as for me situation is clear: every day Russia loses about $150 millions (=$1 billion per week!) not flipping gas to Europe; moreover, everyone realises that Russian's explanations are childish lie. why does Russia do it? answer is simple: Russia wants Ukraine to be her slave
Ivan Wrote:as for me situation is clear: every day Russia loses about $150 millions (=$1 billion per week!) not flipping gas to Europe; moreover, everyone realises that Russian's explanations are childish lie. why does Russia do it? answer is simple: Russia wants Ukraine to be her slave
Dear Vanechka,
don't you think truly to say that your explanations are childish lies. Ukrainian are our brothers and sisters, and no one treats relatives as slaves. You just another kind of fascist. Change your mind. Fascism, Communism and US Liberalism are bad stufff and dangerous!
I want to finally disillusion few insane folks about real position of Russia in noble European house… it was a sort of dirty pied fireman who was allowed to heat the manor-house but he never was invited in. Let he heats but not goes inside the grand rooms.
Now when fireman declared strike on lords, denies to heat and freezes rooms… I think he will be pushed off with amazing speed.
Reader2, yes I see some “obnoxious ones here like Moskal and sektion_Gaza” really try to intimidate European opponents and so this distracts westerners which are not used to argue such barbaric way. I think this dangerous trend is worth close attention of mods.
Max Wrote:What really surprises me on this forum I see originally it was created for Europeans but now it’s occupied by Russians. They openly express hate to Europe, they hate Anglo-Saxes but they are here on English language forum… completely inept. Like everything about Russia.
Believe it or not, Russia is part of Europe too, although not an EU member. This is No.1. Second - the forum is also occupied by Ukrainians (for example), but you don't seem nervous about that. Are you a chauvinist?
Or rather racist? It seems so looking at your comment below (for example)
Quote:Do you hate West and UK guys? Go home to your mendicant Saratovs and Tambovs where you are paid for you work lower then Asians. Quote:Maybe comments like explain the hatred towards Brits here... But you are not British, at least by origin - the language you use is not good enough. Polish maybe, or some baltic
Quote:Russia lost 60% of its export, Gazprom loses 120 millions $ a day. How much Russian boys and girls should work to cover this everything? Like miners, huh?
Are you crazy? Where did you dig these figures from?
Quote:Oil will not help you because it’s cheaper then mud now. Russia exports only gas and oil and it’s the end now. You just can’t feel it at the moment but you will feel pretty soon.
Another comment explaining hatred isn't it.
Quote:The Angela Merkel put simply: “Russia have lost our confidence”. It’s BBC, forks.
And knives! Ha-ha! You must be from the Ukraine!
Quote:This means there will never be any phantasmal alternative ways. Russia depends on Ukraine completely in its gas export and if we say – pay 10$ for transit, they will pay 10$ and not less.
Wow! I've figured you out!
Quote:US urges and promotes fastened building of Nabucco. Just when Europe will get gas from Caspian pool, Russian can forget about EU clientele. And Ukraine will be just happy to stop its GTS for Russia.
The chances of Nabucco are rather slim. Its main problem - its capacity only 30 mcm per year - a consumption of Poland alone. Its supplies are problematic: gas from Azerbaijan is not sufficient, and Iranian gas is not allowed by uncle sam. It is also much longer than the South stream if you look at the map (reliable one - not Ukrainian!) and therefore more expensive. So, Europe is facing the choice between a much more expensive pipeline with doubtful supplies and a cheaper pipe with reliable supplies. Take a wild guess what they chose... Nabucco may be constracted only as additional to South Stream, which, although much biggere and with reliable supplies, is still not enough. The problem of the Ukraine is that it bypasses its territory too!
Dear Brother Moskal,
Some our beloved friends here: <!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.eu-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2451&p=16630#p16630">viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2451&p=16630#p16630</a><!-- l -->
suggested that we must be kicked off from the forum. Please read my answer to them. I hope you can add anything as it concerns you.
Max said:The best Brits can do about local online "Russian epidemic" is to simply kick Russians off.
reader2 added: Good idea - but not just Russians (although there are two or three really obnoxious ones here like Moskal and sektion_Gaza) but anyone who engages in name calling and similar non-constructive immature behavior. Whose the overall site moderator and how do we do it?
My reply to them:
Anecdote:
Ukrainian democrat Max proclaimed "Let's kick Russians from our own EU forum off!". Another Ukrainian Nonsensecrat Reader2 added: "how do we do it?"
