Military Review

Fight for Europe

32
In the past few years, all have not ceased passion for the construction of one of the most scandalous branches of the gas routes of Europe under the name "Nord Stream - 2". Let us try to understand what lies behind this "war for resources" and how this is reflected in the distribution of geopolitical forces in the Middle East arena.


It is no secret to the existence of the saying "Who owns information, he owns the world." However, back in the days of "young America" ​​another principle became clear: "Who owns the resources, he owns the world." Already someone, and the United States, which has built up its "power" on plundering the resources of the North America century untouched until 17, is unlikely to dispute this statement.

Since the beginning of the 20 century, the United States waged a fierce struggle for the right to control resources on other continents, and only a person who does not understand geopolitics can object to this conclusion. And if earlier it was expressed in the ability of the United States to trade profitably, then with the growth of "military power" of the United States, the ambitions of overseas "partners" began to grow, and they began to openly abuse military force.

You can list for a long time the list of countries where the US invaded "politically" (using revolutions and regime changes), or with the help of military force, if the more budgetary and less bloody first scenario "did not work."

In the process of conquering world resources outside the country, 1989-2000 became the "golden era" of the United States. Having lost a strong geopolitical rival in the face of the USSR and against the background of China’s still lacking economic and military power, the US government, in alliance with transnational corporations, could completely and cheaply overcome local dissatisfaction of the local population of oil and gas exporting countries and take control of the most important hydrocarbon deposits and arteries of the planet.

Always for the United States were the most attractive areas of oil and gas arteries between the Russian Federation and the EU. They had large reserves of hydrocarbons, powerful volumes of pumping, already completed gas transmission system (hereinafter referred to as GTS). It was necessary only to take it all under control. And it succeeded.

On the territory of the Russian Federation, many companies were established that produced hydrocarbons in different parts of the country and drove them to the solvent EU, which also experienced its “development boom” against the background of the USSR’s loss of its markets both in Europe and in other countries.

In the open access there is a huge variety of estimates and economic calculations, on the basis of which you can find the final "profit" received by the United States from the commercialization of the formerly former state GTS USSR, which for us, the inhabitants of the largest country in the world, is expressed as a "loss" or "under-received profit".

With the change of power in the Russian Federation in 2000, the government of the Russian Federation "understood" that the main issue of restoring the sovereignty of the Russian Federation is to regain control over the export of resources, but the sharp "nationalization" of large energy companies could only contribute to a sharp outflow of capital and investment abroad, which it is quite likely that it would lead to a decrease in the investment climate in Russia, which would have a pitiful effect on an overly credited country. Moreover, many branches of the country simply “laid down” in the 90s and demanded the arrival of foreign investments and technologies.

A different method was chosen: the Russian Federation began to buy up private oil companies, and if there were such legal opportunities, then freeze their activities with all fields bringing the company to bankruptcy and acquiring it for a pittance with part of the GTS and fields. And the point here is not in the “raider” seizure, but rather in the reluctance of the old owners of these companies to fulfill the new requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation (we recall Yukos). By the way, many private traders adopted new laws of the Russian Federation in the field of regulating the export of resources and called them acceptable.

Buying small companies, the Russian Federation introduced them to Gazprom, increasing the share of its shares in this corporation. The main task was to bring the stake to the "control". And it succeeded. After receiving the "decisive vote" in this corporation, Russia gained the right to a one-man decision on the "policy" of this corporation. Gazprom’s policy, by the way, has changed dramatically, the “competitiveness strategy” entered into action, and the company put other gas producers under such conditions that their survival outside this corporation became impossible, which led, in fact, to the fact that the state received a controlling stake over all participants of the gas market in Russia. This was done not with the help of laws, but with the help of price dumping, which put other companies on the level of profitability below profitability. Everything is legal, pure business.

Thus, the gas market of the Russian Federation was returned to the control of the state, although today a decent share of Gazprom still belongs to other countries. However, the United States was removed from the "scheme, the most pernicious and shameless player, which deprived them of their right to vote in matters of gas supplies from the Russian Federation to the EU within Russia. This is, if briefly.

