#russian oil export

[irhabiya]

i honest to God think yemenis have every right to gut any saudi, emirati or usamerican if they so please

[just2bruce]

Dark fleets and Sanctions

We now have two worlds of international commerce, as a result of trade wars and the Ukraine-Russia conflict. As the Western world, principally the EU, UK and related countries and the US look to tighten sanctions on Russian oil exports, some shipowners are finding creative ways to get around the rules set by the West. One important escape hatch is to flag ships with a Flag State that doesn’t…

[head-post]

EU countries want assessment on potential sanctions against Russian LNG

European countries request an assessment of a possible restriction on imports of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) as part of the next package of sanctions.

EU diplomats stated that countries, such as Belgium, Germany, and France, addressed the European Commission. They asked to assess whether a ban on LNG transshipment at European ports would hit the EU economy harder than Russia’s, according to Reuters.

There’s broad support but mainly questions. This package is just stitches – we’ve never done anything like this before.

Diplomats argue that they are seeking to iron out the 14th package before Hungary takes over the EU presidency in July. Earlier, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán tried to block aid to Ukraine and restrictions on Moscow, they recalled.

That could thwart EU plans to impose sanctions, as their adoption requires unanimity. However, as the war drags on, the EU is running out of options to cut Russian revenues.

We were truly surprised at the resilience of the Russian economy but it has been hurt … Russia is turning into a kind of war economy.

Last month, the Russian government stated that it would seek ways to overcome what it considered to be illegal sanctions that the EU was imposing on LNG operations. Officials said any measures would have unpleasant consequences for European industry.

Read more HERE

[mightyflamethrower]

“Name me a single objective we’ve ever set out to accomplish that we’ve failed on. Name me one, in all of our history. Not one!”

-President Joe Biden, August 16, 2023 

Joe Biden in one of his now accustomed angry “get off my grass” moods dared the press to find just one of his policies/objectives that has not worked. Silence followed.

Perhaps it was polite to say nothing, given even the media knows almost every enacted Biden policy has failed.

Here is a summation of what he should instead apologize for.

Biden in late summer 2021 sought a 20th anniversary celebration of 9/11 and the 2001 subsequent invasion of Afghanistan. He wished to be the landmark president that yanked everyone out of Afghanistan after 20 years in country. But the result was the greatest military humiliation of the United States since the flight from Vietnam in 1975.

Consider the ripples of Biden’s disaster. U.S. deterrence was crippled worldwide. China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea almost immediately began to bluster or return to their chronic harassment of U.S. and allied ships and planes. We left thousands of allied Afghans to face Taliban retribution, along with some Western contractors.

Biden abandoned a $1 billion embassy, and a $300 million remodeled Bagram airbase strategically located not far from China and Russia, and easily defensible. Perhaps $50 billion in U.S. weaponry and supplies were abandoned and now find their way into the international terrorist mart.

All our pride flags, our multimillion gender studies programs at Kabul University, and our George Floyd murals did not just come to naught, but were replaced by the Taliban’s anti-homosexual campaigns, burkas, and detestation of any trace of American popular culture.

Vladimir Putin sized up the skedaddle. He collated it with Biden’s unhinged quip that he would not get too excited if Putin just staged a “minor” invasion of Ukraine. He remembered Biden’s earlier request to Putin to modulate Russian hacking to exempt a few humanitarian American institutions. Then Russia concluded of our shaky Commander-in-Chief that he either did not care or could do nothing about another Russian invasion.

The result so far is more than 500,000 dead and wounded in the war, a Verdun-stand-off along with fortified lines, the steady depletion of our munitions and weapon stocks, and a new China/Russia/Iran/North Korean axis, with wink and nod assistance from NATO Turkey.

Biden blew up the Abraham accords, nudged Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States over to the dark side of Iran, China, and Russia. He humiliated the U.S. on the eve of the midterms by callously begging the likes of Iran, Venezuela, Russia, and Saudi Arabia to pump more oil that he had damned as unclean at home and cut back its production. In Bidenomics, instead of producing oil, the president begs autocracies to export it to us at high prices while he drains the nation’s strategic petroleum reserve for short-term political advantage.

Biden deliberately alienated Israel by openly interfering in its domestic politics. He pursued the crackpot Iran Deal while his special Iranian envoy was removed for disclosing classified information.

No one can explain why Biden ignored the Chinese balloon espionage caper, kept mum about the engineered Covid virus that escaped the Wuhan lab, said not a word about a Chinese biolab discovered in rural California, and had his envoys either bow before Chinese leaders or take their insults in silence—other than he is either cognitively challenged or leveraged by his decade-long grifting partnership with his son Hunter.

Yet another Biden’s legacy will be erasing the southern border and with it, U.S. immigration law. Over seven million aliens simply crossed into the U.S. illegally with Biden’s tacit sanction—without audits, background checks, vaccinations, and COVID testing, much less English fluency, skills, or high-school diplomas.

Biden’s only immigration accomplishment was to render the entire illegal sanctuary city movement a cruel joke. Given the flood, mostly rich urban and vacation home dwellers made it very clear that while they fully support millions swarming into poor Latino communities of southern Texas and Arizona, they do not want any illegal aliens fouling their carefully cultivated nests.

