# Forum About Russia Politics  Russo-Ukrainian gas quarrell

## TATY

So Russia switched off Ukraine's gas. Thoughts, reactions, etc. 
Буде холодно у Києві....

----------


## Бармалей

Well, supposedly, Kiev says it can make it through the winter -- so they wouldn't necessarily be cold -- just chilly (but then again, assuming they could last, say only 3 days -- would they actually admit it?). 
What I found really interesting is that Ukraine claims it has a contract right to 15% of the transported fuel, as a tariff for the pipeline crossing their territory. OK, fine -- but the Russian side is saying it would be straight-up theft, as it wasn't covered by the contract at all. Setting this entire issue aside for a second, shouldn't somebody know what the contract says, one way or the other -- or do these officials just sign these things while they're drunk? 
Going back to the 15%, it will be interesting to see if the Ukrainians elect to exercise this right/theft since they'll essentially be taking European countries' oil -- Moscow will still have its money, presumably. Ultimately, though, they do seem to have quite a bit of leverage, since all these pipelines cross their territory. They may get cool and their industry may suffer, but Russia needs a way to sell that gas, too -- let's not forget that the oil/gas sector makes up a big chunk of their economy.

----------


## TATY

I can see the point that Russia makes. Why should it subsidise Ukraine?  
But implementing such steap price increases overnight is harsh, especially on a weak economy like Ukraine's. 
It is a bit hypocritical of the Ukrainian government to want to be all pro-West and be properly independant of Russia but at the same time have Russia subsidise them. 
But as I said before, its more about the time frame, rather than the actual price increase. 
Most of the gas that goes through Ukraine goes to Germany, and other major recipients are Austria, Italy and France. If Ukraine starts taking gas and the flow to these Western European countries is affected, they are just gonna get pissed with Russia and not Ukraine.

----------


## Бармалей

> But as I said before, its more about the time frame, rather than the actual price increase.

 To which the Russian rebuttal would be: "We offered them loans and to postpone the rate hike for 3 months, if they'd just agree to it." 
But, of course, you are basically right; the Russian side is being a bit ridiculous -- and let's just cut the crap, and admit it: Ukraine no longer wants to have a unique relationship with Russia, and so the Russians are cutting loose of its benefits -- not that there's anything wrong with that. Look, Kiev wants to be part of the NATO/EU club, which is fine, great, and wonderful, but they shouldn't expect to keep the perks from the "competing club." Let's flip the scenario a bit by playing that time-honored game "What if?" What if, say, a NATO member, were to join the Warsaw Pact (we're playing "what if" here, remember). Do you think that we'd say "ok, that's fine guys -- we're going to continue to supply you with military hardware!" Of course not. To offer up an analogy, you can run as a Republican or a Democrat -- but don't expect to be funded by both parties. 
Oh, and the word crap is censored? What the crap!?!?

----------


## DDT

> What I found really interesting is that Ukraine claims it has a contract right to 15% of the transported fuel, as a tariff for the pipeline crossing their territory. .

  I think that this is quite fair. That's why after I noticed that the local TV cable company had routed the cable to my neighbors' telvision through my appartment I felt compelled to get out my tool kit and tap into it. Wouldn't you?

----------


## mishau_

А почему вожди-командиры розовых демократий молчат - грузины, там, всякие и проч? Что-то не слыхать г-на Саакашвили, что-то не протягивает он щедрую длань помощи своим ученикам-укаринцам. Мирно посапывает Молдавия со совоей красно-коммунистической демократией. Ба, совсем затухла Прибалтика со своими эсэсовцами! Есть такое слово - "кусты". Возможно, это кусты роз или апельсинов, но хорошее место, знаете-ли, чтобы сидеть тихо-претихо и обсираться со страху.   ::   
Извините за немножечко _хули_ганский комментарий.  ::

----------


## VendingMachine

Bad news, Ukraine. Mooching off over.

----------


## pranki

Анекдот в тему, недавно мною услышанный:
Январь 2006 года. Фрадков заходит к Путину.
- Европа в панике - без газа нечем топить.
- Пошлите им для сугреву партию оранжевых шарфиков.  
My translation (for your checking  ::  ):
January, 2006. Fradkov came to Putin:
-- Europe is in panic -- without gas there are no fuel for heating
-- Send them a consignment of little orange scarfes for getting warm    ::

----------


## mishau_

Циничные анекдоты - хорошие анекдтоты, если они, конечно, не про тебя. Я тут BBC почитал, прямо "газки-шоу" какое-то.   http://news8.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/russian/ ... 568088.stm  _
Russian president clearly and cynically enough explained what was  happening. These explanations are complete. 
Coming from president's words, there are "good neighbours and friends", who are possible to make a compromise with in price issues. In practice it means inclusion of all the consumers of a "friendly country" in a varying degree in the chain of "Gazprom's" cross-financing, that the whole Russian industry uses now._

----------


## Бармалей

It would seem as though they have already tapped the keg:  _Russia's state-controlled natural gas monopoly on Monday accused Ukraine of diverting about $25 million worth of Russian gas intended for other European countries, a day after Moscow halted deliveries to Kiev in a price dispute. 
The only gas now being put into pipelines headed for Ukraine is intended for European customers, the company said. 
Several countries reported problems Monday. Hungary, Poland and Austria all reported that gas piped to them from Russia through Ukraine had slowed down by between 14 and 40 percent._  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060102/...NlYwMlJVRPUCUl

----------


## Dogboy182

You know this WHOOOLE problem could have been avoided if Ukraine didn't want 'independence' from the Union in 1991. Russia should shut off all the gas and oil... to the WORLD! That will teach them a lesson they wont soon be forgetting!

----------


## TATY

Ukraine didn't really want independance in 1991. It only went for independance once it was clear the Soviet Union was falling to pieces. 
And with the current situation, Ukraine will pay in the end, but I think it'll continue to pilfer the gas designated for Europe, which will just make the affected countries pissed with Russia. 
Germany's gas flow from Russia has dramatically gone down since the Russia "turned off" Ukraine's supply. Germany know it's because Ukraine is taking its gas, but they are just pissed with Russia. So Russia is pissing off some of it's biggest customers.

----------


## kalinka_vinnie

Well, firslty, Russia supplies only 30 percent of the Gas Ukraine uses, most of their gas comes from Turkmenistan. Secondly, Russia didn't turn off the gas, since they need to sell it to Europe (80% of the gas Russia sells the Europe is via the Ukraine), they just reduced the pressure such, that powerstations that run on gas could not work. Thirdly, east europe (not only Ukraine) is feeling the pain of Gazproms action, since there is a decreased supply of natural gas to them. I think all in all, it hurts Russia just as much as it does Ukraine (Europe will everntually find other suppliers).