Consequences: So friends, keep Russian gas blocked and start blackmailing Administration of EU forum saying that if Russians are allowed here to express thoughts, you're gonna freeze them to death
Miskhorsky Wrote:Max Wrote:US urges and promotes fastened building of Nabucco. Just when Europe will get gas from Caspian pool, Russian can forget about EU clientele. And Ukraine will be just happy to stop its GTS for Russia.
The only thing it means for silly Russian forks is slow starvation.
1.Hey dude! be polite! :evil you are european or not?? ;(
Smth seems me youre - "fresh european" ;-) from "new democracies"???
No he is Ukrainian, western ukrainian something tells me, always caring fro Europeans' needs even not having enough to eat and wearing no pants!
Ivan Wrote:everyone realises that Russian's explanations are childish lie. why does Russia do it? answer is simple: Russia wants Ukraine to be her slave
Would you please explaine whom do you mean by "everyone"? Who exactly?
the last one is just pathetic. If we had the South stream and Nord Stream already in place we woould forget about this strange state once and forever!
Moskal Wrote:Ivan Wrote:everyone realises that Russian's explanations are childish lie. why does Russia do it? answer is simple: Russia wants Ukraine to be her slave
Would you please explaine whom do you mean by "everyone"? Who exactly?
the last one is just pathetic. If we had the South stream and Nord Stream already in place we woould forget about this strange state once and forever!
I guess Ivan have meant Western Propaganda PR Team and analysts!
[quote="1) the Route on which Russia tries to transfer europas gas is the basic transit route. It is the most important transit pipe which all time was used as a transit pipe and it was not used for internal needs of Ukraine.
[/quote]
No, this is inner, DOMESTIC pipeline of Ukraine, though theoretically it can be used for transit to Europe, but it hadn't been used for that purpose before. Technically it's hard to deliver gas to Europe via this pipeline, otherwise South Ukraine will left without gas. So why do Russia send gas this route? The real russian intentions are clear: to make ukrainian govenment more loyal to Russia and to make Europe obedient.
:banghead Technical gas to transit must be save by Ukraine because they has a contract between Europe . end this gas was in the tube all this time . were this gas now ? Ukrainian thinking that this game is very funny to Europe
BK Wrote:as a lawyer, I would rather represent Ukraine for the simple reason that Russia ignored European pleas and never even attempted to send the full amount of gas due to Europe <...> Russia never attempted full delivery, its reasons for doing so are incoherent, and it is therefore legally questionable whether Ukraine can be held liable for any damages to Europe once the monitors were in place.
Dear professor, even if you don't believe Gazprom claims that they were sending full amount of gaz on 01/7 (when EU consumers recorded drastic decreasing of gas intake), you could try and remember that in '06 Russia actually supplied full volume of the gas to Europe during whole crisis, but like 60-80% didn't reach Ukraine's western borders.
It's hard not to agree with you that closing vents in a middle of winter isn't the most humane thing Gazprom could do, but considering previous experience they just didn't want to give it for free, knowing that ukrainians aren't bona fide customer (I hope I use right term). Well, neither major business nor politics are humane. And that's understandable reason to blame government (and corporations), not just russian - but also british, american, chineese and whomever else. It's sad but true - throughout history some people become victims of other, and you'll never make it stop in the forseeable future.
sektor_Gaza Wrote:To solve gas dispute, let's organize an Ultimate Mix Fighting: Putin vs Yuschenko! The Loser will be HARDLY punished and FORCED to leave office! Agree??????????????????????
That is a good idea.
I have a couple of friends who are good plumbers. They tell me it is a relatively simple matter to tap into the main gas pipe in Russia, and run my own supply across Ukraine and Europe to ensure that I have supply of Gas, if no one is watching. I said no to this, money always wins. Russia and Ukraine will eventually see the benefits of a continuous supply of currency coming their way, rather than the right to fight for or about something which is collapsing in the west.
Money always wins, you can only fight if you have got it, or know where you can get some. It will take two years to get a winner at this rate, and the winner will still be governed by market forces, their are other players looking for a way in. The pipe line map leading to the west that I have seen gives a very limited view of what is going on. If their is a transit fee involved then Ukraine can charge what it likes, in money Gas or both. Just finish building other pipelines, then restart the fight with Ukraine. I might feel like watching it if my heating is working. They wouldn't be fighting if it wasn't worth their while, its a business, their not fools.
african_guy Wrote:I think its high time the word democracy is changed. I its meaning has changed. Nwadays a democratic government is one that Supports American interests, and not the one that rules in interest of its people.
