supply for their industries or US poodles with a real chance of no gas supply and fucked industry and economy due to ill advised geo political adventurism. Self interest will prevail in some quarters once they realise Russia isnt going to be walked over. Hopefully not too late though . it took 3 months from the start of ths crisis for the EU to acknowledge Russia has legitimate economic interests in Ukraine. 3 months to acknowledge a massive pipeline trade deals tax breaks joint industry etc. And a whopping unpaid gas bill . Both gas and commonsense could well be in short supply .

 

[not-bono-ever]

erm..have you seen the state of some of these chinese civil engineering projects? they may be completed ahead of scheduele, but some are rotten

 

[pocketscience]

True, but would gas still be economic after paying for infrastructure crossing the width of Russia?

The Kovytka fields are only about 1000km away from Beijing. That's a shorter distance than the Nord Stream pipeline which incidentally only took 18 months to physically put together, and that's mostly under water!

but that won't work if the gas exported east is at a significant discount.

depends how significant the discount is. 400Bn buys a lot of Chinese produce.

 

[pocketscience]

erm..have you seen the state of some of these chinese civil engineering projects? they may be completed ahead of scheduele, but some are rotten

I have. I've been there a few times. Been involved in projects. The more recent infrastructure projects are up to, if not better than western standards. Rogers, Foster, Arup are falling over themselves trying to get contracts out there (just don't mention the millennium footbridge).

Sorry for derail...
Someone get us back on topic ffs

 

[Casually Red]

Someone get us back on topic ffs

right well..looks lke the Ukrainian army is collapsing all over . The most important ingredient..morale..seems to have dropped out of them for now at least.

Ukrainian Defense Minister Valery Geletey has completely lost the plot taking bullshit to a new level and is claiming Russia has threatened to use nuclear weapons on them . Also warning of a new phase in the war were tens of thousands will die. Claims the rebels have been defeated too and this is Russia invading.

Kremlin responding with disbelief such a clown has been allowed to be a defence minister by anyone ..say he needs scrutinized by experts...not military ones. Worth noting theres demonstrations calling for his head in Kiev due to the massive failures on his watch

http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukrain...-would-leave-dozens-of-thousands-dead/5398798

rebels are claiming if the junta recognizes their regions special status and agrees to tals they wont try and take any more districts...presumably kharkiv and Odessa ...and will commit to retaining some links with Ukraine .... Russia calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire .

one ray of hope for the future seems to be rebs seem happy enough to let troops withdraw through humanitarian corridors thereby avoiding further pointless slaughter..prisoner swaps going on too . could be worse

 

[elbows]

Look at the timing: The first round of western sanction came in March. The second round in April. Then in May Russia & China sign a deal. Coincidence? I think not.. It's 100% politically driven.
The fact that the Siberian reserves are geographically closer to china is an added convenience which provides quicker ROIs.

100% politically driven my arse. The deal was 10 years in the making, not something cooked up in response to the Ukraine situation. It is completely in tune with Chinas approach to securing resources around the globe, and other countries making the most of this.

Politics plays a part, and may have affected the timing of the deal being finally sealed. But even thats hardly just about Ukraine, with 'western' relations with Russia having come under quite a strain over places like Syria well before the Ukrainian situation entered the openly antagonistic phase.

 

[pocketscience]

100% politically driven my arse. The deal was 10 years in the making, not something cooked up in response to the Ukraine situation. It is completely in tune with Chinas approach to securing resources around the globe, and other countries making the most of this.

Politics plays a part, and may have affected the timing of the deal being finally sealed. But even thats hardly just about Ukraine, with 'western' relations with Russia having come under quite a strain over places like Syria well before the Ukrainian situation entered the openly antagonistic phase.

Depends how you want to see it. The 10 year figure actually lends to the argument it was politically driven.
Negotiations failed for 10 years because they were economically driven. Then suddenly a done deal after a recent major political shift.

 

[elbows]

It wasn't 10 years of failure. Milestones happened in 2004, 2009 and 2013.

eg: http://www.gazprom.com/press/news/2013/february/article157027/

 

[ViolentPanda]

and 800km is what, a quarter of the distance between the major gas fields in the north and west of russia? plus the cost of transit, leakage, etc.

Russia wants to export its gas in the north and west to countries in the north and west and its gas in the east to countries in the east. recent events have made the later happen faster (at a lower price for Russia), but I don't think they mean that Russia can reorientate all its infrastructure towards asia.

Plus China have been sensible in diversifying their sources, as they've also been undertaking joint ventures with Iran for gas and oil storage, refinement and shipment (plus weighing in on the infrastructure side, too) for at least the last 10 years - something Iran have been very pleased about, as it gives them an unblockadeable outlet (i.e. not reliant on trans-shipment throught the Straits of Hormuz).

 

[pocketscience]

It wasn't 10 years of failure. Milestones happened in 2004, 2009 and 2013.

eg: http://www.gazprom.com/press/news/2013/february/article157027/

From that link

Gazprom and CNPC agreed to step up the negotiations on Russian natural gas supply via the eastern route with a view to sign a gas purchase and sale contract with a validity period until 2013....
In the nearest future the negotiations will be continued...
Currently, Gazprom and CNPC are negotiating the commercial parameters...