Biden is mum about the 100,000 fentanyl deaths from cartel-imported and Chinese-supplied drugs across his open border. He seems to like the idea that Mexican President Obrador periodically mouths off, ordering his vast expatriate community to vote Democratic and against Trump.

Despite all the pseudo-blue collar dissimulation about Old Joe Biden from Scranton, he has little empathy for the working classes. Indeed, he derides them as chumps and dregs, urges miners to learn coding as the world covets their coal, and studiously avoids getting anywhere near the toxic mess in East Palestine, Ohio, or so far the moonscape on Maui.

Bidenomics is a synonym for printing up to $6 billion dollars at precisely the time post-Covid consumer demand was soaring, while previously dormant supply chains were months behind rebooting production and transportation. Biden is on track to increase the national debt more than any one-term president.

In Biden’s weird logic, if he raised the price of energy, gasoline, and key food staples 20-30 percent since his inauguration without a commensurate rise in wages, and then saw the worst inflation in 40 years occasionally decline from record highs one month to the next, then he “beat inflation.”

But the reason why more than 60 percent of the nation has no confidence in Bidenomics is because it destroyed their household budgets. Gas is nearly twice what it was in January 2021. Interest rates have about tripled. Key staple foods are often twice as costly—meat, vegetables, and fruits especially.

Biden has ended through his weaponized Attorney General Merrick Garland the age-old American commitment to equal justice under the law. The FBI, DOJ, CIA, and IRS are hopelessly politically compromised. Many of their bureaucrats serve as retrieval agents for lost Biden family incriminating laptops, diaries, and guns. In sum, Biden criminalized opposing political views.

Biden has unleashed the administrative state for the first time in history to destroy the Republican primary front runner and his likely opponent. His legacy will be the corruption of U.S. jurisprudence and the obliteration of the American reputation for transparent permanent government that should be always above politics, bribery, and corruption.

If in the future, an on-the-make conservative prosecutor in West Virginia, Utah, or Mississippi wishes to make a national name, then he has ample precedent to indict a Democrat President for receiving bad legal advice, questioning the integrity of an election, or using social media to express doubt that the new non-Election-Day balloting was on the up-and-up, or supposedly overvaluing his real estate.

The Biden family’s decade-long family grifting will likely expose Joe Biden as the first president in U.S. history who fitted precisely the Constitution’s definition of impeachment and removal—given his “high crimes and misdemeanors” appear “bribery”-related. If further evidence shows he altered U.S. foreign policy in accordance with the wishes from his benefactors in Ukraine, China, or Romania, then he committed constitutionally-defined “treason” as well.

Defunding the police, and pandemics of exempted looting, shoplifting, smashing, and grabbing, and carjacking merit no administrative attention. Nor does the ongoing systematic destruction of our blue bicoastal cities, Los Angeles, New York, Portland, San Francisco, Seattle, and Washington, D.C. All that, along with the disasters in East Palestine or Maui are out of sight, out of mind from a day at the beach at Biden’s mysteriously purchased nearly 6,000 square-foot beachfront mansion.

Biden ran on Barack Obama-like 2004 rhetoric (“Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America — there is the United States of America).”

And like Obama, he used that ecumenical sophistry to gain office only to divide further the U.S. No sooner than he was elected, we began hearing from the great unifier eerie screaming harangues about “semi-fascists” and “ultra-MAGA” dangerous zealots, replete with red-and black Phantom of the Opera backdrops.

What followed the unifying rhetoric was often amnesties and exemptions for violent offenders during the 120 days of rioting, looting, killing, and attacks on police officers in summer 2020.  In contrast, his administration lied when it alleged that numerous officers had died at the hands of the January 6 rioters. In addition, the Biden administration mandated long-term incarceration of many who committed no illegal act other than acting like buffoons and “illegally parading.”

The message was exemptions for torching a federal courthouse, a police precinct, or historic church or attempting to break into the White House grounds to get a president and his family—but long prison terms for wearing cow horns, a fur vest, and trespassing peacefully like a lost fool in the Capitol.

Finally, Biden’s most glaring failure was simply being unpresidential. He snaps at reporters, and shouts at importune times. He can no longer read off a big-print teleprompter. Even before a global audience, he cannot kick his lifelong creepy habit of turkey-gobbling on children necks, blowing into their ears and hair of young girls, and squeezing women far too long and far too hard.

His frailty redefined American presidential campaigning as basement seclusion and outsourcing propaganda to the media. And his disabilities only intensified during his presidency. Biden begins his day late and quits early. He has recalibrated the presidency as a 5-hour, 3-day a week job.

If Trump was the great exaggerator, Biden is our foremost liar. Little in his biography can be fully believed. He lies about everything from his train rides to the death of his son to his relationship with Biden-family foreign collaborators, to vaccinations to the economy. Anytime Biden mentions places visited, miles flown, or rails ridden, he is likely lying.

Biden continues with impunity because the media feels that a mentally challenged fabulist is preferable to Donald Trump and so contextualizes or ignores his falsehoods. Never has a U.S. president fallen and stumbled or gotten lost on stage so frequently—or been a single small trip away from incapacity.

So, yes, Biden’s initiatives have succeeded only in the sense of becoming successfully enacted—and therefore nearly destroying the country.

[suratan-zir]

Morning in Ukraine. Russia delivers its rich culture to us every single night.

Meanwhile, new Western-made components are found in russian-north korean missiles.