Realizing that such a tidbit is getting out of control, and the once geopolitical adversary is starting its recovery, returning credits and restoring sovereignty that does not meet their interests, the United States tried to "show the world" a new "project" of GTS from the Middle East. Cheap gas production in Qatar should have successfully offset the costs of multi-stage transit and pipeline protection in "troubled" areas, give the US full control over this GTS and weaken the Russian Federation as much as possible.

Europe, of course, is interested in this project. Then the shifts of the American "democracy" began in the countries of the Middle East, through which this gas pipeline was to pass.

However, at the beginning of the second decade of the 21 century, the main supplier of gas to the EU had already gained political weight, it became clear that international decisions could not influence the policy of the Russian Federation, and its reliability as a supplier of gas to the EU was rated as "very high".

It was then that the EU began to lose interest in the “long-term project”, especially since the constant infusion of funds into the Middle East “hot projects” began to tire the EU, and the volume of gas supplied from Russia fully satisfied its needs. And it demanded from the USA new actions, active and decisive.

2013 year can be considered decisive, it was at this point that the fiercest struggle between the Russian Federation and the United States began over the EU gas market.

Today, I increasingly hear that "the Third World War has already begun" between the United States and the Russian Federation. In fact, this is something different than the battle for the most solvent customer in the oil and gas industry ... No more.

It is unlikely that someone in an attempt to take possession of a new market will put "themselves beloved" under the real threat of destruction, lost profits are not worth such candles, especially since both the United States and Russia understand perfectly well that the chances of the United States in this game of winning are minimal . And the reason for that is the country of the European Union, whose words in the field of resolving European gas issues sound louder and stronger every day - Germany.

The loss of Europe’s interest in Middle Eastern "hot projects" did not suit the United States very much; in the light of this "fading attention", the most interesting option for the United States was a blow to the stability of gas supplies to the EU from its eastern neighbor. Since Germany is a very strong player on a regional scale, Ukraine was chosen as the second gas transit country in the EU. Many political scientists argue that in this way NATO is approaching the borders of the Russian Federation and is seeking to block the military potential of the Russian Federation, however, this statement seems rather doubtful to me. We live in a sufficiently developed era, and modern weapons negate the need to be closer to the "potential enemy", especially since the proximity to the Russian capital of the Baltic countries that are already members of NATO is maximum.

The Ukrainian “project” of democracy, promises of strong US support, is no more than an attempt to limit gas supplies to the EU, making it clear to the latter that the gas pipelines from the Russian Federation to the EU are not so stable and safe in order to rekindle the EU’s interest in alternative sources of supply. gas.

Russia also joined in this struggle, realizing that at least one GTS was lost as reliable, and this would force the EU to look for alternative sources of gas supply, which would reduce not only Russia's geopolitical influence on the EU, but mainly deprive Russia of part revenues to the budget and allow "someone" to rise again on its losses.

In this situation, it was necessary to act as quickly and decisively, the "inertness" of the decisions of the Russian leadership has already led to the fact that Russia has lost its industrial partner, although in this matter Russia was able to benefit in the long term. The transfer of production to Russia is long overdue, and this was the "final impetus" to the growth of industrial sovereignty of the Russian Federation.

The annexation of the Crimea can be considered an act of military struggle, the return of the peninsula plays a purely military significance, it lowers Ukraine as a potential NATO asset below the liquidity threshold, and the deployment of military self-defense equipment of the Russian Federation on the peninsula completely eliminates the military benefits of the west from the seizure of Ukraine In the long term, obviously, the West lost this micro-grab precisely in the military aspect.

The South Stream project was also being actively worked out as an alternative to the Ukrainian transit GTS, but everyone here was against it, since it was not clear who would be the main transit country for gas in this area. It is no coincidence then that Mr. Obama traveled to Germany, not to Brussels. The former US President understood that this project was hitting the interests of Germany, a regional power within the European Union. It was after Obama’s visit to Germany that the “energy package” was adopted, blocking the construction of South Stream, and it was then that “speculation” began on the subject of “poor Ukraine” and the need to support it by preserving transit. Even then, it became clear to me that the already discussed “North Stream -2” would divide everyone who then sang about the “single support of Ukraine” and the “need to preserve its status as a transit country”, and I wrote about this to many “hurray-patriots” Blakitnoy "Republic.