----------


## TATY

Yes, we are aware they are not cutting the gas to Ukraine. Because how could they steal the gas if it was switched off. 
And 30% is a significant proportion, especially in winter. 
Russia's problem is the fact that so much of the gas has to travel through Ukraine, meaning they can'st simply turn off the supply.  
It's up to Ukraine if they take the gas or not. Russia can't physically stop them taking gas without stopping the rest of Europe getting gas either. 
According to BBC: *Moldovan President Vladimir Voronin said his country had also been cut off, after refusing to pay $160 per 1,000 cubic metres, according to the Itar-Tass news agency.*

----------


## N

> Well, firslty, Russia supplies only 30 percent of the Gas Ukraine uses, most of their gas comes from Turkmenistan.

 In 2005? 
Today in 2006 Ukraine has no gas from Turkmenistan because the contract is not sigined yet. Turkmenistan sold *all* their first quarter gas to RF and got the money already.

----------


## kalinka_vinnie

> Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie  Well, firslty, Russia supplies only 30 percent of the Gas Ukraine uses, most of their gas comes from Turkmenistan.   In 2005? 
> Today in 2006 Ukraine has no gas from Turkmenistan because the contract is not sigined yet. Turkmenistan sold *all* their first quarter gas to RF and got the money already.

 Needless to say, you are right:  http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europ ... ne.gas.ap/ 
"[...] Meanwhile, analysts said a Russian bid Thursday to buy up natural gas from another major supplier to Ukraine, Turkmenistan, would leave the Central Asian nation with little gas to sell to Ukraine. 
But Ukrainian Prime Minister Yekhanurov told Kiev's private Era radio Friday that Ukraine would get the 40 billion cubic meters of natural gas it was scheduled to receive from Turkmenistan in 2006 "because an agreement has already been signed." 
Yekhanurov said transport could be a problem. Turkmenistan sends gas to Ukraine via Russia. A Russian-run company, Rosukrenergo, charges Ukraine for the transit of Turkmen gas, and Gazprom owns the pipelines. 
Ivan Varga, a director of Ukraine's state-run Naftogaz, said Ukrainian gas reserves from vast underground storage tanks could last until mid-April."

----------


## kalinka_vinnie

Here is another article:  http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/03/inter ... r=homepage 
MOSCOW, Jan. 2 - For President Vladimir V. Putin and Russia, 2006 was supposed to be a banner year. Instead, it has begun badly, and with problems of the Kremlin's own making. 
The Kremlin, which labored in 2005 to distance itself from the ill will that accompanied its destruction of the Yukos oil company and the bungled handling of the rigged Ukrainian presidential election in 2004, has begun the new year with a display of politics and bullying, followed by partial retreat, that is raising fresh questions about its reliability as an international energy partner.  
The problems are familiar. Even as Russia assumed the presidency of the Group of 8 industrial nations on Jan. 1, a position it hopes will improve its stature, Mr. Putin returned to two issues that have previously undercut his reputation: control and management of Russia's energy resources and Russia's waning influence in Ukraine. 
The source of the trouble is a relatively straightforward question: What will Ukraine pay for imported Russian natural gas? It is a commodity that Ukraine, and much of Europe, desperately needs. 
Gazprom, Russia's state-controlled gas monopoly, seeks $220 to $230 per 1,000 cubic meters for Ukraine, abandoning the favored rate of $50 for a more realistic market rate.  
Ukraine, while agreeing that it must eventually pay market rates, seeks a much lower price and a transition period to a full rate - an arrangement that Russia has offered to other former Soviet nations. 
The Kremlin's solution on Sunday was to reduce gas flows through the pipeline system for Ukraine, a major transshipment point for gas going to Western Europe.  
The move, in retrospect, seems both spiteful and unwise, because Russia then tried to send gas through Ukraine to reach European customers on the other side. 
One predictable result was a threat to winter fuel supplies in Europe. By Monday, declines in pipe pressure were reported in Austria, France, Italy, Moldova, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Hungary, which said it would have to cut exports to Bosnia and Serbia and Montenegro.  
Even Germany, usually a faithful Russian ally and Russia's largest gas customer, wondered aloud whether Russia could be trusted.  
Michael Glos, the German economy minister, said in a radio interview that Germany would like to import even more gas, but could do so only "if we know that supplies from the east are dependable," according to Reuters.  
Speaking of Russia, he added, "One should naturally act responsibly."  *Supply concerns seemed to ease Monday as Gazprom announced it was restoring most of the gas flow to Ukraine. Mr. Putin, amid a fresh din of international criticism, appeared to blink.* [bold by kalinka_vinnie  :: ] 
But a set of oddities and problems remained. 
First among the oddities was that Mr. Putin, who managed to draw unflattering attention to himself, did so in a case where almost no one disputes that in principle he is right: Gazprom's customers should pay market prices.  
Western governments, the European Union and the customers themselves have not argued otherwise. The issue is what market prices are, and how Ukraine should reach them.  
To build what seemed a manageable business dispute with a neighbor into a problem for much of Europe, Mr. Putin, a former K.G.B. colonel who last year called the collapse of the Soviet Union a "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century," cast himself anew.  
For the purposes of this quarrel, he became not only a capitalist but a monopolist, embracing a free-market rationale in its harshest form. His position was clear: If Ukraine does not like the price, let its factories slow down, let its lights dim, let its people freeze. And let Europe worry if it will have heat this winter, too. 
Other problems followed, as the dispute attracted more attention. While the Kremlin argued for market rates, it refused to acknowledge why Ukraine's gas prices have been so low. The job of clarifying the record fell to Andrei N. Illarionov, who was Mr. Putin's top economic adviser until he resigned in frustration last week.  
Mr. Illarionov said in a radio interview that Ukraine's subsidized rate was essentially a problem of the Kremlin's own creation. Gazprom had agreed to the $50 price in 2004, he said on the Ekho Moskvy radio station, to help a Kremlin-backed candidate in Ukraine's presidential election.  
The $50 deal was supposed to last until 2009, he said. But when the Kremlin's candidate lost the presidency to Viktor A. Yushchenko - who wants Ukraine to join the European Union and NATO - the Kremlin changed the rules. Market rates were invoked.  
Moreover, Gazprom has been using different pricing criteria for different nations. Georgia pays $110 for the same amount of gas, as does Armenia and Azerbaijan. The Baltic states, which are members of the European Union, pay $120 to $125. Moldova pays $160. Belarus, a firm Kremlin ally, pays $47. 
The origins of Ukraine's current rate, and this variable pricing regime, allowed critics to suggest that the Kremlin suffers from amnesia and hypocrisy alike.  
The problems only piled on. Experts also charged that Mr. Putin had undermined the credibility of Gazprom, Russia's largest company. 
Gazprom has been seeking international respect and trying to shed its image as a Kremlin stooge. But at important moments last week, it was not the company's official leadership making proposals for settlement, but Mr. Putin.  
Mr. Putin's appearances put to rest any questions about who is handling this affair, and underscored anew that Gazprom is a company bound to the whims of a head of state.  
Investors will get some measure of how the company has fared in the short term when the Russian stock market reopens after the Russian holiday season, on Jan. 10. The news, experts say, has been bad. 
"Once again we are seeing that Gazprom is not a leading international company," said Dan Rapoport, managing director of CentreInvest, a Moscow-based investment firm, "but a tool of policy making for the Kremlin."

