Trump: the EU will build new terminals for our gas for their money

American President Donald Trump, during a press conference with Italian Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte, said that the EU is currently considering building terminals for the purchase of US liquefied natural gas. According to Trump, construction of at least 9 new ports, and possibly 11, is being discussed, RIA reports News with reference to CBS News.

Trump: the EU will build new terminals for our gas for their money

In his speech, the American leader focused on "the current negotiations with the EU on the construction of nine to eleven ports that will receive liquefied gas from the United States." At the same time, Trump said that all costs associated with the construction of terminals, assumes the European Union.

Recall that earlier in negotiations with the head of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, Trump received several concessions from Brussels in order to avoid a trade war. According to Western media, in particular, Europe has agreed to consider "an increase in the export of liquefied natural gas from the United States", in addition to reduce duties on certain goods from the United States and increase imports of soybeans.

Earlier, Russia has repeatedly stated that all US efforts to close the 2 Nord Stream project are aimed at squeezing Russia out of the European gas market and are an attempt to force Europeans to purchase more expensive liquefied gas from the US.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +5
    31 July 2018 07: 37
    How can relations with mattresses be improved here?)) Then it will be even more fun, now we’ll meet with them on “ideology”, and now we’ll also be on finances ...)
    1. +14
      31 July 2018 07: 44
      Last winter, the United States purchased liquefied natural gas in the Russian Federation. And the question is often asked: whose gas does the US export to the EEC?
      It can be assumed that the US intermediaries in this transaction ...
      1. +8
        31 July 2018 07: 47
        In fact, they have a lot of gas, and if they pull Canada up, which is very possible, it will already be very, very much, and they can easily cope with the volumes of supplies to Europe, the only question is price. But pressure, blackmail, and dumping can do the trick.
        1. +8
          31 July 2018 07: 56
          If there is a lot of gas in the USA, and even more with Canada, then what the hell did they buy us in the winter, as Logall wrote? And I think the American gas will be from Yamal ...
          1. +3
            31 July 2018 08: 02
            ... American gas, I think it will be from Yamal ...