The US was advantageous to leave the transit of gas through Ukraine, in order to regulate the valve, to be able to create tension in the EU with gas supplies from Russia, the USA in this case appropriated Ukraine as a “gasket”, which has a profit from gas transit. Also, the United States has long ago developed a project for shale gas extraction in the territory of the "rebellious republics" of Ukraine, since there is already a ready GTS on the territory of the United States, and the inert power is ready to make any decision in favor of the United States due to the lack of alternative patrons. “Shale projects” in Ukraine would not in any way cover the EU’s needs for gas from the Russian Federation, but would become an excellent subject for trade in the domestic political environment in Ukraine itself.

However, in this situation in the upper ranks of the Russian Federation the correct conclusions were made. And Russia decided to bet on the main player in the region - Germany. I doubt that Merkel supported all these games, clearly and clearly understanding all movements in the GTS network of Europe. For inertness and neutrality, Merkel in Germany does not scold unless she is very lazy. I think it was the calculation from Russia, to include the main gas player of the European Union in the "game", to lure him to his side and give him a DREAM - a monopoly on gas transit to the European Union.

Russia needed to find a "weak link" in the EU that would stand on the side of Russia in solving gas problems, and paradoxically, this "weak link" turned out to be a strong political link of a "regional" scale. Russia proposes Germany to become a transit country for the new branch of the Nord Stream, while construction will imply two branches with an eye to the growth of gas consumption by the European Union according to the trends of recent years. At the same time, Gazprom did not say anything about redirecting gas transit from the Ukrainian direction to a new “pipe”, but the whole world understood this without words.

At this very moment, comparing all these resource battles with the chess game, Russia “removed” from the queen’s chessboard. Moreover, she made this pawn, turning it into a new queen on her side. I believe that this step is, for today, the final victory of Russia in the field of gas supplies to the territory of the European Union, a victory precisely in that for which all this long-term fuss in the Middle East, all this democracy in Ukraine was planned.

Naturally, attempts to block the North Stream - 2 from the United States ended in failure. The promise and inevitability of this project from the very beginning was appreciated by Western companies not only from Germany, but also from France and Holland, who joined this project in order to have at least some kind of "profit" from the new project, which was inevitable and predictable.

Further cries of the "rest of Europe" about the need to preserve Ukraine as a gas transit country and alternative source are already perceived in Berlin as a threat to their interests and unwillingness to put up with the growing political power of Germany in the EU space. The background noise that Ukraine needs help and the EU should oppose the Russian Federation “united front” no longer finds response in the hearts of the major players in the European space, personal benefits are closer to the heart, “nothing personal, just business”.

"It seems that we need to rely on our own strength" (c) A. Merkel


And all the competent politicians have already understood and calculated the end of this battle in monetary terms for the main players in this market. The opinion of Ukraine does not count and no one is interested. The empty halls at the conference in Munich demonstrate this more than frankly, the interest of the West in the "Norman format" is demonstrated there. A positive decision on the “SP-2” almost immediately turned Ukraine into an illiquid asset ... not interesting ...

The United States also, realizing that the party is lost, is trying to create a general uproar in order to adequately emerge from this defeat in the struggle for resources, trying to have profit at least from sanctions against the Russian Federation, which are obviously not as effective and no longer find support in the EU . At the same time, the “transatlantic partnership”, pushed through the EU by the US, choked. The last "stuffing" about the punishment of companies involved in the program "Nord Stream - 2", also did not scare anyone. The benefits are greater, even with penalties.

The main partner, whose US interests were firmly defended in the EU, sold the Americans for the monopoly of gas transit in the near future, which undoubtedly strengthens the economic power of Germany, which against the general background of EU losses from sanctions looks like strengthening the authority and economy of Germany in the EU exponentially. Russia, on the other hand, has maintained its market share in the EU and will be ready to increase volumes in the coming years in light of the growing gas consumption in the EU.