----------


## TATY

[quote]Moreover, Gazprom has been using different pricing criteria for different nations. Georgia pays $110 for the same amount of gas, as does Armenia and Azerbaijan. The Baltic states, which are members of the European Union, pay $120 to $125. Moldova pays $160. Belarus, a firm Kremlin ally, pays $47[quote] 
Isn't that the key here. It is obviously politically motivated. If Moscow just admitted as such, it wouldn't make them look so bad. 
Barmaley posted this in the Ukrainian longue, asking for a translation.    *"And let those cursed Russians choke on their gas"* 
I did the translation myself so corrections are welcome.

----------


## scotcher

Politically _de_motivated©, I reckon. 
The original _massive discount_ was politically motivated, but the conditions under which that massive discount was granted no longer apply, so...

----------


## TATY

> Politically _de_motivated©, I reckon. 
> The original _massive discount_ was politically motivated, but the conditions under which that massive discount was granted no longer apply, so...

 Yes, but it still means it has to do with politics. E.g. Russia says they are bringing the price in line with EU prices. So then why are Belarus' still paying fuck all? 
Cos Lukashenko sucks Putin's cock and Yushchenko won't.

----------


## mishau_

[quote]
So then why are Belarus' still paying @@@@ all? 
Cos Lukashenko sucks Putin's cock and Yushchenko won't.
[/qoute]
Gazprom is the co-owner of Belarussian pipes. The same thing is about Georgia. Ukraine is known to rebuff Russia's proposal to share its pipelines with Russian companies. Whose cock Yushchenko sucks is not a secret, either.

----------


## TATY

> So then why are Belarus' still paying @@@@ all? 
> Cos Lukashenko sucks Putin's cock and Yushchenko won't.
> [/qoute]
> Gazprom is the co-owner of Belarussian pipes. The same thing is about Georgia. Ukraine is known to rebuff Russia's proposal to share its pipelines with Russian companies. Whose cock Yushchenko sucks is not a secret, either.

 His American wife's

----------


## scotcher

> Originally Posted by scotcher  Politically _de_motivated©, I reckon. 
> The original _massive discount_ was politically motivated, but the conditions under which that massive discount was granted no longer apply, so...   Yes, but it still means it has to do with politics. E.g. Russia says they are bringing the price in line with EU prices. So then why are Belarus' still paying @@@@ all? 
> Cos Lukashenko sucks Putin's cock and Yushchenko won't.

 That's kind of what I was getting at. Sorry for being too oblique. 
Anyhoo... 
to say that Ukraine is being punished is to look at the situation back-to-front, IMO.  
The default level here is not 'what other former Soviet states pay', the default level is _ market rates_. Any discount on those rates is a bonus to whomever receives one. What Belarus pay is between Russia and Belorus, it has @@@@ all to do with Ukraine. Ukraine is not being _punished_, they are simply no longer being _rewarded._ That might be semantics, but it's pertinent semantics. 
Now, you can argue over whatever it was they were giving Russia in return for that discount rate. In this case I'd say it was probably unswerving loyalty (which is pretty much what Mishau said, but cleaner). In the eyes of Gazprom/ Putin/ Russia, Ukraine have withdrawn that unswerving loyalty, so is it any surprise that Russia has reciprocated by withdrawing their huge discount? 
Harsh for Ukraine and her economy, maybe, but tough sh*t, that's the path she (and her people), have chosen.

----------


## TATY

> Originally Posted by TATY        Originally Posted by scotcher  Politically _de_motivated©, I reckon. 
> The original _massive discount_ was politically motivated, but the conditions under which that massive discount was granted no longer apply, so...   Yes, but it still means it has to do with politics. E.g. Russia says they are bringing the price in line with EU prices. So then why are Belarus' still paying @@@@ all? 
> Cos Lukashenko sucks Putin's cock and Yushchenko won't.   That's kind of what I was getting at. Sorry for being too oblique. 
> Anyhoo... 
> to say that Ukraine is being punished is to look at the situation back-to-front, IMO.  
> The default level here is not 'what other former Soviet states pay', the default level is _ market rates_. Any discount on those rates is a bonus to whomever receives one. What Belarus pay is between Russia and Belorus, it has @@@@ all to do with Ukraine. Ukraine is not being _punished_, they are simply no longer being _rewarded._ That might be semantics, but it's pertinent semantics. 
> Now, you can argue over whatever it was they were giving Russia in return for that discount rate. In this case I'd say it was probably unswerving loyalty (which is pretty much what Mishau said, but cleaner). In the eyes of Gazprom/ Putin/ Russia, Ukraine have withdrawn that unswerving loyalty, so is it any surprise that Russia has reciprocated by withdrawing their huge discount? 
> Harsh for Ukraine and her economy, maybe, but tough sh*t, that's the path she (and her people), have chosen.

 Yes, this is what I was getting at in earlier posts. But as I said, its the timeframe rather than the actual price increase.

----------


## Бармалей

> Politically _de_motivated©, I reckon. 
> The original _massive discount_ was politically motivated, but the conditions under which that massive discount was granted no longer apply, so...

 You can't copyright that! It's already been coined (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=demotivate)! And to think that I was about to award you "Best Use of a Fake Word" in the New Year!" You were about to join those hallowed few who created  "strategery" or "threeve..."

----------


## scotcher

I wasn't to trying to copyright the word 'demotivated', I was copyrighting the phrase 'politically demotivated'.  ::

----------


## Бармалей

> I wasn't to trying to copyright the word 'demotivated', I was copyrighting the phrase 'politically demotivated'.