This is a true statement, when I hear about Democracy, It can only mean war or trouble for those trying to convert to it. I live under a Democracy, it is not something that I would be willing to kill for.
However I don't know anything else. I can see the benefits of EU membership, it makes sense to corporate with ones nabour's. Everyone should be cooperating with every one else to keep things moving.
If the US was not involved in this indirectly no one would care, including Putin and Yuschenko. They get around.
Quote: I think you are just retelling Putin's lies, my dear Russian999. Your "responsible" government has cut off gas to many Europeans. Just to keep your promisses? Even the former Soviet Uninon never did it during. even during the cold war.
See, here we go again with the same attitude just from the "other side of the fence". It always starts with labeling of opponents. <"responsible" government has cut off gas to many Europeans>.
Lets sort out two issues moral and financial. I completely agree that it IS awfull to be without heating during winter. But why Russia is the only one taking the blame? What, Ukraine is good just because Russia is bad?
Sounds like the same old story about "our son of a bitch".
As you porbably don't know is that Gazprom in fact a corporation (with big governmental share indeed). Ukraine is simply a buyer who does not want to pay on time! What's wrong with the Gazprom that wants to get its money? Although have you ever heard a stories about people losing their homes because of not been able to pay credit on time? So what's the difference? There are many cruel things in this material world. But there are still banks around.
Soviet Union never did it simply because there was NO reason to do so. HE was getting paid for it. and there was NO intermediary in between.
Lucy Wrote:No, this is inner, DOMESTIC pipeline of Ukraine, though theoretically it can be used for transit to Europe, but it hadn't been used for that purpose before. Technically it's hard to deliver gas to Europe via this pipeline, otherwise South Ukraine will left without gas. So why do Russia send gas this route? The real russian intentions are clear: to make ukrainian govenment more loyal to Russia and to make Europe obedient.
If it's so confusing about pipelines then why don't implement the proposal made by Slovakian PM and agreed by Gasprom to supply Ukraine with the gas volume it supply to Slovakia from its gas reserves. There is technical problem as well? I just can't understand.
It is unfortunate that the most vocal participants on this site are more interested in political rhetoric than the issue itself. To repeat: The subject line of this forum is Does anybody care about Russia-Ukraine conflict?" The answer is Yes. Russia cares because it believes that it was wronged by Ukraine and the dispute is costing much needed revenue and incalcuable damage to their reputation. Ukraine cares because it believes that it was wronged by Russia and is suffering similar damages. Europe cares because it has not wronged anyone and yet its people are paying the price for Russian and Ukrainian intransigence,
Both sides are to blame. SPublic statements from the leaders of both Russia and Ukraine during the negotiations support the conclusion that neither party was negotiating in good faith. Each side had a hidden agenda. Russia claims that the deadlock in negotiations was due to Ukraines political instability, corruption or late payments. This is at least partly true. It is equally true that Russia's response to the deadlock was inappropriate. To shut off gas to Ukraine's 48 million people in mid-winter while simultaneously demanding that Ukraine use its own reserves as technical gas to deliver supplies to Europe was barbaric --no matter how frustrating the situation was. But at least Russia, Ukraine and Europe all still had gas.
Ukraine's decision to use gas intended for Europe for transit/technical gas instead of using gas from its own reserves is understandable given that it had no idea what the price of that technical gas would be or how long the deadlock and its reserves would last. But this decision was wrong, Ukraine acted too quickly and without proper consultation with the countries that would be directly affected by its actions. Russia's response, the decision to shut off all gas to Europe rather than supply technical gas or allow Ukraine to use it for transit, is incomprehensible from both a business and legal oerspective. When Ukraine breached or repudiated its transit contract, Russia had a legal --and in these circumstances, moral-- duty to mitigate damages. Russia should have kept pumping and just recording the difference between what it was pumping and what Europe was receiving and reached out to Europe and the Courts for a solution. Instead, like Ukraine, it acted impetuously and unilaterally, ignored its contractual commitments, ignored the suffering it would cause, and simply transferred the burden of the dispute between Russia and Ukraine to Europe.
