Medienkonsumenten: Das Verhalten Russlands ist rational, welcher Energieversorger dreht bei solch hohen ausstehenden Forderungen nicht früher oder später den Hahn zu? Der Vorstand einer deutschen AG wäre bereits von den Aktionären wegen grober Fahrlässigkeit verklagt worden…
Militärstützpunkte der USA im Ausland – Vergleich mit Rußland: http://www.hart-brasilientexte.de/2014/04/12/ukraine-2014-militarstutzpunkte-der-usa-im-ausland/
„Nun schlägt der pro-russische Mob zurück“ – Tagesschau, 12.4.2014: http://www.hart-brasilientexte.de/2014/04/12/%E2%80%9Dnun-schlagt-der-pro-russische-mob-zuruck%E2%80%9D-tagesschau-1242014-zu-den-protesten-in-der-ostukraine-gegen-die-kiewer-putschregierung/
Die „Drohung“ Putins war, wenn ich mich nicht völlig falsch erinnere, ein Hinweis, dass Russland, sollte die UA weiterhin nicht zahlen, irgendwann die Lieferung an die UA einstellen wird. Uiuiui, wie frech. Und ja, er hat darauf aufmerksam gemacht, dass, sollte die UA wie in der Vergangenheit das durchgeleitete Gas für Euorpa stehlen, es zu Problem kommen könnte. Ist DAS eine Drohung? Dass das widerrechtlich von uns gegen Russland installierte Regime in der Ukraine unser Gas stehlen könnte? Ist dafür jetzt Russland verantwortlich? Absurd!
Der Gaspreis für die Ukraine wurde von 260 auf 460 $ je 1’m³ erhöht. Das sind ($/€ = 0,7958) also 366 EURO welche die arme Ukraine an die bösen Russen zahlen muss. Wir haben (in Deutschland) 2013 allerdings 626 EURO je 1’m³ zahlen müssen. Wer ist denn so viel böser als Russland uns so auszuplündern und niemand beschwert sich darüber?
April 10, 18:38 UTC+4 The text of the letter was obtained by ITAR-TASS on April 10
© ITAR-TASS/Alexei Druzhinin
Ukraine’s economy in the past several months has been plummeting. Its industrial and construction sectors have also been declining sharply. Its budget deficit is mounting. The condition of its currency system is becoming more and more deplorable. The negative trade balance is accompanied by the flight of capital from the country. Ukraine’s economy is steadfastly heading towards a default, a halt in production and skyrocketing unemployment.
Russia and the EU member states are Ukraine’s major trading partners. Proceeding from this, at the Russia-EU Summit at the end of January, we came to an agreement with our European partners to hold consultations on the subject of developing Ukraine’s economy, bearing in mind the interests of Ukraine and our countries while forming integration alliances with Ukraine’s participation. However, all attempts on Russia’s part to begin real consultations failed to produce any results.
Instead of consultations, we hear appeals to lower contractual prices on Russian natural gas – prices which are allegedly of a “political” nature. One gets the impression that the European partners want to unilaterally blame Russia for the consequences of Ukraine’s economic crisis.
Right from day one of Ukraine’s existence as an independent state, Russia has supported the stability of the Ukrainian economy by supplying it with natural gas at cut-rate prices. In January 2009, with the participation of the then-premier Yulia Tymoshenko, a purchase-and-sale contract on supplying natural gas for the period of 2009-2019 was signed. The contract regulated questions concerning the delivery of and payment for the product, and it also provided guarantees for its uninterrupted transit through the territory of Ukraine. What is more, Russia has been fulfilling the contract according to the letter and spirit of the document. Incidentally, Ukrainian Minister of Fuel and Energy at that time was Yuriy Prodan, who today holds a similar post in Kiev’s government.
INFOGRAPHICSRussian gas in Europe
One-third of gas consumed in EU comes from Russia. Infographics ITAR-TASS
The total volume of natural gas delivered to Ukraine, as stipulated in the contract during the period of 2009-2014 (first quarter), stands at 147.2 billion cubic meters. Here, I would like to emphasize that the price formula that had been set down in the contract had NOT been altered since that moment. And Ukraine, right up till August 2013, made regular payments for the natural gas in accordance with that formula.
However, the fact that after signing that contract, Russia granted Ukraine a whole string of unprecedented privileges and discounts on the price of natural gas, is quite another matter. This applies to the discount stemming from the 2010 Kharkiv Agreement, which was provided as advance payment for the future lease payments for the presence of the (Russian) Black Sea Fleet after 2017. This also refers to discounts on the prices for natural gas purchased by Ukraine’s chemical companies. This also concerns the discount granted in December 2013 for the duration of three months due to the critical state of Ukraine’s economy. Beginning with 2009,the total sum of these discounts stands at 17 billion US dollars. To this, we should add another 18.4 billion US dollars incurred by the Ukrainian side as a minimal take-or-pay fine.