 Well in that case, your copyright is approved. Scotcher is now the sole proprietor of the term "politically demotivated" on the MR boards. You have been warned. Прикалывайте осторожном!   ::

----------


## TATY

I have copyrighted Kateryna Yushchenko's penis

----------


## kalinka_vinnie

> The default level here is not 'what other former Soviet states pay', the default level is _ market rates_. Any discount on those rates is a bonus to whomever receives one. What Belarus pay is between Russia and Belorus, it has @@@@ all to do with Ukraine. Ukraine is not being _punished_, they are simply no longer being _rewarded._ That might be semantics, but it's pertinent semantics. 
> Harsh for Ukraine and her economy, maybe, but tough sh*t, that's the path she (and her people), have chosen.

 Uh... wake up and smell the fish! 
Read the article again: 
"Mr. Illarionov said in a radio interview that Ukraine's subsidized rate was essentially a problem of the Kremlin's own creation. Gazprom had agreed to the $50 price in 2004, he said on the Ekho Moskvy radio station, to help a Kremlin-backed candidate in Ukraine's presidential election.  
The $50 deal was supposed to last until 2009, he said. But when the Kremlin's candidate lost the presidency to Viktor A. Yushchenko - who wants Ukraine to join the European Union and NATO - the Kremlin changed the rules. Market rates were invoked." 
It might look all rosy in your world, but you can't break a contract just because you regret you have made it. Why should the Ukraine pay market price anyway, if 80% of Russian Europe-export gas passes through their territory, doesn't that give them some leverage, say yee? 
Me thinks that this is all alot of hot air.

----------


## mishau_

The West will express angrity with Ukraine only when the situation repeats with $50 prices. That's evident, because it's naturally.  
Will russian lose the game?
I think "The $50 deal was" really "supposed to last until 2009" and it has been and it is, and probably will be. However, it gives Russia some more room for maneuver. For example, now all Europe has found out how bad it is to deal with artificially revolutionized post-soviet republics such as Ukr. It also a good reason to wobble Ukr now and then and play cat-and-mouse games with it. Ukr's refusals come from its stalemate caused by Ukraine's unskillful goverment and is considered to be a Russian-Ukrainian internal affair. This "of course internal" affair will let Russia loose on political pressure upon U. It's not the proifit, but yet great benefit, eventually more profitable than $230 per 1000 c/m.

----------


## kalinka_vinnie

> The West will express angrity with Ukraine only when the situation repeats with $50 prices. That's evident, because it's naturally.  
> Will russian lose the game?
> I think "The $50 deal was" really "supposed to last until 2009" and it has been and it is, and probably will be. However, it gives Russia some more room for maneuver. For example, now all Europe has found out how bad it is to deal with artificially revolutionized post-soviet republics such as Ukr. It also a good reason to wobble Ukr now and then and play cat-and-mouse games with it. Ukr's refusals come from its stalemate caused by Ukraine's unskillful goverment and is considered to be a Russian-Ukrainian internal affair. This "of course internal" affair will let Russia loose on political pressure upon U. It's not the proifit, but yet great benefit, eventually more profitable than $230 per 1000 c/m.

 Whaaa? 
I don't really think Europe is so angry with the Ukraine, but more skeptical with Russia as a reliable energy partner...

----------


## TATY

Yes, all the news in Britain, and from what my Germany friend says about German news place the blame firmly at the doorstep of the Kremlin. But the West love critising Russia, so of course they are gonna side with Ukraine.  
Basically it's like a big fat rich kid bullying a little poor kid. We sympathise with the poor kid.

----------


## Бармалей

> I don't really think Europe is so angry with the Ukraine, but more skeptical with Russia as a reliable energy partner...

 Right. Ignoring the "economic dispute" angle on this one, it simply seems to Westerners that this is the next logical step in the nationalization of the oil-gas sector. Regardless of your position on this, think about it like this for a moment: Russian authorities have shut down Yukos (a very big deal here in the press), were accused of meddling with the Ukranian elections in 04', and now they do this (to say nothing of the Belarus-Russia relationship). Guess what -- that spooks people, however fair or not that may be. 
Anyway, I think you're going to end up being just as murky on the final outcome; I would expect that this ends when Ukraine agrees to pay a somewhat higher price -- but nothing like 4x increase. Both sides will claim "victory:" Ukraine will claim that it sucessfully defeated the Russian increase and in doing so helped out all of Europe and the Russians will say they got their rate hike while at the same time acting like a responsible G-8 power...

----------


## kalinka_vinnie

More from New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/04/inter ... rmany.html 
Gas Halt May Produce Big Ripples in European Policy 
By MARK LANDLER
Published: January 4, 2006 
FRANKFURT, Jan. 3 - Russia's shutdown of natural gas lines to Ukraine lasted less than 48 hours, but the repercussions could last far longer in Western Europe, which also relies heavily on Russian gas. 
Even as the flow of gas to Germany, France and other countries resumed at normal levels by Tuesday evening, public officials and energy experts called on the Continent to rethink its energy policy. 
Russia's standoff with Ukraine has exposed a deep European dependence on Russia, the officials and experts said. To reduce that vulnerability, they said, Europe should seek out other gas suppliers and develop alternative fuels, like clean-burning coal, nuclear power and renewable energy. 
"If Russia is prepared to run the risk of cutting off supplies to its neighbors if they have a disagreement, how reliable are they as a supplier?" said William Ramsay, deputy executive director of the International Energy Agency, which advises 26 industrialized nations. "You have to ask the question." 
Russia is virtually the sole supplier of gas to large swaths of Central and Eastern Europe, and to close neighbors like Finland. France and Italy buy between a quarter and a third of their imported gas from Russia. 
In Germany, which is by far Russia's largest customer and has made energy the cornerstone of a broad economic alliance with Moscow, some experts said the standoff might even have political implications. 
"Germany's alliance with Russia was not just conceived as a commercial deal, but as a way to integrate Russia into Europe," said Alexander Rahr, a Russia expert at the German Council on Foreign Relations in Berlin. "This could be in jeopardy if the gas dispute continues." 
The European Union, he said, is likely to rush to Ukraine's defense in its dispute with Russia over gas prices, giving Germany little choice but to fall in line. And Russia can no longer count on the friendship between President Vladimir V. Putin and Gerhard Schr

----------


## N

> The $50 deal was supposed to last until 2009, he said. But when the Kremlin's candidate lost the presidency to Viktor A. Yushchenko - who wants Ukraine to join the European Union and NATO - the Kremlin changed the rules. Market rates were invoked."