Sanctions are working as intended. Russia exports its oil and uses this money to buy western tech to use in their missiles to bomb our houses :)

I hate this stupid fucking world.

[zvaigzdelasas]

Oil is on track to be the largest export item for the United States this year for the first time in history, highlighting the growing influence of U.S. oil production and exports on the global oil market. Rising U.S. crude oil production in recent years and growing exports after the ban was lifted in 2015 have made U.S. oil an increasingly important commodity on the market, especially after the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the ban and sanctions on Russian crude in the West.

U.S. oil supply offset some of the OPEC+ cuts in the first half of this year as it is set for record-high production in 2023 and 2024.

16 Oct 23

[theculturedmarxist]

The contradictions of China-bashing in the United States begin with how often it is flat-out untrue.

The Wall Street Journal reports that the “Chinese spy” balloon that President Joe Biden shot down with immense patriotic fanfare in February did not in fact transmit pictures or anything else to China.

White House economists have been trying to excuse persistent US inflation saying it is a global problem and inflation is worse elsewhere in the world. China’s inflation rate is 0.7% year on year.

Financial media outlets stress how China’s GDP growth rate is lower than it used to be. China now estimates that its 2023 GDP growth will be 5-5.5%. Estimates for the US GDP growth rate in 2023, meanwhile, vacillate around 1-2%.

China-bashing has intensified into denial and self-delusion – it is akin to pretending that the United States did not lose wars in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and more.

The BRICS coalition (China and its allies) now has a significantly larger global economic footprint (higher total GDP) than the Group of Seven (the United States and its allies).

China is outgrowing the rest of the world in research and development expenditures.

The American empire (like its foundation, American capitalism) is not the dominating global force it once was right after World War II. The empire and the economy have shrunk in size, power and influence considerably since then. And they continue to do so.

Putting that genie back into the bottle is a battle against history that the United States is not likely to win.

The Russia delusion

Denial and self-delusion about the changing world economy have led to major strategic mistakes. US leaders predicted before and shortly after February 2022, when the Ukraine war began, for example, that Russia’s economy would crash from the effects of the “greatest of all sanctions,” led by the United States. Some US leaders still believe that the crash will take place (publicly, if not privately) despite there being no such indication.

Such predictions badly miscalculated the economic strength and potential of Russia’s allies in the BRICS. Led by China and India, the BRICS nations responded to Russia’s need for buyers of its oil and gas.

The United States made its European allies cut off purchasing Russian oil and gas as part of the sanctions war against the Kremlin over Ukraine. However, US pressure tactics used on China, India, and many other nations (inside and outside BRICS) likewise to stop buying Russian exports failed. They not only purchased oil and gas from Russia but then also re-exported some of it to European nations.

World power configurations had followed the changes in the world economy at the expense of the US position.

The military delusion

War games with allies, threats from US officials, and US warships off China’s coast may delude some to imagine that these moves intimidate China. The reality is that the military disparity between China and the United States is smaller now than it has ever been in modern China’s history.

China’s military alliances are the strongest they have ever been. Intimidation that did not work from the time of the Korean War and since then will certainly not be effective now.

Former president Donald Trump’s tariff and trade wars were meang, US officials said, to persuade China to change its “authoritarian” economic system. If so, that aim was not achieved. The United States simply lacks the power to force the matter.

American polls suggest that media outlets have been successful in a) portraying China’s advances economically and technologically as a threat, and b) using that threat to lobby against regulations of US high-tech industries.

The tech delusion

Of course, business opposition to government regulation predates China’s emergence. However, encouraging hostility toward China provides convenient additional cover for all sorts of business interests.

China’s technological challenge flows from and depends on a massive educational effort based on training far more STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) students than the United States does. Yet US business does not support paying taxes to fund education equivalently.

The reporting by the media on this issue rarely covers that obvious contradiction and politicians mostly avoid it as dangerous to their electoral prospects.

Scapegoating China joins with scapegoating immigrants, BIPOCs (black and Indigenous people of color), and many of the other usual targets.

The broader decline of the US empire and capitalist economic system confronts the nation with the stark question: Whose standard of living will bear the burden of the impact of this decline? The answer to that question has been crystal clear: The US government will pursue austerity policies (cut vital public services) and will allow price inflation and then rising interest rates that reduce living standards and jobs.

Coming on top of 2020’s combined economic crash and Covid-19 pandemic, the middle- and-lower-income majority have so far borne most of the cost of the United States’ decline. That has been the pattern followed by declining empires throughout human history: Those who control wealth and power are best positioned to offload the costs of decline on to the general population.

The real sufferings of that population cause vulnerability to the political agendas of demagogues. They offer scapegoats to offset popular upset, bitterness and anger.

Leading capitalists and the politicians they own welcome or tolerate scapegoating as a distraction from those leaders’ responsibilities for mass suffering. Demagogic leaders scapegoat old and new targets: immigrants, BIPOCs, women, socialists, liberals, minorities of various kinds, and foreign threats.

The scapegoating usually does little more than hurt its intended victims. Its failure to solve any real problem keeps that problem alive and available for demagogues to exploit at a later stage (at least until scapegoating’s victims resist enough to end it).

The contradictions of scapegoating include the dangerous risk that it overflows its original purposes and causes capitalism more problems than it relieves.

