Remove the mask. The threat of war is the engine of commerce!
In another way, it is impossible to assess the bill of the US Senator Joan Barrasso, registered in the US Senate, designed to ensure "the energy security of NATO members."
According to the author of the proposed regulatory act, as well as the majority of the American establishment, the best and only way to achieve this “security” is to purchase energy resources from European allies exclusively from the United States.
And so that the Europeans (apparently not sufficiently reasonable) did not even try to undermine their security by acquiring energy from Russia and thereby “becoming completely dependent” (according to Trump) on it, the bill offers a whole arsenal of sanctions against those who decides to buy Russian oil and gas.
In the proposed document, strictly speaking, there are no new options for sanctions compared to the law that was signed by Trump a year ago, in August, 2017. The main difference is that it makes it impossible for the US president to impose sanctions on "disobedient" duty.
That is, the sword of Sanction of Damocles becomes a sword, striking in any case.
It is noteworthy that the proposed regulatory act does not provide for any compensation for countries and companies currently participating in joint energy projects with Russia that have agreed to cease this cooperation.
But in fact, it contains a “road map” to impose on the US allies the uncontested acquisition of American LNG.
Thus, the US president will have to send a representative to the NATO Council who will exercise strict control over the movement of the member countries of the alliance in the "right" direction of "energy security."
The transatlantic energy strategy should become the basis of the European hydrocarbon market. Which is submitted for approval to the US Congress no later than 180 days after the adoption of the law.
This act, without a shadow of embarrassment, indicates that its main task is to increase the supply of American energy to NATO countries.
As we see, the Americans are ready to reduce diplomatic "Chinese ceremonies" to a minimum by starting to twist the arms of their allies and "friends", depriving them of the right to choose where to buy what they need for themselves. Loyalty to the United States involves purchases only from US companies.
All the absurdity and absurdity of the constructions regarding "energy security" and "dependence on Russia" is easily refuted by one historical example: Hitler received from the USSR not only energy sources, but also grain, cotton, zinc, molybdenum, and much more until June 1941. Which, however, did not make Berlin dependent on Moscow and did not prevent the Nazis from attacking our country.
The media reports that John Barrasso is a lobbyist for the US energy complex and bought by gas tycoons with giblets (received from them over the past six years, more than half a million dollars).
But it does not matter. Someone serves the oil barons, someone weapons. But the point is not personal bonuses, but the fact that all US power institutions, consisting of such lobbyists, promote US economic interests in the world, using unacceptable and dangerous methods.
And the question is not only that these methods do not fall under the definition of fair competition, which Trump promised Putin during the meeting in Helsinki.
Much worse is that in order to impose their goods and services on other countries, the Americans recklessly go to the unfolding of military hysteria, to deliberately and rapidly heightening tensions.
But, as you know, a gun hanging on the stage is sure to shoot. And international politics is so complex and multifactorial that commercial “wiring” with the help of “threats of war” can easily end with this very war.
To the credit of Donald Trump, he not only fears the development of the situation in such a dangerous direction, but also tries to prevent it. Actually, this was the main purpose of his meeting with his Russian counterpart. On which he tried to convince him that Washington’s actions were not at all preparations for imposing a war, but simply “commercial” methods, a kind of marketing and work to promote American goods and services. It is proposed not to fight, but to compete ...
But the problem is that in some cases this kind of “marketing” is extremely difficult to distinguish from the final preparation for war (or an ongoing war using hybrid methods).
And in such a situation, it is possible and necessary to “compete” in similar ways, as well as to make preemptive strikes.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.