 The appendix#4 with 50$ deal is no more than "филькина грамота". 
Juridic explanation is here - http://phorum.proua.com/read.php?1,487762 
Texts of the contract - http://pravda.com.ua/news/2005/12/22/36935.htm   

> It might look all rosy in your world, but you can't break a contract just because you regret you have made it. Why should the Ukraine pay market price anyway, if 80% of Russian Europe-export gas passes through their territory, doesn't that give them some leverage, say yee?

 Of course does not. Ukraine officialy accepted the European Energy Charter and she cannot block the pipe.

----------


## scotcher

> Originally Posted by scotcher  The default level here is not 'what other former Soviet states pay', the default level is _ market rates_. Any discount on those rates is a bonus to whomever receives one. What Belarus pay is between Russia and Belorus, it has @@@@ all to do with Ukraine. Ukraine is not being _punished_, they are simply no longer being _rewarded._ That might be semantics, but it's pertinent semantics. 
> Harsh for Ukraine and her economy, maybe, but tough sh*t, that's the path she (and her people), have chosen.   Uh... wake up and smell the fish!

 Never mind the fish, treacle, I am not taking one side against the other, just pointing out that this was a totally predictable result of Ukraine's recent political change of direction.  
Did anyone really expect Russia to continue to subsidise Ukraine's economy to the tune of billions of dollars a year, given Ukraine's stated desire to join both the EU and Nato and to distance itself from its overbearing neighbour, even at a time when the WTO are trying to force Russia to cut its own _domestic_ fuel subsidies?  
Give me a break. 
Slightly petty and vindictive it may be, but it wis totally understandable and should have been totally predictable to Ukraine's Powers That Be. 
Looks like they might have struck a deal now though: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4579648.stm

----------


## mishau_

The West could be dissapointed by Ukraine only when the price remains $50 and Ukr. That's evident, because it's naturally for every market. It means like this: the price was $50 and everything went well, then Russia does something (f.e. inreases the price for U.) and Europe stops receiveng the gas. Russian is guilty, because it is the initiator of negative changes on the market in ths case. Europe will need status quo.  
Now then, let's suppose, the price has not changed, but Ukr. syphones off the gas anyway and Europe stops receiving it again. Then Ukr is guilty in this case, becuase it is not Russia that is the iniciator of negative changes. That's natural for market. Russa would say 'listen, we did totally nothing, so look for disturbers outside Russia, please' 
Would russia lose the game if the remainded 50 dollars? By no means! 
"The $50 deal was supposed to last until 2009", ok, that's probably so. However, regardess the price - let it be even the same $50 - it gives Russia some more room for maneuver. For example, now all of Europe found out now how bad it is to deal with artificially revolutionized post-soviet republics such as Ukr. It also is a good reason to play cat-and-mouse games with Ukr. Ukr's refusals come from its stalemate caused by Ukraine's unskillful govermening policy and is considered to be a Russian-Ukrainian internal affair. This "of course internal" affair will let Russia loosen political pressure on U. It's not the proifit, but yet great benefit, eventually more profitable than $230 per 1000 cubic meters. 
The BBC doesn't write "the Ukraine" and neither do I. А то они нашли тут Судан, едрена вошь. I also say "на(из) Украине (Укарины)" as the Russian I speak is my Russian, not something invented by Ukrainian and other politics, fox 'em all with their innovations in the english and russian languages.

----------


## TATY

> The BBC doesn't write "the Ukraine" and neither do I. А то они нашли тут Судан, едрена вошь. I also say "на(из) Украине (Укарины)" as the Russian I speak is my Russian, not something invented by Ukrainian and other politics, fox 'em all with their innovations in the english and russian languages.

 The BBC may not write "the Ukraine", but they sure do say it on TV.   

> so look for disturbers outside Russia, please

 Like Russia would say that. Are they gonng say that to Germany? Their biggest customer?

----------


## mishau_

> Like Russia would say that. Are they gonng say that to Germany? Their biggest customer?

 There's no reason of it and hardly will. But still. It was Russia that iniciated the price increase. So, no wonder, that Russia was up to its neck in troubles. It would have been quite another matter, if the gas price had remained the same, namely $50, and Ukraine had started stealing Europe's  gas all the same. 
In that case Russia would not have been implicated in the row at all and Russia might have told anyone 'we didn't do anything, didn't increase the price, didn't reduce the amount of gas in pipes, etc; so solve your problems outside Russia'.  
What happened indeed was that once Russia had shaked a trifle the market by their new price policy, the West warned Russia quite justly that they might reconcider reliability on such a partnership. The West said 'do whatever you want, we won't intervene, but provide us with the gas in corpore.' It means that if Ukraine as it has signed the new conrtract goes on with stealing, the EU will blame Ukraine only. That's why Ukraine won't do so anymore (until Russia implements a new price policy  ::  ).  
But I wonder why NAFTA-gas never proposed to increase the price for the transition. It seems to me that some of NAFTA-gas chiefs were bribed or blackmailed.

----------


## kalinka_vinnie

Ok, maybe it is a disputable question: 
From wikipedia: "In English, the country is sometimes referred to with the definite article, as the Ukraine." 
"the Ukraine" seems just much more natural to me than "Ukraine" 
"I drove through England" - OK
"I drove through Ukraine" - my ear not like
"I drove through the Ukraine"  - my ear like

----------


## mishau_

> "the Ukraine" seems just much more natural to me than "Ukraine"

 Natural is the far side of unnatural.  ::  
After all, when was the first time you'd heard the word "the Ukraine"? I guess it was not so long ago. Ukraine hasn't got its own history or more exactly it has, but it's laughably short. So, for my ear, all the whimsical things that the Ukarinian government invent instead of making themselves useful do not seem too natural. Let's take their latest official statemet for instance: _
Все империи распадаются, как это было с Римской империей. Поэтому российская империя тоже распадется, но еще не скоро. 
All empires disintegrate, the way it happened with the Roman Empire. So the Russian Empire is also going to fall apart, though not too soon._   
"Excursuses into history and prediction of that kind look incongruous for a diplomat of such a high rank and are unacceptable for Russian-Ukrainian relations." Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs say. 
"If this paranoid raving of a top Ukrainian official is true, then, in full accordance with rules of civilized diplomacy, this Mr. Buteiko should either immediately resign by the decision of the Ukrainian president, or take his own decision to quit civilized politics, like a shot, joining marginals who write their slogans on fences." says Valery Tursunov, a well-known expert on post-Soviet states. Then he points out as follows:  
"Anton Buteiko and his poorly educated inspirers have a short memory. If they had got at least satisfactory marks at the Soviet schools they went to, they would know that the present-day Ukraine is entirely an offspring of an empire and itself an empire, created by Stalin and Khrushchev, who annexed to it Polonized Galicia in 1939, Carpathian Rus in 1945, and Russian Crimea in 1954. What then can one say about Brezhnev and his Dneprodzerzhinsk-based clan who pumped ‘imperial’ money from all over the USSR into Ukraine? If Buteiko, raving about disintegration of empires, longs for the death of his Mother Ukraine, it is his personal problem. Yet what does fraternal Ukraine have to do with this? The paranoid raving that comes from the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry indicates a deep moral and professional dissolution of the Ukrainian elite. If the Ukrainian elite still preserves some remnants of intellectual conscience, it should discard such discredited diplomats as Buteiko."  
So I think the Ukrainian governers must stop making doo-doo in the pants. first.