            Many agree on this point. Some even call buyers - primarily limitophore countries and Poland. Perhaps Ukraine.
            1. +4
              31 July 2018 08: 59
              Yes, divorce is all:
              taken from chervonets
              a) On the Atlantic coast, the United States has few gas liquefaction capacities - up to only 2 billion cubic meters per year
              b) there are few special terminals for loading
              c) the United States for the supply of "dirty gas", the so-called LPG - liquefied petroleum gases - Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). This is a mixture that still needs to be cleaned - there is power for the country, no for export
              d) the USA does not have its own fleet for gas delivery - it is necessary to charter
              e) if Europe builds itself terminals for the reception of liquefied gas, it is more likely that not American gas will become closer, but Russian from Yamal
              1. +2
                31 July 2018 11: 57
                There are 13 LNG terminals in the USA.
                Almost everything in the Gulf of Mexico.
                Build another 7.
                Most of the terminals in Japan - more than 40. In Europe, most of all in Spain - 6.
                Building 11 terminals is not so difficult and not so long.
                1. +2
                  31 July 2018 19: 20
                  Alexei, existing terminals in Europe operated in winter at 30% of their capacity. And why are they still terminals? hi
                2. 0
                  1 August 2018 07: 55
                  In Europe, the horseradish mountain of these receiver terminals. Already, there are 22 terminals in Europe with a capacity of more than 200 billion cubic meters. Moreover, the load of this infrastructure does not exceed 20 percent. New terminals are NOT NEEDED there, the entire state LNG will calmly accept the existing one. In abundance.
                  The problem of LNG supplies from the United States is purely price - in Asia, higher than the price. And all the LNG goes there. No one will take LNG to Europe when they are in Asia for 500. And in Europe no one will buy it for 500, when there is a Russian for 300. You can make people buy like Lithuania does. But that means ruining your industry.
          2. +5
            31 July 2018 08: 03
            It was just cheaper in this situation. Their production is designed for a certain amount of consumption, in view of the cold they fell out of this calculation, that's all. And if an additional sales market appears, which Trump does, they will increase production accordingly. By the way, in terms of gas reserves, Canada seems to have comparable volumes to ours. Just don’t think that I’m protecting them somehow)) pah on them, you just don’t need to be mistaken.
            1. +1
              31 July 2018 12: 44
              Russia has 18% of the world's gas reserves excluding Arctic. Considering - MORE THREE. Canada does not even have a tenth of this; they are not even in the top five in gas reserves. If I’m not mistaken, there are no candidates in the top ten, now it’s too lazy to check.
              1. 0
                31 July 2018 13: 47
                Sorry, mixed up with oil. The mattresses are 4th place.
                1. +1
                  31 July 2018 21: 27
                  Natural gas production in 2016 according to OPEC
                  No. Country billion m³/year
                  1 USA 751,063
                  2 Russia 642,242
                  3 Iran 226,905
                  4 Qatar 182,830
                  5 Canada 174,051
              2. +1
                31 July 2018 21: 29
                US gas production comes first.
                Arctic gas reserves are difficult to extract. Unprofitable for mining. They are not included in statistics either in Russia or in Canada.
                1. +1
                  31 July 2018 21: 32
                  Gas production in Yamal is for prestige. It is absolutely unprofitable.
                  Here is LNG Sakhalin profitable.
                  1. 0
                    1 August 2018 07: 59
                    How do you know? Did you tell the idiot with Achronot? :) GP has never disclosed the cost of gas production. From time to time, someone blurts out some kind of tsiferka from the ceiling and that's it. But a prominent Israeli specialist knows for sure. Don't be a pre-ninthrop, professor. :)
                    1. 0
                      1 August 2018 12: 12
                      In the construction of Yamal invested $ 27 billion. Mostly Russia. It will pay off in about 30 years. The Chinese saved the project. Gas will go (in 5 years) to China via the Northern Sea Route. Gas carriers built by South Korea.
                      1. 0
                        1 August 2018 21: 02
                        Hahlaughing I love these ignorant lunatics, they’re craping with any garbage into any question where they don’t understand. The comprehensive project in Gydan and its environs includes not only the construction of YamalSPG (it is functioning at all), but also YamalSPG-2, ArcticKSPG-3, the largest Arctic airport on the planet (works well), the first-class seaport of Sobetta (gorgeous), as well as the construction of the Northern Shirotny megaproject A move and much, much more. There is gas only in this part of Yamal and its water area for TRILLIONS $, and there are huge reserves of gold, platinum and much more besides gas and oil.
                      2. 0
                        3 August 2018 17: 21
                        Warrior, you really did not understand the issue. The problem with financing the Yamal-LNG project (by the way, I made a mistake, this is NOVATEK) was not in low profitability, but in the direct ban on US funding for sanctions. China put 12 yards there. Gas has already been transported to China; last month, the Arc7 tanker Vladimir Rusanov came to Zhudong.

                        The profitability of the project is such that the second phase of the project no longer knows the problems with external financing. Novatek signed a memorandum of understanding with the Korean company KOGAS, expressing the “mutual interest of the two companies in the participation of KOGAS in the Arctic LNG-2 project "". Negotiations are also underway with Aramco, with the China National Petroleum Corporation and with the Japanese Marubeni Corporation about their participation in the project. But while the priority investor is Total, it claims at least 10 percent.

                        But you, of course, will not be written about this. :)
                2. +3
                  31 July 2018 22: 27
                  Are you reading carefully? Russia owns the FIFTH of the Earth’s gas WITHOUT the Arctic (with the Arctic 30%), this is the first. Second: who told you such nonsense that YamalSPG and YamalSPG-2 are "image-building"? Do you think the French, Indians, Chinese, Koreans and Qatari fools bought in the amount of 50% (a couple of tens of billions of $) in these projects? You should not write utter stupidity, especially since Novatek has one of the smallest cost of gas production, at the level of QatarGas and one of the highest profitability among all energy companies in the world, in the Platts energy rating, they compete with these indicators only with Exxon and Gazprom. I’m telling you all this as a power engineer and an energy builder, I know Yamal well, I work with MRTS JSC and with the head of the Salekhard Administration and with Urengoyhydrostroy.
                  A part of the Arctic reserves has already been added to the balance of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Rosnedr, and the fact that mattresses did not take them into account is their problem, even if they continue to live in their own enticing world.
                  And by the way, the cost of shale gas production among staff members is 2 times higher than in the Russian Federation, and when the price is included in the price, the cost of delivery and all associated costs are generally 3,5 times higher. In total, in dollars, America earns on gas many times less than Gazprom alone. And a dozen more companies produce gas from us, and this is not only Lukoil, Novatek, Rosneft. Here is such an Omerigan zilch.
          3. +2
            31 July 2018 08: 06
            Quote: sabakina
            If there is a lot of gas in the USA, and even more with Canada, then what the hell did they buy us in the winter, as Logall wrote? And I think the American gas will be from Yamal ...

