Military Review

What is good for Russians is good for Americans: a new gas truth

26
The administration of D. Trump continues the policy of the B. Obama administration in the gas sector. The White House’s actions are directed against the Russian project Nord Stream 2. However, other foreign experts consider such a policy harmful to Washington. Opposition to the Russian project is not only a waste of time and effort, but also contrary to US national interests.




The administration of Donald Trump dissociated himself from the policies of his predecessors in the energy field, but one aspect was fully preserved: Washington’s vehement opposition to the Russian gas pipeline Nord Stream 2 (from Russia to Germany). This is what Brenda Scheffer writes in an influential subscription magazine. "Foreign Policy".

The Barack Obama administration opposed the Nord Stream 2 project, and the George W. Bush administration opposed the Nord Stream project (before it began operating in the 2011 year). Thus, there is a continuity of Washington’s foreign gas policy.

The other day, while in Warsaw, the US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson actually supported this position. According to him, the United States believes that the Russian pipeline "undermines the overall energy security and stability of Europe."

The new pipeline along with Nord Stream will be able to provide a quarter of the annual import of natural gas to Europe. And this Russian project, that is, the second “stream”, was therefore specifically identified in the US sanctions policy towards Russia, adopted by the Congress in August 2017 of the year.

Such a position has always created for the United States a "contradiction" in relations with Russia. According to some commentators, this may seem like a reason enough to approve a policy.

The American opposition to the second “stream”, that is, the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, is bipartisan: it is supported by both Republicans and Democrats. And at the same time, Brenda Schaeffer points out, this kind of strategy is wrong. Ultimately, when Washington puts sticks in the wheels of the Russian “stream”, it not only wastes time and energy, but also naturally harms ... American interests!

This conclusion confirms a number of facts. First, the United States should have thought before turning Europe into political battlefields: after all, Europe is an American ally. And if we object to the policy of European states, then only where Washington has in mind the really important vital interests and where he is able to win. But the “northern streams” are crucial for Berlin, and Washington’s decision to Berlin’s politicians “not to shake,” says Scheffer. In Germany, the pipeline itself and the expansion of direct gas supplies from Russia have “broad political support,” the author recalls. This is how it is: the United States cannot prevent the export of Russian gas to Europe.

Attempts energy sanctions were before. In 1981, the administration of Ronald Reagan imposed restrictions on American and European companies involved in building gas pipelines from the Soviet Union to France and West Germany. This led to friction between the US and Europe. In the end, Reagan refused sanctions. He refused when it became clear: Europe will do what it wants, despite the “American opposition”. The current US politicians would do well to read the declassified CIA report from 1982 of the year, where it is written in black and white in what way Europe views energy trade with the Russians. Since that year, nothing has really changed.

Secondly, continues B.Sheffer, Europe needs more and more gas. Its sources may be different, but Russia is also among the suppliers. Indeed, over the past 2, gas imports to Europe have increased significantly. And if economic growth in Europe continues, gas imports will increase, despite an increase in the share of renewable energy sources. It is also necessary to take into account the closure of nuclear power plants in Germany (the latter will be closed in 2022). Additional gas supplies to Europe will also contribute to the reorientation of the country from coal to natural gas, since the latter has less impact on the environment, including climate change.

As a result, the security of Europe and its energy supply are directly related to the supply of Russian gas. Europe can not reduce them. Russian gas (alas, for the USA) cannot be replaced (at least in large part) by the export of liquefied natural gas. Many countries in Europe, which are more dependent on Russian gas imports, are landlocked and cannot access LNG terminals. Moreover, even the states that have built facilities for importing LNG (for example, Lithuania) are ready to further import gas from Russia: the price gap between natural pipeline gas and LNG is large.

Third, Washington’s attempts to pressure Russia undermine European energy security because they create relative instability. The Russian state-owned concern Gazprom has a clear commercial goal: to avoid instability wherever possible. Ukraine is a sad example here. Today, about half of gas supplies to Europe go through Ukraine. And over the past two decades, gas supplies to Europe have been interrupted several times due to conflicts between Moscow and Kiev. One of the most common causes of conflict: Kiev does not pay for gas. And the expansion of the Nord Stream gas pipeline would really mean greater gas stability for Germany: it would simply replace the transit through Ukraine with these routes.