----------


## N

The new contract (Yulia Timoshenko is in a fury ::    ): 
Фотокопия: http://obozrevatel.com.ua/news/2006/1/5/77250.htm
Текст: http://www.korrespondent.net/main/141273

----------


## Superman

I think you are all mistaken by the position of the west.  The position of the United States, at least, was that they support market pricing, only not immediately. 
And thats it.  Most people here didn't even pay attention to this news.  Yes, the media was one sided...and generally put the blame on the Kremlin.  But that is only because it is in the wests interests to do so.  Blame the Kremlin, try to help get oil prices down for Ukraine, a potential EU member state. 
But, any in-depth reading, shows that most people had no intellectual stake in that argument.  Any of the papers that went into the subject in-depth almost invariably asked the question as to why Ukraine should continue having Soviet era subsidies, for what purpose? 
It's up to Russia to sell gas to whomever they want, at whatever price they can get.  Nothing wrong with it. 
As for Europe balking and talking about new partners for gas...OF course, of course, thats the only sensible position for them to take in bargaining sessions...that they might somehow have other options.  But the market price is going to rule, no matter what...so its all talk. 
Hey Europe bought gas from Russia throughout the Cold War.  The United States is in love with Communist China, our software companies Microsoft, Yahoo even help them censor journalists... we buy oil from all kinds of countries that fund terrorists.   
Nah, its all talk, markets will prevail.  And in a way, thats a good thing too.

----------


## scotcher

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4587598.stm 
hehe

----------


## kalinka_vinnie

Russia is wising up, I guess, seeing how much money they could get. Too bad they signed contracts!

----------


## mishau_

С 1 января по экранам Украины начал победное шествие новый мульфильм “Как казаки газ воровали”. 
Российские кинематографисты начали съемки блокбастера *“Ночной разор”*. За основу сценария взята известная украинская пьеса *“Ирония трубы, или с легким газом”*. По предварительной информации, озвучивать фильм будут на туркменском языке.  
Одновременно группа авторов из США приступила к написанию сценария уже следующей серии блокбастера, посвященного итогам российско-украинских переговоров по “газовой” теме. Рабочее название сценария – *“Дневной позор”*...   ::   ::   ::   http://www.pravda.ru/society/family/lif ... 2809-gaz-0

----------


## kalinka_vinnie

> “Ирония трубы, или с легким газом”

   ::

----------


## Бармалей

> “Ирония трубы, или с легким газом”

 Молодец! Well-played, lol... 
What about "Меньше надо гореть?"

----------


## TATY

> The new contract (Yulia Timoshenko is in a fury   ): 
> Фотокопия: http://obozrevatel.com.ua/news/2006/1/5/77250.htm
> Текст: http://www.korrespondent.net/main/141273

 They say *в* Украину in that contract.  :P

----------


## TATY

> "the Ukraine" seems just much more natural to me than "Ukraine" 
> 			
> 		  Natural is the far side of unnatural.  
> After all, when was the first time you'd heard the word "the Ukraine"? I guess it was not so long ago. Ukraine hasn't got its own history or more exactly it has, but it's laughably short.

 Just because it hasn't been an independant country for long doesn't mean it doesn't have a history. 
The Russian Federation has a laughably short history. 
Talking about The Ukraine vs. Ukraine. Now it is more proper to NOT use The.

----------


## basurero

Why the hell do they call it The Ukraine anyway? It's just a proper noun why is there a the? Why not The Guatamala or The Morocco?

----------


## kalinka_vinnie

.... or THE Netherlands? AHA!

----------


## TATY

> .... or THE Netherlands? AHA!

 That's because it was originally: The nether lands (nether = low). 
It was called The Ukraine, because it wasn't a country, rather a region of Russia. 
The steppe, the Crimea, the Far East. 
That's why Ukraine would like it if The was dropped.

----------


## Бармалей

You've got the Sudan, the Phillipines, и т.д. This might be of some interest to you, if you want to know more about the "the":  http://www.livejournal.com/community...s/1190187.html

----------


## mishau_

Почему Ющенко так медленно читает речь по бумажке? 
- Он не читает, а переводит с английского.  
*** 
Глядя на лицо Ющенко, начинаешь понимать, что демократия Украины - это демократия с нечеловеческим лицом. 
*** 
Газ для Украины должен стоить больше, чем для Западной Европы, поскольку Украина получает его намного раньше и, значит, более свежим. 
*** 
Пока прокляты москалы подло подкупалы 'олоса избирателей в пользу Януковича, мы, хохлы, 'арно подтасовывалы результы в пользу Ющенко.  
*** 
Путину нужно было поддержать не Януковича, а Ющенко. Тогда бы Ющенко лишился, по крайней мере, половины своих голосов. 
*** 
Украинское ТВ.
На экране трое мужиков избивают друг друга. Сильно так и чем попало: стаканами, графинами, стульями. Минуту дерутся, две дерутся, пять дерутся. Через пять минут на экране появляется диктор: 
- Вы прослушали традиционное новогоднее обращение к народу президента Украины.   
*** 
У Ющенко берут интервью. 
- Вы будете хорошим президентом? 
- Да. Меня поддерживает все население Украины. У меня ровные отношения как с американскими, так и с российскими политиками. Я сделаю русский язык вторым государственным. Я демократ. Я не вор. Со мной приходит отличная команда профессионалов. Я честно победил на выборах. 
- А недостатки у вас есть? 
- Да. Врать люблю.

----------


## TATY

> Газ для Украины должен стоить больше, чем для Западной Европы, поскольку Украина получает его намного раньше и, значит, более свежим.

 Can gas be 'Fresh'? And should they be penalised for being closer to the source? 
At the end of the day, didn't Russian want them to pay 4 times as much, and now they will be only paying twice as much?

----------


## Бармалей

> Can gas be 'Fresh'? And should they be penalised for being closer to the source?

 This guy thinks so:   
If a "prince" from Bel-Air can be, then sure...