Germany and Russia emerged victorious in this “fight,” the US lost time and money. It is hard for me to assess that Ukraine has lost in this dispute, it has never been the subject of these tensions, OBJECT and nothing more, it has lost very much in its own price. Now Ukraine is turning into an unprofitable and unprofitable "asset" that needs to be reset either by Russia or the European Union, which has completely lost interest in Ukraine as an OBJECT of geopolitical "battle."

Both Russia and Germany received their benefits, they will still scream about Ukraine in Poland and other countries that fall out of the common European field towards American interests, but these countries do not decide anything in matters of regional policy and are highly dependent on the same Berlin ... economically. So the issues of their dissatisfaction with Berlin will be settled very quickly, after the elections. By the way, Merkel has already received the “pre-election victory”, which is so necessary for herself, and has increased her rating in the eyes of the electorate.

___
Now, last but not least.
With regards to Syria. Russia entered there in case negotiations with Germany fail. Yes, of course, in no way can we deny the fact that terrorism in the Middle East is a threat to the Russian Federation, as well as the fact that all these people with beards and machine guns can come to the Russian Federation as the “last revenge” from the United States, Moreover, they stated this not once, but the economic component of the state played an important role here.

I do not see politicians as people who say that "our guys are dying for the interests of Putin in Syria". Gas supplies to the EU are state profits (BUDGET) and leverage on a huge number of EU countries in order to get political preferences for our country, including our guys in Syria are fighting for it.

I myself am liable for military service, I flew 2 to Syria once in the crew of a transport plane, and I have no questions “need it or not” - definitely needed!. Because the sale of hydrocarbons, including, it is revenues to the budget and the economic sovereignty of my country. These are the salaries of teachers, doctors and other state employees, these are social programs and much more. So, I, just like any person “in uniform”, should protect any interests of my country, the infringement of which could put her position on the edge, worsen the situation inside society. I will go to war with penguins in Antarctica, if it threatens, including the economic sovereignty of my country.

In the end, we are doing the right thing, and the "impotent" aircraft carrier from France, who had bravely arrived on the shores of Syria and escaped through 2 of the day without a single shot, would not solve the problems of the peaceful population dying under the wheels of religious fanatics in Paris, whose ideological mentors are today It is in the black zones of ISIS in our theater.

Of course, it is possible to talk a lot about corruption and about the fact that other people besides gas have other people besides the state, about corruption and other negative things about my country and you. Of course, this is the case, as in any country. But if you do not protect the economic interests of our country today, then tomorrow, when you defeat internal enemies, no one will let you go to the foreign market, because with your “economic impotence” and lack of understanding that to defend today, you will let everything go what could have tomorrow.

And it will be like in a sphere close to my heart aviation, where the country of Antonov, Yakovlev, Ilyushin, Tupolev, Lavochkin and other great designers rejoices with only one hundred sold passenger aircraft in 10 years.
Author:
32 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vard
    Vard 8 March 2018 06: 40
    +10
    Everything is fine ... But why the capitalization of Tesla ... More than Gazprom ... So far, we are not getting the money ... But those intermediaries who resell our gas to the same Europeans ...
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack 8 March 2018 07: 08
      +14
      Quote: Vard
      But why the capitalization of Tesla ... More than Gazprom ...

      Right And why at the same time, Tesla (which has been a year already) has been steadily showing losses, while Gazprom is showing profit.
      I’m silent about the fact that Tesla’s share in the US budget is zero whole, zero torn. And the share of Gazprom in the budget of the Russian Federation, in its revenue, is not much zero.
      Somehow request
      PS: article plus.
    2. Winnie76
      Winnie76 8 March 2018 12: 22
      +6
      Quote: Vard
      But why the capitalization of Tesla ... More than Gazprom ...

      From the same series as the capitalization of Google, Apple, Amazon, etc. Bubbles.
      Quote: Vard
      So far, we are not getting the money ... But those intermediaries who resell our gas to the same Europeans ...

      Those. Putin pays bridges, spaceports, armats and other vanguards from his pocket. From the nightstand ...
  2. Firework
    Firework 8 March 2018 06: 42
    +3
    The West is not an enemy of Russia, Europe needs Russia’s resources, just like Western goods are needed for Russia, without Western technology, our country can seriously lag behind the whole world, primarily in medicine
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack 8 March 2018 07: 11
      +14
      Quote: Salute
      The West is not an enemy of Russia ...