Both Russia and Ukraine had another opportunity to do the right thing when the EU put independent monitors in place. Again, they both failed. It is not yet clear who really bears responsiblity for the failure; there are too many contested facts. However, as a lawyer, I favor Ukraine's side because Russia did not attempt to resume normal deliveries despite the EU's pleas, and failed to respond to requests that it ship the gas using an alternate route. Had Russia changed routes and/or attempted delivery of the full amount of gas due to Europe then the burden again would have been on Ukraine to meet its obligations --this time under the watchful eyes of European monitors. Unfortunately, Russia did not do this and its public explanations for this failure have been privately criticised by independent monitors and publically questioned by even its closest European allies. Ukraine will surely be held liable for the initial decrease in gas supplies to Europe and perhaps for part of the damages caused during the initial shut-off but It is now likely that Russia will be held responsible for most if not all of the damages arising after the monitors were put in place. The potential loss is staggering; Russia and Ukraine may find themselves arguing over money that neither of them will ever receive. If justice is done, the money will go to the real victims of the gas dispute: the Europeans. The simple truth is that , it does not matter who you blame, Russia or Ukraine, Europe is the only real victim.
Lost in all of the legalities and technicalities and the banalties being exchanged on this forum, is the simple and inescapable fact that while Russians and Ukrainians continue to throw insults and point fingers at each other others from the relative warmth of their offices and homes, the lives of millions in Europe have been disrupted and endangered. Factories and schools are closed, hospitals are unheated, thousands upon thousands of Europeans are literally cold and hungry. So far, twelve deaths have been directly attributed to the gas cut-off. Whatever the final outcome, Russia and Ukraine will have nothing to be proud about. Does anyone care about the conflict. Yes. I care. We all should. This is not spin. It is reality.
Dear professor, even if you don't believe Gazprom claims that they were sending full amount of gaz on 01/7 (when EU consumers recorded drastic decreasing of gas intake), you could try and remember that in '06 Russia actually supplied full volume of the gas to Europe during whole crisis, but like 60-80% didn't reach Ukraine's western borders.
Pete,
I have absolutely no doubt that following Russias decision to cut off Ukraine's gas supplies, Ukraine was using a significant amount of the gas intended for Europe as transit or technical gas. For one, Ukraine openly admitted doing this and said it would replace the gas once new contracts were in place. The amount of gas that Russia claimed was stolen during the first week of january appears to approximate the amount that Ukraine said was needed for transit which makes it is a question whether Ukraine was syphoning off additional gas to build up its reserves, although this would not surprise me.
Forget the inhumanity or morality of shutting off the supply of gas to completely innocent people in the middle of winter. My argument is that the unilateral decision to shut-off ALL gas to its European customers without even the courtesy of discussing it with them was not only a serious breach of Russias contractual obligations but irrational from a business perspective. The claims that Russia did not want to supply free gas to Ukraine cannot be taken seriously. Ukraine openly admitted its responsiblity to pay for the gas and, Russia could also offset its costs by withholding transit payments accruing to Ukraine. The potential costs of shutting off the gas in terms of liablity for damages was and is much higher than the cost of temporarily supplying transit gas. So, from a purely business standpoint, Russias behavior is inexplicable. It is this that gives rise to the suspicions now being voiced in Brussles and elsewhere that this was not simply business as usual but the pursuit of questionable if not dangerous political ends. More importantly, it brutally illustrated Russias willingness to sacrifice it contractual commitments to political expediency. This is not like 2006. For one, Georgia has not yet been forgotten. The lessons learned now will adversely affect Russia for years to come, regardless of how this dispute ends.
THE fact is that Ukraine doesn't have any business contract with Europe about gas,we have contract with russia about transit of russian gas from the border of russia to the border of European Union,and all of it was delivered in full measure which Europe paid to russia and Europe didn't make complains about that
the reason why Russia cutted off the gas to Ukraine on the 1st of January was that there were no agreement beetwen"Gasprom"and ukrainian"Naftogas" for the gas for ukraine on 30th of december .becouse Russia started to deny previous agreement about the price for next three years and on 30th "Gasprom"put new price of 420 dollars for barel of gas,which Ukraine refused to sign becouse it is highest price in europe at the time when the price for transit remans the same.The reason why "Gasprom"hAD RIGHT TO CUT OFF the gas for European union which has deal with "Gasprom"is still unanswered.the same there is no answer why they blame Ukraine
Russan"Gasprom"has a Goal for monopoly for gas in all Europe ,and Ukraine stands on its way,and as far as they capture it,they will have power on europe more and more,this is why they take risk to loose millions with each day and 18 countries of europe are without heat
While Russian President Medvedev talks on international gas forum in Moscow clever and seemingly rational things, the theatre of absurd goes on…
Instead of required 300 millions c.m. through all five stations Gazprom requested fourth time from Naftogas the transportation of around 90 millions c.m. through technically impossible route Sudja-Orlovka-Moldova. Naftogas rejected once again.