If anti-immigrant agitation actually slows or stops immigration (as has happened recently in the United States), domestic labor shortages may appear or worsen, which may drive up wages, and thereby hurt profits.

If racism similarly leads to disruptive civil disturbances (as has happened recently in France), profits may be depressed.

If China-bashing leads the United States and Beijing to move further against US businesses investing in and trading with China, that could prove very costly to the US economy. That this may happen now is a dangerous consequence of China-bashing.

Working together (briefly)

Because they believed it would be in the US interest, then-president Richard Nixon resumed diplomatic and other relations with Beijing during his 1972 trip to the country. Chinese chairman Mao Zedong, premier Zhou Enlai, and Nixon started a period of economic growth, trade, investment and prosperity for both China and the United States.

The success of that period prompted China to seek to continue it. That same success prompted the United States in recent years to change its attitude and policies. More accurately, that success prompted US political leaders like Trump and Biden to now perceive China as the enemy whose economic development represents a threat. They demonize the Beijing leadership accordingly.

The majority of US mega-corporations disagree. They profited mightily from their access to the Chinese labor force and the rapidly growing Chinese market since the 1980s. That was a large part of what they meant when they celebrated “neoliberal globalization.” A significant part of the US business community, however, wants continued access to China.

The fight inside the United States now pits major parts of the US business community against Biden and his equally “neoconservative” foreign-policy advisers. The outcome of that fight depends on domestic economic conditions, the presidential election campaign, and the political fallout of the Ukraine war as well the ongoing twists and turns of the China-US relations.

The outcome also depends on how the masses of Chinese and US people understand and intervene in relations between these two countries. Will they see through the contradictions of China-bashing to prevent war, seek mutual accommodation, and thereby rebuild a new version of the joint prosperity that existed before Trump and Biden?

This article was produced by Economy for All, a project of the Independent Media Institute, which provided it to Asia Times.

[mariacallous]

At the end of 2022, Dmitry Medvedev—Russia’s former prime minister and the current deputy chairman of its Security Council—offered his predictions for the coming year. He warned that Europeans would suffer badly from Russia’s decision to curb natural gas exports to the European Union, suggesting that gas prices would jump to $5,000 per thousand cubic meters in 2023—around 50 times their prewar average. He probably assumed that that sky-high prices would translate into a windfall for Russian state-owned energy company Gazprom, which was still supplying several European countries via pipeline, ramping up exports of liquefied natural gas, and eyeing new deals with China. Perhaps Medvedev also hoped that Europeans would beg the Kremlin to send the gas flowing again.

It turns out that Medvedev might want to polish his crystal ball: Last year, European gas prices averaged a mere one-tenth of his number. And just this month, Gazprom posted a massive $6.8 billion loss for 2023, the first since 1999.

Gazprom’s losses demonstrate the extent to which the Kremlin’s decision to turn off the gas tap to Europe in 2022 has backfired. In 2023, European Union imports of Russian gas were at their lowest level since the early 1970s, with Russian supplies making up only 8 percent of EU gas imports, down from 40 percent in 2021. This has translated into vertiginous losses for Gazprom, with the firm’s revenues from foreign sales plunging by two-thirds in 2023.

Gazprom’s woes are very likely setting off alarm bells in Moscow: With no good options for the company to revive flagging gas sales, its losses could weigh on Russia’s ability to finance the war in Ukraine. This is especially ironic given the fact that EU sanctions do not target Russian gas exports; the damage to the Kremlin and its war effort is entirely self-inflicted.

The most immediate impact of Gazprom’s losses will be on Russian government revenues, a crucial metric to gauge Moscow’s ability to sustain its war against Ukraine. Poring over Gazprom’s latest financials paints a striking picture. Excluding dividends, Gazprom transferred at least $40 billion into Russian state coffers in 2022, either to the general government budget or the National Welfare Fund (NWF), Moscow’s sovereign wealth fund.

This is no small feat. Until last year, Gazprom alone provided about 10 percent of Russian federal budget revenues through customs and excise duties as well as profit taxes. (Oil receipts usually account for an additional 30 percent of budget revenues.) This flood of money now looks like distant history. In 2023, the company’s contribution to state coffers through customs and excise duties was slashed by four-fifths, and like many money-losing firms, it is due a tax refund from the Russian treasury.

For Moscow, this is bad news on several fronts. Because of rising military expenses, the country’s fiscal balance swung into deficit when Moscow invaded Ukraine. To help plug the gap, the Kremlin ordered Gazprom to pay a $500 million monthly levy to the state until 2025. Now that the company is posting losses, it is unclear how it will be able to afford this transfer. In addition, Gazprom’s contribution to the NWF will probably have to shrink. For the Kremlin, this could not come at a worst time: The NWF’s liquid holdings have already dropped by nearly $60 billion, around half of its prewar total, as Moscow drains its rainy-day fund to finance the war. Finally, Gazprom’s woes could prompt the firm to shrink its planned investments in gas fields and pipelines—a decision that would, in turn, hit Russian GDP growth.

As if this was not enough, a closer look at Gazprom’s newly released financials suggests that the worst may be yet to come, with three telltale signs that 2024 could be even more difficult than 2023.