      ... and even more so the West of Russia not a friend yes
  3. samarin1969
    samarin1969 8 March 2018 07: 57
    +6
    Good "oil painting from the author" ...
    Germany is still far from a partnership without quotes with Russia.
    The “nullification” of Ukraine’s value for NATO is something between exaggeration and absurdity.
    The buyback strategy for domestic resources is inconsistent and replete with deals of dubious efficiency - the buyback of BP shares, the deal with the Qatari fund, and the consistent admission of the Chinese to the market during difficult negotiations on the Power of Siberia. And most importantly, both alternative gas flows are in limbo and below the announced plans for power.
    I agree with the main idea of ​​the author that the struggle for resources is a struggle for sovereignty. But while it comes with varying success and with an obscure beneficiary.
    1. datur
      datur 8 March 2018 09: 10
      +2
      so everything at once happens only in American films !!!! laughing wassat
    2. iouris
      iouris 10 March 2018 21: 40
      +2
      Quote: samarin1969
      struggle for resources - struggle for sovereignty

      The state, of course, can fight for sovereignty, but the capitalists are fighting for resources and profits.
      1. samarin1969
        samarin1969 10 March 2018 22: 09
        +1
        Quote: iouris
        [The state, of course, can fight for sovereignty, but the capitalists are fighting for resources and profits.

        Still, the peoples of Rome, the USA, England, Germany at different times received their share of the resources won ... No matter how cynical villains the "capitalists" would be, they would be united with the "proletariat" before external enemies. No one turned bayonets against the rich. To anyone closer dear, iouris. To whom is class solidarity, to whom is the fate of their people. Another question is that Russia does not have "capitalists", but some kind of Qin dynasty.
  4. seti
    seti 8 March 2018 08: 49
    +3
    Very competent and sensible article. Understandably, critics will always be found and will find something to complain about.
    Thank you
  5. rehev931
    rehev931 8 March 2018 10: 14
    +2
    most liked the last paragraph !!! but the rest are also interesting !!!
  6. Vlad Petrov
    Vlad Petrov 8 March 2018 11: 12
    +3
    Caps throwing celebrating a victory will have in 2 years. The construction of two lines of the Turkish Stream gas pipeline will be completed in October 2019. 31,5 billion cubic meters of gas per year. The Power of Siberia began supplying gas to China on 20.12.2019/38/2, 93,5 billion cubic meters. meters per year. Plus, the Amur Gas Processing Plant will not export gas, but the products of its processing - propane, butane, ethane. SP24 laying work has not yet begun. Ukrainian transit accounted for 2 billion cubic meters. That is, minus XNUMX billion cubic meters remains to Ukrainian transit Perspective China, Japan, Southeast Asia. Gas consumption is expected up to XNUMX trillion cubic meters. per year and do not need Europe, NATO, other smut. We also found an ally in the Germans
    1. antivirus
      antivirus 10 March 2018 13: 46
      +2
      Germans are business partners.
      unlike negotiation partners
  7. akudr48
    akudr48 8 March 2018 11: 33
    +9
    At first glance, the publication is sincere.

    The author is "rooting" for the interests of the country, worries, claims that in Syria there is a struggle for the budget of "my country" and is ready to fight with the penguins for the oil and gas interests of the state, not everyone is capable of this.
    Although it’s easier to fight with penguins than with Bedouins.

    He believes that the more Russian people die in Syria, defending the oil and gas interests of the country's masters, the more there will be pensions and salaries for other Russian people in Russia. And this is either blatant cynicism, or outright stupidity.

    The author attributed all the tragic events in the Donbass to the ups and downs of the struggle for the pipe between America and Russia, probably forgetting the oath that the guarantor made to protect the Russian people. Gave, and did not fulfill. He put the pipe more important than tens of thousands of dead ...