Russia, the author further recalls, provides about 35% of German gas needs. Germany is the largest gas export market for Russia (22% share). In addition, German-Russian trade and cooperation are important for stability in Europe. In fact, they serve as the cornerstone for establishing closer relations between East and West. Therefore, Washington should coordinate with Berlin, and not break relations.

In order to hinder the Nord Stream 2 project, other politicians in Brussels, supported by Washington, are considering the issue of EU energy trading rules: they say, let these rules apply not only in Europe, but also on imported pipelines located outside Europe. Ultimately, such a position would damage the security of Europe and would siege gas suppliers who seek to export their goods to the European market. In addition, EU gas trade laws have been developed for trade and consumer relations, and not for gas production and transit projects. Moreover, the introduction of new EU gas trade laws for imported pipelines before gas arrives in the EU could improve Russia's position in various projects related to the supply of gas of non-Russian origin. EU laws would allow third-party access to these pipelines, which would open the door for Russia to join these projects.

In fact, we note that the Americans have already lost this gas war. First, Washington under Trump ruined relations with the EU, and especially with Germany. Secondly, the “Nord Stream 2” starts this year. This was announced by the executive director of the company "Nord Stream 2 AG" Matthias Warnig in an interview with the newspaper "Welt". According to him, the company expects to receive permits and proceed to the construction of the Nord Stream 2 in 2018.

“My work,” quotes him. Kommersant, - is to provide a start in the 2018 year. We have technically and virtually completed all the tasks and are going to mobilize the contract partners. ”

The businessman said that permits for the construction of the pipeline were received from Germany and Sweden. There remains Finland, and then "will have to see what decision Denmark will take."

As for the United States, then, according to Warnig, in Washington “they hardly understand the European energy market and European pricing, but all attention is focused on the threat from Russia”.

For the Russian “Gazprom”, the new “stream” is economically beneficial not only because of the bypass of the unstable factor of Ukraine. The positive effect of the transfer of gas volumes from the Ukrainian route to the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline for Gazprom will express totaling over 1 billion dollars a year. In essence, Gazprom will start paying the transport tariff to itself. An additional economic plus will appear due to the greater efficiency of the new pipeline system: a shorter distance, higher pressure in the pipes.

And another blow to Trump - indirect. More precisely, it is a blow to the European LNG market. It will soon be inflicted by the same Germans together with the Russians.

On evaluation the German consulting company Energy Research & Scenarios, when launching Nord Stream 2, the EU will need less LNG, which is now being purchased from Norway and North Africa. As a result, LNG prices will fall.

Mr Trump, how's the mood?

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
26 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. ul_vitalii
    ul_vitalii 12 February 2018 15: 34
    +8
    Yes, everyone understands that this is beneficial, they just need to overcome the psychological barrier and think about their real energy security.
    1. Bastinda
      Bastinda 12 February 2018 16: 59
      +1
      They think it, they have options, and we? We need to sell gas and oil before the cut, and that's why we are building the Nord Stream 2, Turkish Stream. Naturally, they squeeze out the best conditions, and achieve them, but maybe this is a multi-pathway from GDP? laughing
    2. Evdokim
      Evdokim 12 February 2018 17: 08
      +1
      Quote: ul_vitalii
      Yes, everyone understands that it is profitable.

      The Germans know how to count denyushku, and that means a second pipe to be, and transit fees
      for Ukraine and Poland not to be, or to be, but much sooo much less, that’s screeching and screaming. hi
    3. siberalt
      siberalt 14 February 2018 08: 43
      0
      If the "Nord Stream" is contrary to the national interests of the United States, then the national interests of the United States contradict not only the whole of Europe, but also the world. winked
  2. Lexus
    Lexus 12 February 2018 15: 49
    +3
    I don’t know how the others are, but I am against the desire of the government and the oligarchs to quickly sell off natural resources. If this continues, Russia, after a protracted "resuscitation", has one way - to the "cemetery".
    1. Sling cutter
      Sling cutter 12 February 2018 16: 01
      +2
      Quote: lexus
      I don’t know how the others are, but I am against the desire of the government and the oligarchs to quickly sell off natural resources. If this continues, Russia, after a protracted "resuscitation", has one way - to the "cemetery".