----------


## kalinka_vinnie

> Газ для Украины должен стоить больше, чем для Западной Европы, поскольку Украина получает его намного раньше и, значит, более свежим.
> 			
> 		  Can gas be 'Fresh'? And should they be penalised for being closer to the source? 
> At the end of the day, didn't Russian want them to pay 4 times as much, and now they will be only paying twice as much?

 Its a joke. You know one of those ha-ha things?

----------


## TATY

> Originally Posted by TATY     
> 			
> 				Газ для Украины должен стоить больше, чем для Западной Европы, поскольку Украина получает его намного раньше и, значит, более свежим.
> 			
> 		  Can gas be 'Fresh'? And should they be penalised for being closer to the source? 
> At the end of the day, didn't Russian want them to pay 4 times as much, and now they will be only paying twice as much?   Its a joke. You know one of those ha-ha things?

 Well you never know with Russians.

----------


## Scorpio

Самый короткий анекдот на эту тему я услышал недавно:  *Путин - Ющу*: А у нас на кухне газ! А у Вас? *Ющ - Путину*: А у нас газопровод. Вот.

----------


## Friendy

> Самый короткий анекдот на эту тему я услышал недавно:  *Путин - Ющу*: А у нас на кухне газ! А у Вас? *Ющ - Путину*: А у нас газопровод. Вот.

  Which parodies this very famous poem for children.  ::  http://www.lukoshko.net/mihal/mihal7.shtml

----------


## Греческо

This action was right. 
I don't understand why Ukraine can get cheaper gas from Russia than the EU, since they are an indepedent from Russia country.

----------


## pisces

> This action was right. 
> I don't understand why Ukraine can get cheaper gas from Russia than the EU, since they are an indepedent from Russia country.

 Furthermore, they continue to steal gas that was shipped to EU through their transport system. That's their style, they regard paying for what they take as a humiliation to their nation.

----------


## mishau_

Вот история по-украински. Теперь я понимаю почему с их точки зрения им "можно" отбирать газ. Они порабощались аж с 15 века, даже когда у них еще не было собственной территории, языка, и культуры. Даже когда самого украинского народа еще не было.  http://www.day.kiev.ua/156240/ 
Оказывается, в отличие от иностранцев, которые на Руси считались  людьми "второго сорта", украинцы считались русскими, и тем самым были лишены собественного языка, традиций и культуры. Невозможно было точно установить границы украинской территории - они же считались русскими. (Территорию Украине определят коммунисты)  _
Все остальные подданные царя-самодержца зачислялись в категорию «инородцев» — людей второго сорта. Их не преследовали за то, что они отличались языком, религией и национальными традициями. Империя относилась к ним толерантно, но не доверяла им. 
...
Во-первых, украинцам не приходилось, как немцам, евреям или татарам, доказывать свою преданность империи переходом в православие. Они были православными c рождения. Во-вторых, империя не рассматривала украинцев как людей другой национальности.
...
Малороссы не были инородцами, но не имели права на собственную интеллигенцию. _  
Гоголь чистокровный русский однозначно _
Среди малороссов всегда находились люди, достигавшие успеха в экономической или духовной деятельности, но не желавшие утрачивать национальную идентичность. Те, кто шел дорогой Тараса Шевченко, уступали по численности тем, кто выбирал путь Николая Гоголя._  
Еще интереснее посмотреть, как именно Российская империя угнетала украинский народ - она просто его не замечала!  _
Отказ от утверждения о колониальном положении Украины означает только одно: доказывать угнетенное состояние украинцев в империи следует иначе. Все существующие факты сводятся к тому, что империя не замечала присутствия украинцев. _   
Вот, как я понимаю, гениальный путь порабощать людей. Просто делать их русскими и дело с концом. Даже резерваций не надо.

----------


## Scorpio

> Вот история по-украински. Теперь я понимаю почему с их точки зрения им "можно" отбирать газ. Они порабощались аж с 15 века, даже когда у них еще не было собственной территории, языка, и культуры. Даже когда самого украинского народа еще не было.  http://www.day.kiev.ua/156240/ 
> Оказывается, в отличие от иностранцев, которые на Руси считались  людьми "второго сорта", украинцы считались русскими, и тем самым были лишены собественного языка, традиций и культуры. Невозможно было точно установить границы украинской территории - они же считались русскими. (Территорию Украине определят коммунисты) 
> [i]
> Все остальные подданные царя-самодержца зачислялись в категорию «инородцев» — людей второго сорта. Их не преследовали за то, что они отличались языком, религией и национальными традициями. Империя относилась к ним толерантно, но не доверяла им. 
> ...
> Во-первых, украинцам не приходилось, как немцам, евреям или татарам, доказывать свою преданность империи переходом в православие. Они были православными c рождения. Во-вторых, империя не рассматривала украинцев как людей другой национальности.

 Это такой особо циничный вид угнетения: не только не угнетать, но и вообще считать своими. Баз поллитры горилки даже не поймешь, что ты угнетен.  ::    

> Гоголь чистокровный русский однозначно _Среди малороссов всегда находились люди, достигавшие успеха в экономической или духовной деятельности, но не желавшие утрачивать национальную идентичность. Те, кто шел дорогой Тараса Шевченко, уступали по численности тем, кто выбирал путь Николая Гоголя._

 Ну так что ж поделаешь, если единственный за всю историю подлинно гениальный украинский писатель ничего на украинском не написал!   

> Еще интереснее посмотреть, как именно Российская империя угнетала украинский народ - она просто его не замечала! _Отказ от утверждения о колониальном положении Украины означает только одно: доказывать угнетенное состояние украинцев в империи следует иначе. Все существующие факты сводятся к тому, что империя не замечала присутствия украинцев._

 Если нет доказательств, их надо выдумать...

----------


## mishau_

> Ну так что ж поделаешь, если единственный за всю историю подлинно гениальный украинский писатель ничего на украинском не написал!

 Он же угнетен был, посредством того, что его cчитали русским. И тем самым его лишали украинского языка, культуры и территории.

----------


## Eugene

> At the end of the day, didn't Russian want them to pay 4 times as much, and now they will be only paying twice as much?

 That's not economical problem. It's defence. Ukraine will slow down moving towards NATO.