    And certainly, the interpretation of “our gas” in Russia is stupid. This gas has not been ours for a long time, probably, the author does not know how much it will cost to carry “our gas” to his house, for the Moscow Region it will be at least 500 - 700 thousand rubles, even if you just need to connect to the street gas highway .
    And the gas boss Miller’s income per day will be much more than a dozen pensioners a year, but this is also nothing, the main thing is “our gas”, and Miller is not alone there.

    It is especially offensive to him that "tomorrow, when you defeat internal enemies," corrupt officials, nobody will let you into the foreign market, ah, ah, ah, nobody will buy our gas, everyone will grab places on the market. Therefore, let them steal, because all the same, “our gas”, because we have gas in Russia (Syria, Ukraine).

    With such sharpening in defense of “our gas,” either irony or regret is unclear why “the country rejoices in just one hundred sold passenger aircraft in 10 years.” That is precisely why “our gas” and money “theirs” are in the bins of the adversary, if this is not clear to the author.

    Therefore, such sincerity in this matter is simply a divorce of readers, and perhaps stupidity.
    1. Winnie76
      Winnie76 8 March 2018 12: 57
      +4
      Quote: akudr48
      He believes that the more Russian people die in Syria, defending the oil and gas interests of the country's masters, the more there will be pensions and salaries for other Russian people in Russia. And this is either blatant cynicism, or outright stupidity.

      No need to juggle. You yourself suggest such a pattern.
      Quote: akudr48
      The author attributed all the tragic events in the Donbass to the ups and downs of the struggle for the pipe between America and Russia, probably forgetting the oath that the guarantor made to protect the Russian people. Gave, and did not fulfill.

      Is Putin a superman for you - to protect every Russian-speaking citizen of a foreign country? Should tanks enter? Bandera hang on the lanterns? So they are also 80 percent Russian-speaking. How do you imagine this, protect? In Estonia, offended by a Russian grandmother - to hell to hell Tallinn?
      Quote: akudr48
      And the gas boss Miller’s income per day will be much more than a dozen pensioners a year, but this is also nothing, the main thing is “our gas”, and Miller is not alone there.

      Well ... In Russia, they have always stolen and always will be. On this basis, you can not fill the budget?
      Quote: akudr48
      Therefore, let them steal, because all the same, “our gas”, because we have gas in Russia (Syria, Ukraine).

      Have you read this in an article?
      Quote: akudr48
      Therefore, such sincerity in this matter is simply a divorce of readers, and perhaps stupidity.

      Just a maestro juggling. The luminous epistolary ...
    2. 82т11
      82т11 8 March 2018 14: 27
      +1
      And what do you propose to leave Syria, to supply gas to Ukraine further for free?
      Or maybe we don’t have to pay taxes because the budget is stolen?)
    3. Pilot1980
      9 March 2018 04: 25
      +1
      You twisted everything and distorted everything, either you have problems with the perception of information, or ...
  8. borys
    borys 8 March 2018 15: 03
    +3
    When reading the article, one statement (not mine) is recalled: "If the country's budget is built on the sale of oil, then the rulers on their shoulders instead of a head appear
    oil barrel. "Here we are talking about gas, but the meaning is the same.
  9. Antares
    Antares 8 March 2018 23: 47
    +1
    Because the sale of hydrocarbons, including the revenue to the budget and economic sovereignty of my country

    trouble
    And it will be like in the aviation field close to my heart, where the country of Antonov, Yakovlev, Ilyushin, Tupolev, Lavochkin and other great designers has been enjoying only one hundred passenger planes sold in 10 years.

    you need to decide whether to sell only energy resources and die for them and markets or for markets of higher redivision ....
    I do not agree with the article. The author believes that the proposal to the Germans will outweigh the rest. And the Germans can also twist their hands, so then build a stream through Norway? The Germans undoubtedly knocked out the best price, and they will lower themselves as technology develops. And Gazprom will bear low profits.
    The author also believes that for the sake of SP 2, Germany will happily do anything ...
    just explains the benefits, but in life more complicated
    The article is a simple simple opinion of the layman ...
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack 9 March 2018 00: 06
      +5
      Quote: Antares
      The article is a simple simple opinion of the layman ...