      The thing is that these thimbles do not know how and do not want more.
      After them, our descendants will be left with a desert polluted with radioactive waste with hemp instead of taiga and holes from developed wells. am
      1. Lexus
        Lexus 12 February 2018 16: 19
        +1
        The thing is that these thimbles do not know how and do not want more.

        They receive income that they appoint for themselves, or "godfather" unfastens, and not according to the financial and economic results of activity. If it is deserved, then the Sechin, Millers, Shuvalovs, on the contrary, should pay extra to the "cash desk" while they are conducting "logging" activities in "places not so remote."
    2. Cube123
      Cube123 12 February 2018 16: 16
      +4
      Quote: lexus
      I don’t know how the others are, but I am against the desire of the government and the oligarchs to quickly sell off natural resources. If this continues, Russia, after a protracted "resuscitation", has one way - to the "cemetery".

      Alexei, you just don't know chemistry well. Gas refers to renewable resources. Almost any process decay organics leads to the production of combustible gases. And if you do not produce and sell gas, then it will simply be useless to migrate to the surface on your own and pollute the atmosphere. In order for it not to pollute the atmosphere, it needs to be BURNED. Then it turns into CO2 and water. So it’s better to get money for it. And CO2 will go to the growth of new organics.
      1. Lexus
        Lexus 12 February 2018 16: 29
        +1
        It would be nice to compare proven reserves with statistics of their increase / decrease. At the same time, visit numerous Russian settlements, which in the XXI century are not covered by gasification.
        1. Cube123
          Cube123 12 February 2018 16: 31
          +5
          So go in for gasification. Who is bothering you? To grind with tongue, not toss bags tongue
      2. Evdokim
        Evdokim 12 February 2018 16: 55
        +4
        Quote: Cube123
        So it’s better to get money for it. And CO2 will go to the growth of new organics.

        Gas for the environment is much better than German brown coal, it is much more convenient for industry to produce gas, there is a demand for gas, Russia has reserves, so why is it good to disappear, from the excess gas begins to make mysterious holes on the surface of the tundra in permafrost. hi
  3. Vard
    Vard 12 February 2018 16: 03
    0
    In this regard, the question ... If everything is so good ... Why Gazprom shares are so low ... And why dividends pay a penny ... Compared to Western gas suppliers ...
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 13 February 2018 07: 28
      +5
      Quote: Vard
      Why Gazprom shares are so low

      what And the fact that the number of shares has exceeded one billion and amounts to 23 673 512 900 pieces, is it not for fate to find out?
      Quote: Vard
      why dividends pay a penny ...

      Well, somehow you are very soft! That's when you declare that, Gasprom pays dividends to the oligarchs at 20% per share, and throws ordinary investors, it will be cool !!!
      From December 17 to January of 18, liquidity of shares jumped by 16,5%, dividends for 16 year 6,67%, if you do not like the interest rate you can invest in Mail Bank at 7,3%, your choice and no one will shoot you drives to Gasprom wink
  4. viktorch
    viktorch 12 February 2018 17: 54
    +1
    we’ll sell everything to white owners, gas, oil, forest, cattle organs,
    blacks work day and night, build a gas-gas flow,
    Putin, Sechin, Abramovich is our everything, they have a lot of money because they work well, praise them and work more

    ps this is not a stream of consciousness, this is a summary compilation of all such articles praising Russia terminally ill with capitalism.
    1. KVU-NSVD
      KVU-NSVD 12 February 2018 20: 14
      +6
      this is a summary compilation of all such articles praising Russia with a terminally ill capitalism.
      What you, my friend, a compiler. Soul hurts for Russia? Then at least write the name of your Motherland with a capital letter ... Although of course, write about
      we’ll sell everything to white owners, gas, oil, forest, cattle organs,
      blacks work day and night, build a gas-gas flow,
      simpler and louder ...
    2. Serg65
      Serg65 13 February 2018 07: 31
      +4
      Quote: viktorch
      we’ll sell everything to white owners, gas, oil, forest, organs cattle,