First, Gazprom’s accounts receivable—a measure of money due to be paid by customers—are in free fall, suggesting that the firm’s revenue inflow is drying up. Second, accounts payable shot up by around 50 percent in 2023, hinting that Gazprom is struggling to pay its own bills to various suppliers. Finally, short-term borrowing nearly doubled last year as Russian state-owned banks were enlisted to support the former gas giant.

Whereas these figures come from Gazprom’s English-language financials, the company’s latest Russian-language update yields two additional surprises—both of which show that the firm’s situation has worsened even further since the beginning of the year.

First, short-term borrowing during the first three months of 2024 roughly doubled compared to the previous quarter. If Russian state-owned banks continue to cover Gazprom’s losses, the Russian financial sector could soon find itself in trouble. This begs a tricky question: With the NWF’s reserves dwindling and Moscow’s access to international capital markets shut down, who would pay a bailout bill? Second, Gazprom’s losses were almost five times greater in the first quarter of 2024 than in the same period of 2023, hinting that the firm may post an even bigger loss this year than it did in 2023.

Looking ahead, 2025 will be an especially tough year for Gazprom. The transit deal that protects gas shipments through Ukraine via pipeline to Austria, Hungary, and Slovakia will probably expire at the end of this year, further curbing what’s left of Gazprom’s exports to Europe. A quick glance at a map makes it clear that China is now the only remaining option for Russian pipeline gas.

Yet Beijing is not that interested: Last year, it bought just 23 billion cubic meters of Russian gas, a mere fraction of the 180 billion cubic meters that Moscow used to ship to Europe. Negotiations to build the Power of Siberia 2 pipeline, which would boost gas shipments to China, have stalled. And in truth, China is not a like-for-like replacement for Gazprom’s lost European consumers. Beijing pays 20 percent less for Russian gas than the remaining EU customers, and the gap is predicted to widen to 28 percent through 2027.

Without pipelines, raising exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) is the only remaining option for Moscow. However, Western policies make this easier said than done. Western export controls curb Russia’s access to the complex machinery needed to develop LNG terminals, such as equipment to chill the gas to negative160 degrees Celsius so that it can be shipped on specialized vessels. And Washington has recently imposed sanctions on a Singapore-based firm and two ships working on a Russian LNG project, signaling that it will similarly designate any entity willing to work in the sector. Finally, U.S. sanctions make it much harder for Russian firms to finance the development of new liquefaction facilities and the gas field designed to supply them. In December, Japanese firm Mitsui announced that it was pulling staff and reviewing options for its participation to Russia’s flagship Arctic LNG 2 project. As a result, the Russian operator announced last month that it was suspending operations of the project, which was originally slated to launch LNG shipments early this year.

Gazprom’s cheesy corporate slogan—“Dreams come true!”—does not ring so true anymore as Moscow’s former cash cow becomes a loss-making drain. Data from the International Energy Agency confirms the extent of the Kremlin’s miscalculation when it turned off the gas tap to Europe: The agency predicts that Russia’s share of global gas exports will fall to 15 percent by 2030—down from 30 percent before Moscow��s full-blown invasion of Ukraine.

This was probably predictable. It is hard to imagine how a gas exporter configured to serve European customers and reliant on Western technology could thrive after refusing to serve its main client—signaling to every other potential customer, including China, that it is an unreliable supplier. Corporate empires tend to rise and fall, and it looks like Gazprom will be no exception to the rule.

[northwest-by-a-train]

When Russia went to war with Ukraine, there were dozens of takes on here about how Europe & America had "snubbed" Russia. Despite Germany shooting themselves in the foot by hooking their economy to Russian oil & gas, despite the high prestige Russian culture still enjoys among the western bourgeoisie, despite the "appease & profit" attitudes of European political, business & education leaders. Despite all that and more, you could find people saying Russia was constantly mistreated, humiliated and belittled by the western world, and was left with nothing but bad choices. I saw people on here argue that the EU should've made Russia a member in the 90s, that western powers should've done everything to preserve its social safety net, and encouraged friendship initiatives with its neighbors. The war in Ukraine was regrettable, yes, and many were against it. But ultimately, the onus of it fell on foreign powers essentially being filthy russophobes.

Now, American libs use the same logic to promote Kamala Harris. "You have to vote for us, or we'll genocide Palestine even harder. We don't want the guy who will genocide harder than this one to be in power. We want to have the one that keeps genocide at around the same level, and who could maybe be amenable to lower that level." And if you say that's irrational or disgusting or predatory blackmail, they turn around and say "Well, if you don't appease our empire, and you don't give us the appropriate level of respect and approval, and treat us as a reliable and trustworthy partner, of course this country will turn around and char the earth. Of course we will commit genocide, and ethnic cleansing, and bomb civilian buildings 24/7. Of course if we don't win on every trade deal and don't get to live better lives than the rest of the world and we don't get to racially segregate our country and export that segregation, we will cause a series of mounting international crises drawing us ever closer to nuclear war. Of course. That's obvious. Everyone is supposed to know that. Now get to appeasing us, and making us comfortable, and making us loved and beautiful. Or else you leave us with no choice."

And now the onus of this genocide is on Palestinians not being nice enough and Lebanon and Yemen not being nice enough and on the third world not being nice enough and college kids not being nice enough and on the international community not being nice enough and on Israel not being respectful enough of its western protectors and people on here will yell at you that you're not being nice enough to Kamala and that it's making things worse for everyone everywhere on earth and that the correct way for this crisis to be solved is people being nice to Kamala, which in turn will make Israel nicer and more respectful towards Kamala, which in turn will make the middle East nicer and more respectful towards Kamala, which in turn will make us all nicer and more respectful towards Kamala and solve all problems for all time.