            Perhaps they are stupid. Although, how stupid they were able to hook the whole world on their printing press and live, not paying attention to financial difficulties in any matters, to make us smart to invest billions in their economy, buying up abstract pieces of paper, the question is not an easy one ...
            They managed to punch things better than these terminals.
            1. 0
              31 July 2018 08: 11
              The best luminaries of domestic science are struggling to unravel this mystery
          4. +1
            31 July 2018 08: 11
            Gas will come from where there is more margin ... it means from Yamal, judging by purchases in Russia ... Americans don’t have enough gas in their peak periods ... what kind of EU can we talk about, only as a customer for terminal equipment .. But this is not bad money. And taxes from gas deals ... and it will be American or Russian ... it's violet ... the main thing is that taxes are paid in the USA.
          5. 0
            31 July 2018 09: 51
            Gas they bought a drop in the sea. They have a lot of gas ... that's just mostly on the Pacific coast.
        2. +1
          31 July 2018 12: 05
          Fans theoretically will not occupy even 15% of the EU gas market (I specifically took a prohibitive percentage). Even 50 new LNG terminals are stupidly not enough for this. Although it is impossible to build such a quantity even in a century, I generally am silent about a lot of tankers for this and their fantastic distillation across the Atlantic. Matrasia will never be in the EU’s gas market, not even the third, let alone compete with us. Everything has been calculated for a long time and experts perceive the words of this old fellow as a hackneyed barrel organ.
          1. +1
            31 July 2018 12: 13
            The entire market should not be occupied. Russia exports 200copecks of billion cubic meters of gas. 50 terminals are enough to replace such a volume
            1. +3
              31 July 2018 12: 35
              You are talking with a power engineer, so it’s better not to argue. 50 terminals will not be enough to replace even 100 billion. But that is not the point, to create from scratch a connecting gas transmission infrastructure for the formation of the EU gas distribution network, plus such an incredible number of reception terminals and an even more unimaginable number of gas carriers - you need a CEC. For experts, all this is Krylov’s fable, the old man says this only for the press and the people (which is normal). By the way, few say that shale gas is an admixture gas and cannot be used in a large number of processes where traditional ones are used, and the corrosion resistance of pipes also suffers from it.
              Friends, there are so many “BUTs” that I didn’t even list the fifth part. Do you even know what happens with amers (in mining places and nearby) on Baken and Permian? You’ll be horrified by the endless km of lifeless spaces, a significant increase in earthquakes as a result of the constant use of hydraulic fractures, the lack of water in nearby towns, the complete lack of infrastructure for expansion even by 30% - and you need to increase by 500% ... Trump Hotels is still more infantilism, than the crazy dill.
              1. +1
                31 July 2018 12: 41
                Give some link to the power of a modern LNG terminal. The one that is being built in Kaliningrad, for example, has 3.2 billion cubic meters. And I think this is far from the most powerful. Well, horror stories about dehydrated Americans are even uninteresting to discuss.
                1. +2
                  31 July 2018 12: 54
                  Dear, I beg you very much - do not write about what you do not understand. Read what is the power of the liquefaction terminal and the regasification output. And in general, read something more than newspapers, be interested, google.
                  And to understand the last thing: I personally know the Director General of Kaliningrad UGS LLC Petrov Leonid Alekseevich, will you tell me about LNG in Kaliningrad? Or even about LNG?
                  1. +1
                    31 July 2018 12: 58
                    here is an example of a directory of some existing terminals

                    the table shows that the terminals can easily have a capacity of 40 or more billion cubic meters of gas per year. (Or, respectively, 30 million tons of LNG per year)
                    Then think for yourself
                    1. 0
                      31 July 2018 22: 36
                      You apparently can neither read nor listen. Learn and you will be happy.
        3. 0
          1 August 2018 19: 42
          Quote: maxim947
          and they can easily cope with the volumes of supplies to Europe