      My friend, it’s interesting, when writing the last word in your tirade, many people immediately delete it, but you don’t?
      What did the VO team write about the fact that they are white and fluffy?
  5. Ber
    Ber 12 February 2018 20: 38
    0
    What is good for Russians is good for Americans: a new gas truth


    This is a joke? Or someone in the editorial office let the gas go, that the author’s eyes began to water, and he began to confuse the words.
  6. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 12 February 2018 22: 05
    +1
    At present, the system of “alternative supplies” - “Power of Siberia”, Turkish Stream, “Nord Stream - 2” and also Yamal-LNG, and Sakhalin-LNG will not allow, for example, China, to try to “twist” us hands. In a friendly way ... Nothing, we will fight with Matrasia. And not just for gas markets.
  7. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 13 February 2018 06: 05
    +1
    Secondly, Nord Stream 2 will start already this year. This was announced by the Executive Director of Nord Stream 2 AG, Matthias Warnig, in an interview with the Welt newspaper. According to him, the company expects to obtain permits and begin construction of Nord Stream 2 in 2018.

    "Expect to receive" is not at all "receive." “Chicks are considered in the fall,” is such a proverb in Russia. And in general, the article is nonsense of a madman. For Americans, the main thing is money and markets for products. Europe is a huge "market" of sales from which the United States needs to kick out competitors and clear ways to promote its products, that's all.
    1. Serg65
      Serg65 13 February 2018 07: 33
      +6
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      Europe is a huge "market" of sales from which the United States needs to kick out competitors and clear ways to promote its products, that's all.

      laughing And that’s why the United States buys LNG in Russia and sells it in Europe?
      1. Monster_Fat
        Monster_Fat 13 February 2018 08: 12
        +2
        And that’s why the United States buys LNG in Russia and sells it in Europe?

        Is funny And it’s funny to me, why the Russians don’t sell it directly, would the fat be much “fatter”? Oh yes, the “second” and “third” energy packages are in the way, lobbied by the “sixes” of the USA and the “Baltic Poles” .... This is precisely the classic example of the struggle for sales markets
        1. Serg65
          Serg65 13 February 2018 08: 35
          +4
          Quote: Monster_Fat
          This is just a classic example of the struggle for markets

          what For sales markets of what? Russian gas?
          1. Monster_Fat
            Monster_Fat 13 February 2018 09: 15
            0
            Already not funny .... winked
            1. Serg65
              Serg65 13 February 2018 09: 25
              +4
              Quote: Monster_Fat
              It's not funny anymore.

              You are right, my friend Monster! There’s not much funny here, more interesting wink ! Buying from an outcast and reselling to suckers is a really interesting fight for sales markets! Moreover, two win, and the third (buyer) naively believes in the terrible fate of the first, left without a sales market - classic wiring laughing ! Are you talking about some kind of classic struggle for markets bully , I beg of you!
              1. Monster_Fat
                Monster_Fat 13 February 2018 09: 57
                +1
                1-a politically far-fetched “restriction” is introduced on the competitor’s trade, 2 is bought (no matter who (in this case, the cheapest offer from Russia) is the main thing at a lower cost) the goods are resold to the buyer, 3-gradually the buyer is accustomed to the new ( increased price) and to a new supplier, the infrastructure for a new type of product is changing or is being created (LNG is different from “pipe” gas), 4 are new political and economic conditions being set for the LNG seller (Russia) –– do not fulfill it? no, we will transfer to another supplier, etc. market now you don’t have it anymore .... Somewhere like that
  8. Some kind of compote
    Some kind of compote 13 February 2018 14: 13
    +15
    If they start shale projects (I don’t know if this is true)
    A lot of things will fall into the category of theory