Russia and the West

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
@Friendly Stranger If you think that the current regime in Russia is communist then you are very ill-informed. It is about as communist as Adolf Hitler was; in fact it's far closer to Hitler's Nazism than it is to any Marxist-Lenist ideology. The only thing that Putinism, for want of a better term, has in common with the Soviet Russian communist form of government, is its extensive use of security services to oppress the population, and restrictions on political, media, and personal freedoms to smother any form of opposition to the ruling clique.

We have rules here that we expect members to follow and politics is against the rules; we have little tolerance for it. The only exception that we have is when its discussed in relation to defence and defence procurement. We especially have zero tolerance for US politics because of its divisiveness and that is jumped on really quickly. This is an international defence thread and as such we have many nationalities active on here.

We don't appreciate blatant attempts at spreading anti Russian or anti Ukrainian material as you are doing with your posts. We have expectations of reasonable assessment and unbiased analysis. Yes it can be difficult, but nevertheless we are first and foremost a defence forum and we have banned posters for posting blatant propaganda before. Be advised that we have little tolerance for such activities.
 

Karl Franz

New Member
True, and that's the logical (business sense) thing to do. That's why it is still 50:50 on any possibility, and it's in the market being call billion euros bet on where it is going. Nobody knows in certain how it is going to work.

Let's say Russia going to follow through on being back as reliable suppliers for those commodities (big question on that), how far will Russian can hope Euro going to open supply on tech (another big question) ? Will EU going to let ASML to supply Rostec semiconductor ambition with their EUV even DUV Litography machine ? This's just an example on one point.

I don't think Euro will going to open more those that can be call dual tech purpose, which semiconductor can be fall on. Thus in the essence what limitations on business exchange going forward is the big question. If Euro hold something, will Russia also hold something back?
Its going to be interesting to see the game develop as you put it, there are undoubtedly many issues that will have to be ironed out and many compromises made. In the end I still believe we will reach some kind of understanding, to go the other way would be detrimental to both parties and we are still in early stages of this conflict, so the bill hasn't arrived yet. Once it does, and its magnitude is revealed, there would be a lot more people willing to compromise on both sides.

Qatar and Germany have signed a deal for energy which will replace Germany's reliance on Russia. Germany, Qatar sign energy partnership agreement | Oil and Gas News | Al Jazeera. The Europeans are also looking at increasing gas supply from Nigeria once Nigeria reopens the Trans Niger pipeline at the end of August after it has improved security in the Niger Delta EU looks to replace gas from Russia with Nigerian supplies | Reuters. Fertiliser and food can be sourced elsewhere as well, albeit as at cost. For example Australian grain producers would be wanting a more stable and secure market than their Chinese one.
There is undoubtedly going to be a lot of effort going into finding alternative sources, but it is highly questionable how far they get. As @Ananda and I have discussed, there simply isn't a way to replace Russian energy resources. The best they can do is realignment and basically allow Russia to become the main supplier to the fastest growing energy market in the world, which would be doing them a favor, something I'm sure they wouldn't want to do.

Even if some of the effort does produce results, it's going to take 2-3 years at the earliest, and even then it's only partially going to cover the loss of Russian resources. So Europe would basically have to pay a lot more for a lot less, while putting a pause on their economy for 2 years, during which high energy prices dampen the blow to Russian revenues until they're able to switch to other markets. This does not sound like a sound strategy to me.

In any case European energy dependence on Russia works in both ways. Just as Russians can influence European decision making by threatening supplies so can Europeans influence Russian policy by threatening their revenues. By cutting this connection Europe losses their best (and perhaps only) tool for influencing Russian decision making.

Russia is changing its economic focus from the west to the east with the INSTC Is the INSTC Russia’s new economic escape route? | Russia-Ukraine war News | Al Jazeera. India is a very large market and it makes good economic sense for Russia to break into it. The new route also has significant advantages. This along with an increase of trade with the PRC would replace a significant amount of its trade with the west. It is also pushing into Africa at the moment. Russian FM Lavrov has just undertaken a trip through Africa drumming up support for Russia in its war against Ukraine and its opposition to the sanctions that the West have put on it. Lavrov denigrates West’s stance towards Africa on Ethiopia visit | Russia-Ukraine war News | Al Jazeera. Many African nations have historical ties with Russia going back to the decolonisation and independence struggles during the second half of the 20th Century. It is noted that many African nations have remained neutral in the Russo - Ukrainian War.