      Tell me, what’s your opinion - what is more valuable than the opinion of the author of the article?
      Well, besides, of course, what does your country lose in the future a certain amount (annually appearing) that it is already used to having and considers it "rightfully"?
      1. Town Hall
        Town Hall 9 March 2018 02: 27
        +2
        Quote: Golovan Jack
        Tell me, what’s your opinion - what is more valuable than the opinion of the author of the article?



        The fact that this "article" is a set of stamps of slogans of blunders and outright fakes
        1. Golovan Jack
          Golovan Jack 9 March 2018 08: 21
          +5
          Quote: Town Hall
          this "article" is a set of stamps of slogans of blunders and outright fakes

          Well, another offended by Gazprom laughing
          (thoughtfully): there were no Poles yet ... wait, sir ...
      2. Antares
        Antares 9 March 2018 13: 07
        +1
        Quote: Golovan Jack
        Tell me, what’s your opinion - what is more valuable than the opinion of the author of the article?

        the same way. In practice, you can argue with me, and criticize or approve the article, which is what we are doing here.
        Quote: Golovan Jack
        Well, besides, of course, what does your country lose in the long run a certain amount (annually appearing) that it is already used to having and considers it “rightfully”?

        my opinion and the country of transit / consumer can only be related by origin.
    2. SCHWERIN
      SCHWERIN 9 March 2018 10: 57
      +2
      The other day I read that the Deutsch increase the share of alternative energy.
      And how many years will we beat off the cost of building gas and other pipelines? Then their repair, operation and protection.
      1. Golovan Jack
        Golovan Jack 9 March 2018 11: 02
        +5
        Quote: SCHWERIN
        ... doychi increase the share of alternative energy ...

        From five percent to five and a half?
        It’s not possible to pull much more “alternative” there, even though you build up the whole of Germany with solar batteries request
        Quote: SCHWERIN
        how many years will we beat off the cost of building gas and other pipelines? Then their repair, operation and protection

        Well, of course ... windmills and batteries (solar, og) - they are much cheaper than the pipe. And they repair and protect themselves ...
        I don’t understand, is it just something Germans were so excited about in SP2? They have everything through and through, from family to energy ... well, they have such a fashion.
        But for some reason, they are not in a hurry to refuse gas ... what
        1. SCHWERIN
          SCHWERIN 9 March 2018 21: 47
          0
          In Germany, today, the share of renewable sources exceeds 26% and the trend is positive ....
          1. NF68
            NF68 11 March 2018 17: 05
            0
            Quote: SCHWERIN
            In Germany, today, the share of renewable sources exceeds 26% and the trend is positive ....


            All this is so. But the problem of storing the generated electricity has not yet been solved, and it is not yet known how much money will be needed to solve this problem.
  10. Romulus
    Romulus 9 March 2018 03: 38
    +1
    [quote = Golovan Jack]
    0
    Golovan Jack Today, 00:06 ↑
    Quote: Antares
    The article is a simple simple opinion of the layman ...

    Tell me, and [/ quot
    Romulus) report to the Russian people - damned! imperialist whiskey is worse than our vodka .. damn Scotland and the USA I am for Putin and against Grudinin .. women with .. have come up with a holiday, and I’m suffering Romka sent a brow to the boutiques (everything is dry in the bar) Putin! handsome, and all the rest p .. (faces of non-traditional sexual orientation)
    I’ll come to the Queen ...
  11. Bouncer
    Bouncer 9 March 2018 14: 24
    +15
    Europe we have profiled
  12. gorenina91
    gorenina91 10 March 2018 07: 35
    +2
    -So, nothing is clear on this "Nord Stream - 2" "... -More likely there will be about 5 years, they will" make decisions "...
  13. andrej-shironov
    andrej-shironov 12 March 2018 09: 27
    +3
    Dear author! To be honest, I do not care about Europe and the problems of Gazprom! Kolya from Urengoy has already dotted all the "and" about the merging of power and the oligarchs! The only important thing is that by selling our national property the state corporations do not improve the internal social situation in the country! There is brazen money making for the authorities and people close to the pipes under the cynical attempts to manipulate the mass consciousness in Russia.
    1. Pilot1980
      12 May 2018 07: 05
      0
      For those like you, the penultimate paragraph is written, read it again!