You said yourself: "Politics plays a part, and may have affected the timing of the deal being finally sealed. "
My view is that when sanctions were tabled by the west, for Russia that part became an entirety.

 

[articul8]

isn't http://www.globalresearch.ca a conspiraloon site?

 

[tbtommyb]

The Kovytka fields are only about 1000km away from Beijing. That's a shorter distance than the Nord Stream pipeline which incidentally only took 18 months to physically put together, and that's mostly under water!

Yes, that's exactly the kind of field I'm talking about Russia wants to export them to china because they're near China. It wouldn't be feasible to export to china from the super massive fields up in the far north west. But then those fields are in decline and many of the new big fields are in the Russian far east. So yes it's politically driven but it's also very much a result of the changing structure of the Russian hydrocarbons industry and I think it is wrong to present Russia as having a free hand to choose who to export to. They are limited by their geography in part.

 

[tbtommyb]

Plus China have been sensible in diversifying their sources, as they've also been undertaking joint ventures with Iran for gas and oil storage, refinement and shipment (plus weighing in on the infrastructure side, too) for at least the last 10 years - something Iran have been very pleased about, as it gives them an unblockadeable outlet (i.e. not reliant on trans-shipment throught the Straits of Hormuz).

Also less noticed is the Central Asian countries' attempts to have an export route not wholly dependent on Russia, where China again has been active

 

[ViolentPanda]

Also less noticed is the Central Asian countries' attempts to have an export route not wholly dependent on Russia, where China again has been active

Although Russia keep trying to gate-crash any arrangements made between the Central Asian states and China, using the old "security" leverage.

 

[kebabking]

Although Russia keep trying to gate-crash any arrangements made between the Central Asian states and China, using the old "security" leverage.

yes, it does look very familiar doesn't it?

 

[DairyQueen]

Although Russia keep trying to gate-crash any arrangements made between the Central Asian states and China, using the old "security" leverage.

I thought Russia and Kazhakstan effectively negotiate together with China, and that they are all in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. I think China and Russia will move a lot closer together, and that China welcomes what is going on.

 

[Casually Red]

isn't http://www.globalresearch.ca a conspiraloon site?

less conspiraloon than the BBC ..which incidentally carries the very same story . The very notcable link at the very top of the page makes clear the report comes from a Russian news site

plus the whole fucking thing is up on the defence minsters Facebook page...you whiny little cunt cribbing away there with your little face scrunched up and your ratty wee nose in the air acting superior with no fucking analysis and just whinging.

 

[Casually Red]

anyways...liberal whingers aside..this report on a WikiLeaks release of a cable from then Amabassador to Russia William Burns certainly sheds a lot of light on the obviousness of US and NATO intentions in Ukraine and the deliberate nature of the chaos . The current fiasco was foreseen by the current deputy US secretary of State..Burns..as far back as 2008 when he gave his analysis to the US administration regarding forseeable major destabilization and civil strife around Ukrainian moves towards NATO .

Today deputy Secretary of State Burns is John kerrys key advisor on both Ukraine and Russia. He also very much has Obamas ear .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Joseph_Burns

some excerpts of the leaked 2008 cable from Burns

“In Ukraine, these include fears that the issue could potentially split the country in two, leading to violence or even, some claim, civil war, which would force Russia to decide whether to intervene — a decision Russia does not want to have to face.”

“He disputed arguments that Nato was an appropriate mechanism for helping to strengthen democratic governments: ‘Russia understood that Nato was in search of a new mission, but there was a growing tendency for new members to do and say whatever they wanted simply because they were under the Nato umbrella — eg attempts of some new member countries to ‘rewrite history and glorify fascists’.”


Moreover, in a government press briefing on January 22 a spokesman stressed: “that Russia was bound with Ukraine by bilateral obligations set forth in the 1997 Treaty on Friendship, Co-operation and Partnership in which both parties undertook to ‘refrain from participation in or support of any actions capable of prejudicing the security of the other’,” further noting: “Ukraine’s likely integration into Nato would seriously complicate the many-sided Russian-Ukrainian relations,” leading to Russia ‘considering appropriate measures’.”

Ukraine and Georgia’s Nato aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region.
“Not only does Russia perceive encirclement and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests.”

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-4797-Nyet,-means-nyet-Russias-red-line-on-Nato#.VAZfQ6O9Z3w

so..this is the guy advising them at the very top today telling them this back in 2008...they new perfectly well from years back exactly what was likely to happen...and thats not even within the context of a coup but a legit government. And they spurned all compromises..all diplomacy..all talks...all the stuff Russia repeatedly pleaded for... and persued confrontation and mass suppression instead . in the full knowledge beforehand of where it would lead.

Why ??

Russias response to whats happening has to be viewed in the context the US has knowingly and deliberately created chaos in Ukraine fully aware of the consequences beforehand ....and Russia knows this because Russia told them years ago .

 

[brogdale]

BBC reporting "permanent ceasefire" has been negotiated.