So the only way out of this is to play nice 🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂 and nothing bad will ever happen again 🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂 and if everyone plays nice you'll eventually stop seeing the mangled corpses of children 🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂🙂

[learnukrainian]

23 August - Day of the National Flag of Ukraine

Day of the National/State Flag of Ukraine - День державного прапора України

What is the meaning behind the National Flag?

It is comprised of two colours - blue and yellow, which represent the clear blue sky and the golden wheat field underneath. Why so? Well, generally speaking, it is a very typical scenery for Ukraine, as Ukrainians have had a strong connection with nature and agriculture for centuries. Moreover, even nowadays (at least, prior to the full-scale russian invasion in 2022) the majority of produced goods are grains, in particular wheat, corn, and sunflower seeds/oil (for this reason some people even referred to Ukraine as 'the bread basket of Europe').

Just to give you some infographics

In 2021, Ukraine was

• one of the top 5 world wheat exporters (5th place) (The World’s Top Wheat Exporters In 2021 (rferl.org)

• one of the top 3 world corn exporters (3rd place) Corn | OEC - The Observatory of Economic Complexity

• and the biggest sunflower oil exporter in the world (1st place) quote: "Since 2012, Ukraine has been the world's leading exporter of sunflower oil with a 47% share of global sunflower oil exports in 2021." (Ukraine: Sunflower oil production (October 2022) - Ukraine | ReliefWeb)

Vocabulary:

День - den - day

Прапор - prapor - flag

Національний - natseeonalny - national (masculine form of the adjective)

Державний - derzhavny - state (masculine form of the adjective)

Україна - Oo-kra-yee-na - Ukraine

Серпень - serpen - August

[apas-95]

Please bear in mind that I'm not disagreeing with you or anything like that, in fact I appreciate your views on Russia-Ukraine and this is why I just want to ask this. So, to simplify, you believe that the conflict is of two imperial powers, NATO vs Putin's Russia. Okay. What I struggle to understand is this, and um I myself am from Kazakhstan, so I guess bear that in mind. So if Russia is seeking new colonies (Crimea as the source of oil, famously), why wouldn't they rather colonize Kazakhstan? We are richer than Ukraine, our oil reserves are greater, we can mount no defense like Ukraine and obviously would not receive any help from NATO. In fact during January events we explicitly asked them to help us, their army entered, and then left (even though many claimed they would overturn our government). Idk how much you know about our country, so you might claim that Russia already has us as their colony, but I know for a fact that the most of oil reserves belong to Italian, German and American companies. Our president (Tokayev) while might seem like Putin's puppet, even during this war has gone against Putin - remained neutral about the conflict (like Belarus we technically could help), and also accepted the greatest number of refugees from Russia who refused to join the war (in my country many have argued that he's done more than the West to truly stop the conflict with this act). There are 14 Post-Soviet Republics, if not us, why not colonize any other country except the one that gets help from the States? (Armenia famously got their help during the whole Azerbaijan invasion) Also - you might say that Ukraine bc of their crimes against Russians gave a better reason, then we, too, have anti-Russia's movements that technically could provide a reason. Again, I'm not pro-Putin, obv, and mb this isn't important in the context, mb I shouldn't include such a narrow point of view, just, if you have anything to say about that, I would love to hear it, thanks!

I would say that there are a few main points that should be got across.

First: taking it as given that the Russian Federation is an imperialist country, in the Marxist sense of the term, we would have to conclude that it's a much weaker imperialist country than the USA.

From the start of the Russian Federation, it was a very impoverished country, one that survived mainly by selling off its natural resources and cannibalising the industrial base it took from the USSR. However, imperialism relies more on the wealth of the capitalist class than the country as a whole, and there was a lot of Soviet wealth and expertise to cannibalise. In Marxist terms, the key feature of imperialism is the export of capital, rather than resources or commodities, becoming the key part of the economy. The bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation has been able to build up enough capital to begin making this possible.

As it stands now, in the cases of CSTO countries, while the RF is often not even the largest investor, it is still a substantial investor, when looking at Foreign Direct Investment figures. Kazakhstan specifically has far more European investment (in part because of its resources compared to other countries), but it's undeniable that the RF is an influence - that we could describe the CSTO as, broadly, the RF's sphere of influence. While the US's sphere of influence is basically the entire world; and the EU's sphere of influence is all of Europe, most of Eurasia, and most of Africa; the Russian Federation would have a comparatively much smaller sphere of influence with a lot of overlap.

The second thing is: the Russian Federation's invasion of Ukraine is not, principally, an attempt at simple economic expansion, but motivated primarily by competition with the US imperialist bloc.

You are right - if the RF was looking to just invade and directly take control of whatever country it wished, it wouldn't choose Ukraine, it would choose somewhere closer to home. However, direct colonisation isn't how modern imperialism operates. Financial control with the threat of military action is far easier to maintain, once you've built up the capital. Being an imperialist country is exactly what makes 'primitive accumulation' through seizing territory no longer necessary. The reason the Russian Federation invaded Ukraine in 2022, and began military action against the country in 2014, is specifically because the prior neutral government was overthrown in a US-backed coup which installed a right-wing, nationalist government, which was explicitly hostile to Russia.