Smile through tears.
$700 million dollars seems like a lot of money but it is really a very small amount if you consider the billions that Russia makes from the gas it ships to Europe. It is in fact, less than than 8% of the value according to Russias own calculations. Many businesses in both Kyiv and Moscow routinely give their regular customers a 10% discount. And in this case, it wouldn't even have been a discount; Russia could have provided the transit gas now and collected the money from Ukraine later, simply by withholding payment of the transit fees it pays Ukraine. Russia has repeatedly said that its dispute with Ukraine is not political, it is purely business. No rational businessman will risk ruining his business reputation, injuring his trading partners, and giving up billions of dollars in income --unless he has some other objectives worth more to him. The explanation is that Russias decision to shut off the gas not purely business, but political. It remains to be seen whether it backfires. In the meantime, at a time of unprecedented international financial crisis, while the world is trying to pull together, Russia has driven a wedge between itself and those who could help it. Providing the transit gas would have been a much cheaper and certainly rational business decision.
Max Wrote:While Russian President Medvedev talks on international gas forum in Moscow clever and seemingly rational things, the theatre of absurd goes on…Instead of required 300 millions c.m. through all five stations Gazprom requested fourth time from Naftogas the transportation of around 90 millions c.m. through technically impossible route Sudja-Orlovka-Moldova. Naftogas rejected once again.
Smile through tears.
Max:
It too cold in much of Europe to appreciate the absurdity of the Russian bears dancing. The tears are frozen and so it the smile. Right now, what I would really like is a Bear skin blanket to keep me warm.
sektor_Gaza Wrote:To solve gas dispute, let's organise an Ultimate Mix Fighting: Putin vs Yuschenko! The Loser will be HARDLY punished and FORCED to leave office! Agree??????????????????????
Does your mommy know that you are playing with her computer?
This site is provided as a service to the European Community. My apologies for previous messages to you. I had thought that I was dealing with an adult but your message here makes it clear that I am not.
the truth
Microsoft has a monopoly on all computers in the world 97% of them. There is nothing any one can do about it.
It is quite clear form the start that this is not purely business. Europe the US and Russians want to fight each other, why are you getting involved for. The west will squeeze any one and every one to get what it wants. This is just business, to my knowledge they don't actually hate any one. Prices rise and fall all the time, if the Russians are not willing to take this into account in your respect, it can only mean it is personal. If it is personal just get another president they are a lot of people in your country that can do that job, you have bills to pay.
I do not see how you can win this with Yuschenko, he is playing around with NATO, this just makes you a proxy for its policy's which the Russians don't like. That means no gas until they have gone. Your country is going down hill, what are you going to do about it. ;(
Valentine Akishkin
Russian entrepreneur
TIME TO AWAKE FROM TRANSATLANTIC ILLUSIONS
Bolstered by the Bush administration the EU has been rigorously digging itself into series of ungovernable brisances. Two coloured revolutions in Georgia and the Ukraine sponsored and adorned by transatlantic unity have brought nothing but confusion. Bush’s spate to expand NATO by including these two subversive handcrafted “democracies” was premeditated as an instrument to vie “resurgent” Russia; the whole evasion being enshrouded behind a veil of “honorable” purposes.
Not the least pertinacity was paid to either diagnose the consequences of hastily ushering these machinated political appendages into power or determine why the cheerleaders of these “democracies” so insistently sought entrance to NATO. In the first case the EU’s unscrupulous and unresisting demeanor, consecrated by US doggedness was humbly assumed by Saakashvili to be a blessing for his bloody swashbuckling assault of South Ossetia.
At the same time, the EU bestowed itself the role of an innocent, sinless bystander, whereas EU stolidity and disregard multiplied by US pandering was the fuse that instigated Saakashvili’s intervention of South Ossetia.