The CCP/PRC has been pushing for the last few years to have the yuan recognised as a benchmark trading currency on par with the US$ and so far this has been rejected internationally. It also wants to establish an international banking and financial clearance system similar to SWIFT trading in yuan instead of US$ by passing both SWIFT and the US$ to avoid US sanctions on using the US$ and SWIFT. Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and some other nations would probably take advantage of this system which would remove their vulnerability to US and western sanctions. If this does succeed then US and western sanctions against Russia become impotent.
By forcing this realignment they're basically laying the foundation for future Russia-China alliance (even if Russians have to accept being the lesser/junior partner). This in my opinion could be considered a geopolitical mistake of the century (although it's still early) and would embolden both China and Russia to be even more assertive and less willing to compromise.

In any case whoever does make European foreign policy would, I imagine, put Russia as the top priority, it is a country that can do the most damage, but can also provide necessary resources to feed Europe's development and keep them an economic powerhouse. Anything else would be detrimental as there are no other good options.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group


The first article talk about commodities market assesment of still upward momentum for Oil Prices hikes. Second article talk on how the realites of global Russian isolation that's being taunted by US and EU, so far shown only by collective west.

This two article I put together, because it is related on why Russia still matter on Global order. Nature of Russia big control on some commodities market especially related to Energy and Food production, make it much less incentives for other nations to isolate Russia. Practically much of the other world community so far ignored what Washington, London, or Brussels call to isolate Russia.

best they can do is realignment and basically allow Russia to become the main supplier to the fastest growing energy market in the world, which would be doing them a favor, something I'm sure they wouldn't want to do.
Euro leadership bureacracy in Brussels seems believe Russia will not find other market as significant as Euro zone. Frankly speaking when I talk with some commodities traders on this, they just laugh cause seems some in Brussels forget where the highest energy consumption coming from. So perhaps what you have put come to slow realisation to some of those euro bureaucrats and politicians.

There's much talk in Green Energy from Brussels as way too cut energy dependencies with Russia. Again the most ambitious scenarios for Green Energy as significant fossil fuels replacements projected even by same Bureaucrats before the war shown next decadeas fastest. As I have ranting in this thread before, those greenies should be really regreting their move to cut nuclear power plant. Like it or not Frenchie right now is in better place compared to others in Euro Zone on reducing dependencies toward fossil fuels.

This is why many in western market before call the politicians on slowing down and think more on better target strategy, before conducting this wide range hastily prepared trade war. Well, market people for most of times considered as money grabing capaitalists. Only when realities of the market mechanism hit them hard, those politicians then begin to hear the market more.
 
Last edited:

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Its going to be interesting to see the game develop as you put it, there are undoubtedly many issues that will have to be ironed out and many compromises made. In the end I still believe we will reach some kind of understanding, to go the other way would be detrimental to both parties and we are still in early stages of this conflict, so the bill hasn't arrived yet. Once it does, and its magnitude is revealed, there would be a lot more people willing to compromise on both sides.



There is undoubtedly going to be a lot of effort going into finding alternative sources, but it is highly questionable how far they get. As @Ananda and I have discussed, there simply isn't a way to replace Russian energy resources. The best they can do is realignment and basically allow Russia to become the main supplier to the fastest growing energy market in the world, which would be doing them a favor, something I'm sure they wouldn't want to do.

Even if some of the effort does produce results, it's going to take 2-3 years at the earliest, and even then it's only partially going to cover the loss of Russian resources. So Europe would basically have to pay a lot more for a lot less, while putting a pause on their economy for 2 years, during which high energy prices dampen the blow to Russian revenues until they're able to switch to other markets. This does not sound like a sound strategy to me.

In any case European energy dependence on Russia works in both ways. Just as Russians can influence European decision making by threatening supplies so can Europeans influence Russian policy by threatening their revenues. By cutting this connection Europe losses their best (and perhaps only) tool for influencing Russian decision making.



By forcing this realignment they're basically laying the foundation for future Russia-China alliance (even if Russians have to accept being the lesser/junior partner). This in my opinion could be considered a geopolitical mistake of the century (although it's still early) and would embolden both China and Russia to be even more assertive and less willing to compromise.

In any case whoever does make European foreign policy would, I imagine, put Russia as the top priority, it is a country that can do the most damage, but can also provide necessary resources to feed Europe's development and keep them an economic powerhouse. Anything else would be detrimental as there are no other good options.
There are no “quick” solutions for European energy needs but increased Arctic production by both the US and Canada together with new NG tankers could be a solution together with SMR, especially the latter which will a green solution. Hard to say how the Russian Chinese partnership will pan out. Short term, not good for the West, long term I don’t see Russia wanting to be China’s $itch. As China builds up its nuclear arsenal along with better and more numerous missiles, Russia may have to bend the knee or more likely bend over. The only help Putin would get from the West is a pair of knee pads.
 