This isn't fueled by a simple, moral justification of 'well they hate Russians, so we should invade them' - it's a political move based on the fact that this new government was explicitly allied with the USA. From the USA's side, it was a move specifically to split the EU and RF blocs. The EU was becoming less interested in the alliance with the USA, and more interested with closer ties with the Russian Federation - the USA provoking a war both weakens the RF, as well as demonstrates its military dominance to the EU. Had the Kazakh government instead called for NATO to assist it, the Russian response may have been different. Imperialism is fine with nominal independence - it wants influence, not direct control - but when that influence is threatened, when a country takes a hard, military stance against it, then it acts violently.

So, again, I'd say the character of this conflict is inter-imperialist competition, instigated mainly by the US imperialist bloc, in order to weaken ties between the RF and EU imperialist blocs. The war is fought between the capitalists of each nation over which group of them gets market access to which territories, and the working people gain nothing either way. The workers, once united under a socialist state, now kill each other, so that the oligarchs that keep them poor can get richer. Neither side of this conflict fights for the workers.

Hope this helps explain my position! Also, for what it's worth, I lived in Kazakhstan for a time as a child, in Almaty.

[irhabiya]

gotta say the us and uk teaming up to bomb yemen to defend israel and their precious cargo ships also didnt help their defense

don't think it affects their defense that much tbf that's business as usual for the us

[its-suanneschafer-author]

Continuing my review and summarizing of Project 2025, the GOP 2024 platform, and Trump’s Agenda 47.

1) Trump denies knowledge of Project 2025, a radical conservative Christian manifesto, yet many of his present and former advisors wrote the 900 page document which is a blueprint for the new GOP president starting from day one with massive, sweeping actions that will not only paralyze the government but will ensure chaos for years to come. It is the most detailed look at a future Trump presidency. Trump’s name is mentioned 268 times in the document, so it was certainly written with him in mind. Trump instituted 64% of the policy recommendations that were put out in the 2016 conservative mandate, a blueprint for the Trump administration and which was as right-wing and conservative as the current Project 2025.

2) Agenda 47 collects formal policies Trump plans to put into effect, many of which rely on executive orders and significant expansion of his executive powers. In 2023, Trump campaign officials stated that Project 2025 aligns well with Agenda 47.

These policies include:

A) restriction of Chinese ownership of US infrastructure

B) End the “Biden war” on US energy by eliminating every regulation that hampers domestic production, getting out of the Paris Agreement, and giving fast approval to every oil infrastructure project that comes before his administration 

C) Baseline tariffs on most foreign goods, revoking Chinese Most Favored Nation trade status

D) Decrease trade deficits

E) Not bailing out failing banks, slashing regulations, and repealing Biden’s tax hikes to reduce inflation

F) The Trump Reciprocal Trade Act will tariff other countries’ imports at the same rate they tariff our exports. NB: The costs of these tariffs will be passed on to consumers and will cause more harm than good

G) Gut Biden’s Green New Deal policies and electric cars initiative, and terminate all emission regulations on cars, fossil fuels, etc

H) Dept of Education

1—Cut federal funding for any school or program teaching critical race theory or gender ideology by removing the radicals who have infiltrated the Dept of Education. 

2—Keep men out of women’s sports. 

3—Create a new way to certify teachers based on their patriotism and give preferential treatment to schools that abolish teacher tenure, abolish DEI, and adopt direct election of school principals by parents. 

4—Pursue federal civil rights cases against schools that engage in “equity” by taxing up to the entire amount of their endowment

5—Restore parental rights to control their child’s education; allow parents to hire and fire principals and teachers.

6—Bring back school prayer NB: This includes reading the Bible but doesn’t include any teachings of other religions

7—Allow teachers to carry concealed weapons at school 

8—Immediate expulsion and sentencing to reform school of any student who harms another student or a teacher or use or possession of drugs at school

9—The US government will issue bachelor’s degrees to those who did not finish their degrees by creating a new educational institution aimed at competing with schools already in existence. NB: This is from the man who owes fines from the failure of his own for-profit college.

I) Reinterpret presidential powers so that he has greater control of the government in the White House

(the unitary executive theory).

1—Dismantle the “deep state” and revamp every aspect of the US government. NB: These policies could upset the balance of power between the three branches of the federal government and provoke a constitutional showdown by usurping congressional authority and cutting out any program he doesn’t like or whose proponents have angered him. This is a fascist plan

2—Prevent World War III and end the Russian invasion of Ukraine. NB: The fact that he has buddied up to Putin makes this highly unlikely.

3—Overhaul the entire US defense and intelligence bureaucracies

4—Ask Europe to refund the money we spend to rebuild the stockpiles we sent to Ukraine. NB: Good luck with that

J) Keep Medicare and Social Security intact. NB: Every single congressional Republican—and 43 Senate Republicans—sided with Big Pharma over the American people and blocked an amendment that would cap out-of-pocket insulin costs at $35 for millions of Americans on private insurance. Thus, Big Pharma and the rich get richer at the cost of the health and lives of the poor. In March 2024, the Republican Study committee which represents 100% of House Republican leadership and 80% of their members proposed yet another budget that would cut the following by $4.5 trillion over 1-0 years: Medicare (transition Medicare to a premium support system that would raise premiums for many seniors), Social Security ($1.5 trillion in cuts) , the Affordable Care Act, the Children’s Health Insurance Initiative and increase prescription drugs (removing $35 insulin), energy and housing costs while raising the retirements age plus forcing $5.5. trillion in tax cuts for the very rich.