          If you count the number of gas carriers required for these deliveries, then very weak weights are hung on this lightness. They are simply physically not available, and it is very difficult to establish this flotilla in the coming years.
      2. +3
        31 July 2018 08: 21
        What powers does Juncker have to promise to buy gas? The little fool got drunk with American bourbon, he became sympathetic, promised everything, such as giving Kemsky parish, and then climbed up kissing Trump drunk .. laughing
        1. MPN
          31 July 2018 09: 27
          construction of at least 9 new ports is discussed, and possibly 11
          It seems to me cheaper to buy a money recycling machine, what kind of Kemsk volost is there? And I think he will straighten the tselnik ...
      3. +3
        31 July 2018 08: 33
        Quote: Logall
        Last winter, the United States purchased liquefied natural gas in the Russian Federation. And the question is often asked: whose gas does the US export to the EEC?
        It can be assumed that the US intermediaries in this transaction ...

        Sasha, hello! But look with what persistence and with what success he bends them (EU) winked
        1. +2
          31 July 2018 08: 40
          Zhenya hi
          Quote: Dashout
          he bends them (EU)

          And he will do it further, despite the weak attempts to resist. Such is the philosophy of behavior of Matrasia ...
          1. +3
            31 July 2018 08: 45
            Hi Pash! drinks
            don’t say ... it pleases me with how stubbornly he bends them ... time to collect stones ...
            1. +1
              31 July 2018 08: 51
              Quote: Dashout
              time to collect stones ...

              It seems that the EU has already realized that they were “not friends with that,” but it’s too late ... But something does not pull me to pity the bent ones, as well as to praise the bending man. wink
    2. 0
      31 July 2018 08: 35
      No US will block the passion for profit. Only an imperialist World War can temporarily shorten this matter with the subsequent redistribution of the world market. And so, there are local, as an inevitable attribute of capitalism, local trade wars that never stopped, either intensifying or decaying. winked
      1. 0
        31 July 2018 11: 42
        But just in case of a world war, more precisely in case of a war with us, these ports are planning to be built
    3. 0
      31 July 2018 09: 46
      Here it is free Europe laughing
    4. 0
      31 July 2018 09: 50
      What other ideology? Does Russia have at least some ideology? Anyhow different from the state? You are only in finance with them for the past 15 years and get together. Exclusively.
    5. +1
      31 July 2018 11: 55
      Matrasia now occupies 1% of gas exports by the European Union, Russia - 70% (and 40% of the EU’s total gas market), that’s all you need to know about the Wishlist of the old infantile Donald. Moreover, the share of Gazprom in the European market is constantly growing, and Novatek manages to sell its LNG even to Poles, Lithuanians and ... Omerigans.
      Even in order to increase the proportion of striped ears to 10% of imports into the EU, it takes about 30 years, provided that Europeans, like sheep, buy at least 1,5 times more expensive "exclusive" haz. But in general, the project is as follows: SP-2 is being built, Turkish Stream-1 has been completed, TP-2 is being built ahead of schedule, YamalSPG is delivering to a dozen countries around the world, construction of YamalSPG-2 is beginning (investors India, France, Korea, China, Qatar) , "Power of Siberia" has already been built at 91%, the construction of the AWG Terminal in Kamchatka is soon planned.
      RUSSIA IS A GLOBAL GAS PLANET LEADER. But Matrasia cannot even saturate its market.
      1. +1
        1 August 2018 08: 18
        More recently, the same alignment was in favor of Roscosmos, but Musk came ... and the situation changed to the opposite. So it will be here. When the first tranches for American gas go, the Americans will increase production and the war in Syria will be pointless.
        1. 0
          1 August 2018 21: 10
          Read the materiel, above me many times everything is laid out on shelves. And please, only about Ilon Ostapovich Bender is not necessary here, an unsuccessful example.
          The serial production of Model-3 is disrupted, Tesla has huge debts, and if the company does not bring at least $ 3 profit by the 1rd quarter, it will collapse. Shareholders no longer know how to get Musk to do business. At the beginning of the year he was left without a salary, directly linking the reward with the success of Tesla. Now, one of the owners of the block of shares suggested: Mask remove from the post of chairman of the board of directors. According to The Washington Post, "Ilon’s voice was trembling," when after voting the shareholders still left him at the post. "The past few months have been a hell for us, but we will try to get out," said Musk.
          PS This kidding guy for a year or two (as earlier the head of the chapter Enron or Maddof) was put in jail for fraud, and we all admire the charlatan. For the fact that tens of NASA bills $ attachedlaughing
  2. +2
    31 July 2018 07: 39
    The country is a gas station.
  3. +3
    31 July 2018 07: 49
    Well, Sabetta is much closer than Houston! Build, guys, build. There isn’t enough LNG for the Americans, we are right there. laughing Yes, and Ust-Luga is even closer ...
  4. 3vs
    31 July 2018 07: 51
    And it’s not time for ours to declare, “Donya, this is our cow and we milk it!”?
    1. +4
      31 July 2018 08: 04
      And it’s not time for ours to declare, “Donya, this is our cow and we milk it!”?