In this manner, during the past four years, Russia has been subsidizing Ukraine’s economy by offering slashed natural gas prices worth 35.4 billion US dollars. In addition, in December 2013, Russia granted Ukraine a loan of 3 billion US dollars. These very significant sums were directed towards maintaining the stability and creditability of the Ukrainian economy and preservation of jobs. No other country provided such support except Russia.
Ukraine’s stored natural gas enough for one month – minister
What about the European partners? Instead of offering Ukraine real support, there is talk about a declaration of intent. There are only promises that are not backed by any real actions. The European Union is using Ukraine’s economy as a source of raw foodstuffs, metal and mineral resources, and at the same time, as a market for selling its highly-processed ready-made commodities (machine engineering and chemicals), thereby creating a deficit in Ukraine’s trade balance amounting to more than 10 billion US dollars. This comes to almost two-thirds of Ukraine’s overall deficit for 2013.
To a large extent, the crisis in Ukraine’s economy has been precipitated by the unbalanced trade with the EU member states, and this, in turn has had a sharply negative impact on Ukraine’s fulfillment of its contractual obligations to pay for deliveries of natural gas supplied by Russia. Gazprom neither has intentions except for those stipulated in the 2009 contract nor plans to set any additional conditions. This also concerns the contractual price for natural gas, which is calculated in strict accordance with the agreed formula. However, Russia cannot and should not unilaterally bear the burden of supporting Ukraine’s economy by way of providing discounts and forgiving debts, and in fact, using these subsidies to cover Ukraine’s deficit in its trade with the EU member states.
Putin says situation around Russia-Ukraine energy cooperation complicated
The debt of NAK Naftogaz Ukraine for delivered gas has been growing monthly this year. In November-December 2013 this debt stood at 1.451,5 billion US dollars; in February 2014 it increased by a further 260.3 million and in March by another 526.1 million US dollars. Here I would like to draw your attention to the fact that in March there was still a discount price applied, i.e., 268.5 US dollars per 1,000 cubic meters of gas. And even at that price, Ukraine did not pay a single dollar.
In such conditions, in accordance with Articles 5.15, 5.8 and 5.3 of the contract, Gazprom is compelled to switch over to advance payment for gas delivery, and in the event of further violation of the conditions of payment, will completely or partially cease gas deliveries. In other words, only the volume of natural gas will be delivered to Ukraine as was paid for one month in advance of delivery.
Undoubtedly, this is an extreme measure. We fully realize that this increases the risk of siphoning off natural gas passing through Ukraine’s territory and heading to European consumers. We also realize that this may make it difficult for Ukraine to accumulate sufficient gas reserves for use in the autumn and winter period. In order to guarantee uninterrupted transit, it will be necessary, in the nearest future, to supply 11.5 billion cubic meters of gas that will be pumped into Ukraine’s underground storage facilities, and this will require a payment of about 5 billion US dollars.
However, the fact that our European partners have unilaterally withdrawn from the concerted efforts to resolve the Ukrainian crisis, and even from holding consultations with the Russian side, leaves Russia no alternative.
Ukraine’s debt to Russia stands at $10 billion after severing Black Sea Fleet agreements
There can be only one way out of the situation that has developed. We believe it is vital to hold, without delay, consultations at the level of ministers of economics, finances and energy in order to work out concerted actions to stabilize Ukraine’s economy and to ensure delivery and transit of Russian natural gas in accordance with the terms and conditions set down in the contract. We must lose no time in beginning to coordinate concrete steps. It is towards this end that we appeal to our European partners.
It goes without saying that Russia is prepared to participate in the effort to stabilize and restore Ukraine’s economy. However, not in a unilateral way, but on equal conditions with our European partners. It is also essential to take into account the actual investments, contributions and expenditures that Russia has shouldered by itself alone for such a long time in supporting Ukraine. As we see it, only such an approach would be fair and balanced, and only such an approach can lead to success.