K) Immigration policy

1—Ban birthright citizenship 

2—End welfare for illegal immigants

3—Massive deportation of immigrants

L) Inflation

1—Build “Freedom Cities” on undeveloped federal land to lower cost of buying a home

2—Build vertical takeoff and landing vehicles

M) Shatter the left-wing censorship regime

L) Law enforcement

1—Increase investment in police personnel, stop illegal drugs

2—Death penalty for drug dealers and human traffickers

3—Overhaul federal standards on disciplining minors

4—Concealed carry reciprocity

M) DEI

1—Abandon DEI, terminate any offices, staff, and initiatives connected to DEI

2—Focus on anti-white racism rather than discrimination against people of color

N) Transgender and LBGQI+ rights: Terminate all gender affirming care at any age and terminating federal funding for any hospital or healthcare provider that participates in it

[head-post]

European Commission wants to cut LNG purchases from Russia after halting gas transit through Ukraine

The European Commission intends to reduce purchases of Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) after Russia’s pipeline gas transit through Ukraine stops on 31 December 2024.

European Commissioner for Energy Kadri Simson told reporters at an EU Council meeting:

We have to discuss the extension of measures to limit gas consumption and we will discuss the consequences of stopping the transit of Russian gas through Ukraine. I am also sure that we will have a good discussion on how we can further reduce the supply [to EU countries] of Russian liquefied natural gas.

Simson also emphasised that under the European Commission’s RePowerEU plan, EU countries are obliged to “completely phase out Russian gas by 2027”. The directive to ban Russian LNG supplies is planned to be introduced in April.

Read more HERE

[tomorrowusa]

People in Washington have belatedly been taking notice that Ukraine, a country with not much of a navy, has chased Putin's fleet out of much of the Black Sea. Things are relatively close to normal for Ukrainian grain exports which use shipping on that sea.

In the Black Sea, Ukraine forced the Russian fleet to retreat from the historic headquarters of Sevastopol in Crimea after hitting ships and key buildings repeatedly with drones and missiles. That was a personal blow to Russian President Vladimir Putin, who lauded the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014.  The maritime success also opened a corridor for Ukraine to move grain shipments in defiance of Russia’s decision last summer to cancel an export deal, an economic and symbolic victory in the war.  “Ukraine won in the Black Sea,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said during a trip to Washington last month.  Zelensky has made the Black Sea victories a central part of his pitch to Western allies and supporters in the past couple of months — a sign of Ukrainian strength after the ground counteroffensive launched in June largely failed, delivering a stalemate on the frontlines of eastern Ukraine.  “This is huge,” said Olga Lautman, nonresident senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis. “They literally shifted the balance in the Black Sea. … Besides practically reopening the Black Sea, they’ve taken out Russia’s navy and pushed them out for the most part. And the attacks continue.”  Ukraine has maintained an edge in the waters of the Black Sea since the war began in February 2022 — and Kyiv does not have a naval force, let alone one the size of the Russian fleet.  In the early days of the war, Ukraine secured its hold on Odesa, a Black Sea port city in southern Ukraine, and sunk the Russian flagship the Moskva.  Ukrainian troops also liberated Snake Island, where defiant Ukrainian troops emerged famous for cursing at a Russian warship, in spring 2022.  In August, Ukraine stepped up attacks on the Black Sea fleet in Sevastopol, a hub for the Russian navy since Moscow annexed Crimea, but which has historical importance for Russia going back to the 1700s. In September, one strike damaged the headquarters of the Russian navy in Sevastopol. That month also saw Ukrainian special forces retake oil platforms in the Black Sea from Russia years after Moscow first seized them.  For the next two months, Ukraine kept assaulting Russian ships, leading to a full Russian naval retreat from Sevastopol and western Crimea.  After the fall attacks, Zelensky hailed Ukrainian forces for “pushing the Russian navy out to the eastern part of the Black Sea,” saying they “totally changed” the situation in the maritime domain.  “Russia can no longer use our sea to expand its aggression to other parts of the world,”  Zelensky said in an Oct. 31 address, “Ukraine’s success in the battle for the Black Sea will go down in history books, although it’s not being discussed much today.” 

It's become increasingly difficult for Russia to resupply its positions by sea. Last month Ukraine sunk a Russian ship loaded to the brim with munitions. This took place in Feodosia in occupied eastern Crimea which is only 100 km by road from Kerch where Ukraine damaged a bridge which connects occupied Ukraine to Russia.

Despite heavy and embarrassing losses, Putin will not give up his desire to conquer Ukraine unless he is forced to. Ukraine has been holding its own, but it needs help obtaining weapons and equipment. The GOP House of Representatives is holding up aid to Ukraine for its own political purposes. We need to contact our representatives and tell them to quit acting like Putin's agents on Capitol Hill.

Find out who your House member is.

Find Your Representative

Then contact him or her using the contact information given at the site. With Republicans, invoke the name of Ronald Reagan and insist that they quit supporting measures which help the Evil Empire. Be firm but polite.