      What for? Conflict because of the obvious? The "cow" must itself choose the "delicious".
  5. 0
    31 July 2018 07: 51
    What is interesting ... "all the costs associated with the construction of terminals are borne by the European Union." and only Russia is building gas pipelines at its own expense ...
    1. -1
      31 July 2018 07: 54
      And what? They are American Vasalians who are building for their own.
    2. +3
      31 July 2018 07: 59
      Ward, and in Russia who should build? Germans? We conduct the pipe on our part, the Germans on our part. Then the "meeting on the Elbe."
    3. 0
      31 July 2018 08: 07
      What is interesting ... "all the costs associated with the construction of terminals are borne by the European Union." and only Russia is building gas pipelines at its own expense ..

      There is a joint stock company. Everything is recorded as a percentage, hence the share in dividends. It seems to me, at the end of construction, one of the shareholders will be a company indirectly associated with Trump.
    4. +1
      31 July 2018 08: 29
      But the couple do not say at whose expense tankers will be built to transport liquefied gas. Europeans invested in cn2 and simply the more they invest in the consequence, the more they will have to give margins
      1. +1
        31 July 2018 08: 49
        Europeans invested in sp2

        That's why the contracts should be reinforced concrete. Then they like to review the prisoner earlier through the court.
    5. +1
      31 July 2018 14: 35
      Russia is building at the expense of the state, and the Millers and the Dvorkovichs with the Dimons and Vovans will receive the fat.
  6. 0
    31 July 2018 07: 56
    Ah yes Donald! Ah yes, son of a bitch!
  7. 0
    31 July 2018 08: 02
    as I understand the gas there will be from Yamal LNG
  8. 0
    31 July 2018 08: 04
    And what again we’ll smack and express concern? They themselves provoke already insolent! It is necessary to succumb to gas and defend by all available means!
  9. 0
    31 July 2018 08: 33
    The American leader emphasized "the ongoing negotiations with the EU on the construction of nine to eleven ports that will receive liquefied natural gas from the United States." At the same time, Trump said that the EU takes all the costs associated with the construction of the terminals.