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Well Feuhrer does translate as leader no coincidence lol just some similarities
Translations don't apply, especially not when the medium language is one as linguistically limited as English.

The title that party LDPR is seeking for Putin is "Правитель" (Pravitel). This basically means "government leader" or "government functionary" (and has done so since at least Tsarist times). The closest linguistic analogue - not translation - in English would probably be "governor" in the sense of "one who governs". The compound noun правительство (pravitel'stvo) just means "government" in a completely neutral manner in regular speech. "The Canadian government" - "Kanady pravitel'stvo" and such.

However Pravitel as a solitary title for a person was last used by the anti-bolshevik governments of the Soviet Civil War, effectively as title of the rulers of the White states set up in Russian territory. That's the juicy part.
 

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Next thing people will discover that titles like 最高領導人 or رهبر انقلاب exist.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Translations don't apply, especially not when the medium language is one as linguistically limited as English.

The title that party LDPR is seeking for Putin is "Правитель" (Pravitel). This basically means "government leader" or "government functionary" (and has done so since at least Tsarist times). The closest linguistic analogue - not translation - in English would probably be "governor" in the sense of "one who governs". The compound noun правительство (pravitel'stvo) just means "government" in a completely neutral manner in regular speech. "The Canadian government" - "Kanady pravitel'stvo" and such.

However Pravitel as a solitary title for a person was last used by the anti-bolshevik governments of the Soviet Civil War, effectively as title of the rulers of the White states set up in Russian territory. That's the juicy part.
I think the best translation would be "ruler". Also the LDPR are... certain kind of political party. With Zhirinovsky gone, they've gone down an unfortunate road.
 

kato

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I think the best translation would be "ruler". Also the LDPR are... certain kind of political party. With Zhirinovsky gone, they've gone down an unfortunate road.
In German media they use "Herrscher" to translate it for the current initiative, which is fairly neutral - although it also implies that that nation's people isn't the sovereign in its country.

And it's not really like the LDPR were um... "sane" under Zhirinovsky either.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
In German media they use "Herrscher" to translate it for the current initiative, which is fairly neutral - although it also implies that that nation's people isn't the sovereign in its country.

And it's not really like the LDPR were um... "sane" under Zhirinovsky either.
No, but he was a deliberate clown, especially in his younger days, with a healthy dose of self-awareness. Now they're just the far-right wing of United Russia.
 

Friendly Stranger

New Member
@Friendly Stranger If you think that the current regime in Russia is communist then you are very ill-informed. It is about as communist as Adolf Hitler was; in fact it's far closer to Hitler's Nazism than it is to any Marxist-Lenist ideology. The only thing that Putinism, for want of a better term, has in common with the Soviet Russian communist form of government, is its extensive use of security services to oppress the population, and restrictions on political, media, and personal freedoms to smother any form of opposition to the ruling clique.

We have rules here that we expect members to follow and politics is against the rules; we have little tolerance for it. The only exception that we have is when its discussed in relation to defence and defence procurement. We especially have zero tolerance for US politics because of its divisiveness and that is jumped on really quickly. This is an international defence thread and as such we have many nationalities active on here.

We don't appreciate blatant attempts at spreading anti Russian or anti Ukrainian material as you are doing with your posts. We have expectations of reasonable assessment and unbiased analysis. Yes it can be difficult, but nevertheless we are first and foremost a defence forum and we have banned posters for posting blatant propaganda before. Be advised that we have little tolerance for such activities.
I posted legit articles link 1 link 2. It's all the truth about the situation in Ukraine and in Canada.

TEXT DELETED - POLITICAL RANT.

Friendly Stranger permanently banned for posting of political posts after being warned not to by a Moderator. His answer to the guidance in this post and a subsequent post that another Moderator unapproved has shown disrespect for both the Forum rules and Moderators. We do not tolerate politics, especially political rants which was all that this poster posted.

Ngatimozart
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ananda

The Bunker Group

Ship to Ship transfer (STS) has been done by Iranian for some time due to trade embargoes, and now spikes on STS around Euro waters. It is no secreet that most refineries outside collective west now getting more crudes from western embargoes suppliers like Iran, Venezuella and now Russia to ger better margin. With continues momentum of high price hydrocarbon, those margin now significant enough to cover the rises of transports and insurances.

Either way, Russian find new market to compensate the losses in their more traditional market in Euro Zone. Their hydrocarbon export now clossing in toward pre Februari 2022 (pre invation) level. So how G7 try to hinder Russian hydrocarbon revenue? They are so far can't done that let alone doing Biden ambition to cap Russian hydrocarbon revenue.
 
Top