Wie Deutsche auf den Absturz der Medienqualität reagieren: http://www.hart-brasilientexte.de/2014/04/09/ukraine-2014-wie-deutsche-medienkonsumenten-in-leserbriefen-auf-den-fatalen-absturz-deutscher-medienqualitat-reagieren/
an die Journalisten und Redaktionen der ÖR! Die seit Monaten praktizierte Art der Berichterstattung zwang mich – als bisher eher “passive Nachrichten-Konsumentin” – dazu, selbst intensiv zu recherchieren, um einen Hauch von Objektivität in der Betrachtung der Geschehnisse in der Ukraine zu erhalten. Zuerst fühlte ich mich beleidigt, dass mir solch fade Kost von den ÖR vorgesetzt wurde – mittlerweile bin ich davon überzeugt, dass hinter diesem praktizierten Anti-Journalismus wohl der GEZ-finanzierte Bildungsauftrag versteckt sein muss Die eigene Recherche ist zwar sehr zeitintensiv-hat sich aber voll gelohnt (tolle Webseiten, freie Journalisten, Kommentatoren … gefunden) Danke liebe TS – nur die Sache mit der Verharmlosung der Nazis nehme ich euch wirklich übel !!!
Merkel-Timoschenko – weiter warten: http://www.hart-brasilientexte.de/2014/03/27/weiter-warten-auf-merkel-positionierung-zu-ihrer-freundin-timoschenko-bisher-nur-2-satze-armselig-oberflachliche-alibi-kritik-von-regierungssprecher-%E2%80%9Egewaltbilder-gewaltphantasien-liegen-we/
“Man muß die Kalaschnikow nehmen und alle Russen platt machen” – Merkel-Freundin Timoschenko: http://www.hart-brasilientexte.de/2014/03/25/timoschenkoman-mus-die-kalaschnikov-nehmen-und-alle-russen-plattmachen-welche-hochrangigen-mitteleuropaischen-politiker-ein-enges-verhaltnis-zu-timoschenko-suchten-offenbar-ihre-allseits-bekann/
Rechtsexperte Reinhard Merkel zu Ukraine-Krise: http://www.hart-brasilientexte.de/2014/04/08/ukraine-2014-klarstellungen-des-hamburger-rechtsexperten-reinhard-merkel-in-der-faz-wonach-rusland-die-krim-nicht-annektiert-habe-das-referendum-auf-der-krim-sowie-die-abspaltung-von-der-ukraine-ni/
Hat Russland die Krim annektiert? Nein. Waren das Referendum auf der Krim und deren Abspaltung von der Ukraine völkerrechtswidrig? Nein. Waren sie also rechtens? Nein; sie verstießen gegen die ukrainische Verfassung (aber das ist keine Frage des Völkerrechts). Hätte aber Russland wegen dieser Verfassungswidrigkeit den Beitritt der Krim nicht ablehnen müssen? Nein; die ukrainische Verfassung bindet Russland nicht. War dessen Handeln also völkerrechtsgemäß? Nein; jedenfalls seine militärische Präsenz auf der Krim außerhalb seiner Pachtgebiete dort war völkerrechtswidrig. Folgt daraus nicht, dass die von dieser Militärpräsenz erst möglich gemachte Abspaltung der Krim null und nichtig war und somit deren nachfolgender Beitritt zu Russland doch nichts anderes als eine maskierte Annexion? Nein…FAZ
”Was auf der Krim stattgefunden hat, war etwas anderes: eine Sezession, die Erklärung der staatlichen Unabhängigkeit, bestätigt von einem Referendum, das die Abspaltung von der Ukraine billigte. Ihm folgte der Antrag auf Beitritt zur Russischen Föderation, den Moskau annahm. Sezession, Referendum und Beitritt schließen eine Annexion aus, und zwar selbst dann, wenn alle drei völkerrechtswidrig gewesen sein sollten.”
Putin to US: It’s bad to read other people’s letters
Zündeln für den Dritten Weltkrieg – Rußlands lockende Bodenschätze: http://www.hart-brasilientexte.de/2014/04/11/nato-generalsekretar-rasmussen-schweigt-zu-den-rd-15-millionen-kriegstoten-der-volkerrechtswidrigen-aggression-von-nato-staaten-gegen-den-irak-attacken-von-nato-staaten-gegen-jugoslawien-irak-lib/
« Ukraine 2014: „Todesschüsse in Kiew“ – der Text der ARD-Monitor-Sendung. Bisher keinerlei Druck von Obama, Merkel, Gauck etc. auf die Kiewer Putschregierung, den Sachverhalt wirklich aufzuklären – was aufschlußreich ist. Hamburger Rechtsexperte Reinhard Merkel: Rußland hat Krim nicht annektiert. – Brasilien vor Fußball-WM 2014: Schwere Zusammenstöße zwischen Polizei und Wohnungslosen in Rio de Janeiro, die aus einer gerade errichteten Elendssiedlung vertrieben wurden. Zustimmung zur WM sank bei Brasilianern unter 50 %, laut Umfragen. »
Noch keine Kommentare
Die Kommentarfunktion ist zur Zeit leider deaktiviert.