Today, Europe is facing its next self-pollinated Gordian knot based on the same quaint transatlantic doctrine, “Russia can never be right”. The present day “orange” political elite in the Ukraine; a regime that the Transatlantic Unity has so lovingly fostered has emerged with an “orange” interpretation of resolving financial problems. Apart from siphoning or bluntly saying sealing Russian gas, transatlantic fostering has brought Yushenko and his associates to the belief, similar to the case of Saakashvili, that there is no limit to unheeding maleficence as long as it implies harm on Russia. Blocking Russia gas supplies, crucial to Europe, found pardon in the “transatlantic agenda”, although it is only fair to say that the negative impact affected mainly on east European countries, some of which are not EU members, and others have little say in European affairs.
Ukraine’s blocking gas supplies to Europe is only a consequence of today’s toothless European policy following up “transatlantic fraternity” stipulating that support to any regime be offered as long as it opposes Russia. What better way would there be to contend Russia other than surrounding it with a military block or by showing how vulnerable its gas supplies were. The US plan of finding an alternative route for gas to Europe is scoring points supported by the Ukraine’s disrupting gas supplies to Europe. Immediate Ukrainian interests fall in unison to US long term aspirations and explain how Yushenko with a popularity rating of 2 % dares to harass both Russia and the EU.
Transatlantic patronizing of “colour” revolutions, the expansion of NATO or the installation of US anti rocket systems in Europe will not disgruntle “resurgent” Russia as it will at length backfire on Europe itself. Georgia has lost all hope of finding a way to integrate South Ossetia and Abkhazia and the Ukraine has become a territory of unpredictable political upheaval. The EU must understand that the time has come to put serious doubt on the Cold War reflexes that constitute today’s transatlantic agenda.
Valentine Akishkin
Russian entrepreneur
TIME TO AWAKE FROM TRANSATLANTIC ILLUSIONS
Bolstered by the Bush administration the EU has been rigorously digging itself into series of ungovernable brisances. Two coloured revolutions in Georgia and the Ukraine sponsored and adorned by transatlantic unity have brought nothing but confusion. Bush’s spate to expand NATO by including these two subversive handcrafted “democracies” was premeditated as an instrument to vie “resurgent” Russia; the whole evasion being enshrouded behind a veil of “honorable” purposes.
Not the least pertinacity was paid to either diagnose the consequences of hastily ushering these machinated political appendages into power or determine why the cheerleaders of these “democracies” so insistently sought entrance to NATO. In the first case the EU’s unscrupulous and unresisting demeanor, consecrated by US doggedness was humbly assumed by Saakashvili to be a blessing for his bloody swashbuckling assault of South Ossetia.
At the same time, the EU bestowed itself the role of an innocent, sinless bystander, whereas EU stolidity and disregard multiplied by US pandering was the fuse that instigated Saakashvili’s intervention of South Ossetia.
Today, Europe is facing its next self-pollinated Gordian knot based on the same quaint transatlantic doctrine, “Russia can never be right”. The present day “orange” political elite in the Ukraine; a regime that the Transatlantic Unity has so lovingly fostered has emerged with an “orange” interpretation of resolving financial problems. Apart from siphoning or bluntly saying sealing Russian gas, transatlantic fostering has brought Yushenko and his associates to the belief, similar to the case of Saakashvili, that there is no limit to unheeding maleficence as long as it implies harm on Russia. Blocking Russia gas supplies, crucial to Europe, found pardon in the “transatlantic agenda”, although it is only fair to say that the negative impact affected mainly on east European countries, some of which are not EU members, and others have little say in European affairs.
Ukraine’s blocking gas supplies to Europe is only a consequence of today’s toothless European policy following up “transatlantic fraternity” stipulating that support to any regime be offered as long as it opposes Russia. What better way would there be to contend Russia other than surrounding it with a military block or by showing how vulnerable its gas supplies were. The US plan of finding an alternative route for gas to Europe is scoring points supported by the Ukraine’s disrupting gas supplies to Europe. Immediate Ukrainian interests fall in unison to US long term aspirations and explain how Yushenko with a popularity rating of 2 % dares to harass both Russia and the EU.
Transatlantic patronizing of “colour” revolutions, the expansion of NATO or the installation of US anti rocket systems in Europe will not disgruntle “resurgent” Russia as it will at length backfire on Europe itself. Georgia has lost all hope of finding a way to integrate South Ossetia and Abkhazia and the Ukraine has become a territory of unpredictable political upheaval. The EU must understand that the time has come to put serious doubt on the Cold War reflexes that constitute today’s transatlantic agenda.