    - Well, Americans for Europe “agree” to everything, just build terminals for your money and buy expensive liquefied gas from them! If the Europeans agree to this, then Trump will certainly pull out all the juices from the EU. Americans need to reduce their public debt at the expense of others. So, let's see how Europeans behave. Now they have a question - either to become richer if we take gas from Russia, or to become poorer if we take American liquefied gas. It is worth thinking about! recourse laughing
  10. +1
    31 July 2018 08: 47
    Trump: the EU will build new terminals for our gas for their money
    That's right agent trump, Russian LNG also needs somewhere to feed .... wassat
  11. +2
    31 July 2018 09: 03
    The deficit of states with the European Union is over one hundred billion. Our gas revenues are around 60. So, the states of Europe can force us to abandon our gas. Perhaps a political decision has already been made. After all, we announced the closure of transit through Sumer, and it seems as if we are going in this direction. I suppose the deterioration of relations with the West after the construction of the terminals. It is time for us to prepare for the program of "building capitalism in a single country."
  12. 0
    31 July 2018 09: 06
    The old Europe is bending ever lower! lol
  13. 0
    31 July 2018 09: 10
    Or maybe it's like a wall with Mexico at the Mexican expense? winked
  14. +1
    31 July 2018 09: 11
    all costs associated with the construction of terminals are covered by the European Union
    Probably this is the way to trade, breaking hands to a partner, blackmailing and eventually getting to buy not only your expensive gas, but also build terminals with your own money. Weak Europe both spiritually and physically.
  15. 0
    31 July 2018 09: 35
    Strictly speaking, it should be borne in mind that in Europe there are now very many people, population growth is expected and, as a result, increased gas consumption. So I think in Europe they will find where to attach gas from Russia and from the USA.
  16. +2
    31 July 2018 10: 43
    The construction of ports and terminals does not yet indicate who will pump gas into them and subsequently bully
    1. 0
      31 July 2018 11: 51
      These terminals are needed to provide gas to European industry in case of interruptions or a complete stop of fuel supplies from our side. When can such problems arise?
    2. +3
      31 July 2018 12: 06
      This is the fundamental advantage of LNG over gas pipelines.
      The customer is not attached to anyone: yesterday he bought gas from Yamal, tomorrow from Texas, the day after tomorrow from Australia. I bought as much as needed, made stock for a rainy day as needed. Just as there is an oil exchange with tankers in the free market and futures, as well as with LNG.
      1. +2
        31 July 2018 21: 28
        Quote: voyaka uh
        This is the fundamental advantage of LNG over gas pipelines.

        There is also a cardinal disadvantage in the form of a higher price.
  17. +1
    31 July 2018 14: 33
    Well done Trump, sets goals and goes to them no matter what, not like our amoeba.
  18. 0
    31 July 2018 17: 44
    So let them build. Gas carriers will carry Yamal LNG to them. But in general, why should anyone worry about the Nord Stream? 70 percent he is foreign. And so did Gazprom. Theoretically, Gazprom has a 51% stake. Of these shares on the exchanges sold half. Total - Gazprom owners are 75% foreigners and 20% Russian oligarchs. From which we have half a percent of taxes (the rest are offshore). Total, the Russian Central Bank will get 5-7% of all income. Of these revenues, money will not go to industry and the social sphere of Russia, but to American, British, Hong Kong and other banks.
    And who cares about the Nord Stream?
    Yes, they worry - the oligarchs of some countries and financiers (the US Federal Reserve and London City) of others.
    So - "dont worry, bi happy"!
    1. +1
      1 August 2018 00: 33
      Hah))) "Russian" Feels like a Newcommy-Sumerian pan. I love these pi-lighters, I took it up and sit. Gazprom is 51% state owned, state-owned Rosimushchestvo and Rosneftegaz holders, they do not trade their shares on the stock exchange, and they do not theoretically have such a function. Dividends are regularly transferred annually to the budget. Gazprom, by the way, is the largest taxpayer in our country. Another 23% of shareholders are AO minority shareholders, 3/4 of them are citizens of the Russian Federation with shares of 0,00000001, 0,000001, 0,00001, etc., there are tens of thousands of such shareholders, ordinary citizens of the Russian Federation. That is, about 70% of Gazprom's shares are in RUSSIA. All that remains to the West and the bourgeoisie is about 30%, among there are no holders of more than 4%.
      And yes, we have withdrawn 80% of the funds from US GKOs since the beginning of the year, now there are less than $ 15 billion. The grandmothers, contrary to the opinion of the pan-and-merchants, were not transferred as some trynds to the “European banks”, but they went to early repayment of the state debt, thereby saving hundreds of millions of interest payments.
  19. 0
    31 July 2018 21: 25
    The US does not want their military units stationed in Europe to be independent of Russian gas supplies. So they would build for themselves a terminal for LNG in Europe.
  20. 0
    1 August 2018 08: 28
    To compete with the “pipe”, gas carriers must be an order of magnitude larger (if transported from the Gulf of Mexico), or they must learn to fly. Imha
    1. 0
      1 August 2018 10: 08
      Quote: Fkjydjckfrgh
      To compete with the “pipe”, gas carriers must be an order of magnitude larger (if transported from the Gulf of Mexico), or they must learn to fly. Imha

      Does this mean that this is impossible?
      1. 0
        2 August 2018 08: 56
        I'm talking about here and now. And increasing the fleet by 10 times is not a quick process.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"