----------


## Man

Выскажусь как русский человек, т.е. объясню свою позицию на это событие. Во-первых сразу определюсь, что я считаю украинцев братьями. Вообще, воспитание в СССР наложило на меня свой отпечаток: я воспринимаю Россию по границам СССР. Те кто живут на этой территории свои. Да они свои, хотя они могут вести себя по-детски, но ведь к детям и отношение другое. А вот руководство стран СНГ ведет себя некорректно по отношению к русским и русскому языку. Я не буду влезать в историю и доказывать, что русский язык каждой из стран СНГ дал многое (впрочем как и Советский Союз). И вот с этой-то стороны выходки подобные действиям Украины вызывают агрессию. Ведя политику против России они хотят, чтобы Россия к ним  хорошо относилась. Мне это непонятно. И несмотря на это,  для жителей Украины (для обогрева домов) я бы газ выделил (но для промышленности нет, вернее тоже да. но цену бы догнал до мировой, что Чубайс и сделал. И правильно). .....
Писать омжно долго, но я думаю, что вы меня поняли.

----------


## mishau_

> я воспринимаю Россию по границам СССР. Те кто живут на этой территории свои. Да они свои, хотя они могут вести себя по-детски, но ведь к детям и отношение другое.

 Имперские замашки, извините.    

> И несмотря на это, для жителей Украины (для обогрева домов) я бы газ выделил (но для промышленности нет, вернее тоже да

 Опять комплекс "большого брата".    

> но цену бы догнал до мировой, что Чубайс и сделал.

 А причем здесь Чубайс, извините?   *Нет комплексу "большого брата"! Свободной Украине - свободные цены!*

----------


## kalinka_vinnie

Interesting seeing what is happening in *Georgia* now. Peculiar how energy problems happen to the two countries that recently went "pro-western".  
But if it is Russia doing so on purpose, they are just making a fool of themselves... I mean how are they supposed to make money on their biggest commodity if they scare away their customers?

----------


## Man

> Имперские замашки, извините.

 Это называется широтой русской души. :0)  

> Опять комплекс "большого брата".

 Есть немного. А в целом, я считаю, что к нации надо относиться так, как она себя ведет. Ведь если человек в 30 лет ведет себя по-детски мы же говорим: "Ведет себя как ребенок".  А я аналогию продолжил.  

> А причем здесь Чубайс, извините?

 А он никогда ни при чем. Четыре дня в квартире без электричества, да в тридцатиградусный мороз, так что извините погорячился.  

> Свободной Украине - свободные цены!

 Больше свободы и большие цены! :0)

----------


## Zaya

я вообще человек аполитичный, хочу только заметить, что утверждение "Гоголь - единственный за всю историю подлинно гениальный украинский писатель" - субъективное высказывание, мягко говоря.

----------


## Dimitri

Хохлы наглые очень.. живут за счет России и еще что-то возникают..  
Им молиться на русских надо

----------


## mishau_

Как бы китайцы про нас так в скорости не заговорили. 
А вот, спрашивается, какго х..?!  *
Телеканал "Россия" снял с эфира интервью президента Украины Виктора Ющенко...  *   http://lenta.ru/news/2006/03/13/rtr/ 
Почему какая-то чиновничья гинда решает, что мне можно смотреть, а что нет? Чем он(а) такое право заслужил(а)? Тем, что на мои налоги существует?   

> Путин - Ющу: А у нас на кухне газ! А у Вас?
> Ющ - Путину: А у нас газопровод. Вот.

 Путин - Бушу: А у нас в Москве ХАМАС! А у Вас?

----------


## Dimitri

> Почему какая-то чиновничья гинда решает, что мне можно смотреть, а что нет? Чем он(а) такое право заслужил(а)? Тем, что на мои налоги существует?

 Это государственный канал. И они тебе ничем не обязаны.

----------


## Scorpio

> Как бы китайцы про нас так в скорости не заговорили. 
> А вот, спрашивается, какго х..?!  *
> Телеканал "Россия" снял с эфира интервью президента Украины Виктора Ющенко...  *   http://lenta.ru/news/2006/03/13/rtr/ 
> Почему какая-то чиновничья гинда решает, что мне можно смотреть, а что нет? Чем он(а) такое право заслужил(а)? Тем, что на мои налоги существует?

 Согласен с Dmitri. Вообще-то, если для вас это новость, на любом телеканале какие-нибудь "чиновничьи гниды" обязательно решают, что показывать а что нет. Этим он отличается от митинга -- там можно орать все, что вздумается.
(Телевидение существует в основном не на ваши налоги, а на доходы от рекламы -- но это к слову.)   

> Путин - Ющу: А у нас на кухне газ! А у Вас?
> Ющ - Путину: А у нас газопровод. Вот.
> 			
> 		  Путин - Бушу: А у нас в Москве ХАМАС! А у Вас?

 Ну, Буш мог бы в ответ перечислить ряд чеченских бандитов, удобно устроившихся в США, начиная с Ильясова...  ::

----------


## mishau_

> Это государственный канал. И они тебе ничем не обязаны.

 Ну-ну. Это рабскому быдлу они ничем не обязаны, а я хожу на выборы и голосую и имею права требовать обеспечение соблюдения моих прав, ибо обязанности свои перед государством я выполняю исправно. Они убрали все негосударственные каналы. Их больше нет. Мне было бы наплевать на гос. каналы, дабы сделали б те, ктороые мне хочется смотреть. А то сделали эту никчемну "Звезду" с нулевым рейтингом, а солдаты голодные и избитые ходят. А теперь еще успотребление сочетания "генеральная прокуратура" запретили использовать в сериалах. Скоро анектоды запретят друг другу рассказывать.   

> Телевидение существует в основном не на ваши налоги, а на доходы от рекламы -- но это к слову

 Мне все равно на что существует телевидение. Мне не все равно на что существует чиновник, который принимает решение. Он существует на налоги. Мы ему платим деньги, а он еще чего-то там решает за нас, а не для нас. Если бы ТВ действительно полностью существовало на рекламу, они бы точно дали это интервью чтобы привлечь рекламодателей. Если бы интервью не сняли, там рекламы было б хоть отбавляй, а то одни высокопоставленные кислые рожи кругом, в аэропорту его встречали: товарищ...

----------


## mishau_

> Ну, Буш мог бы в ответ перечислить ряд чеченских бандитов, удобно устроившихся в США, начиная с Ильясова...

 Русская ментальность. Мне плевать на Буша, если я найду этот линк, где террористы похищают, пытают и убивают русских детей, вырывают им волосы, простреливают кисти рук и отрубают пальцы, потому что русские  - это "неверные шакалы" убить которых есть священный долг, я его приведу. Чтобы было видно, как после этого наша страна растилается перед террористами, очевидно, назло Бушу. А как же "мочить в сортире"? Вчера было надо, сегодня не надо?

----------


## Dimitri

> Мне было бы наплевать на гос. каналы, дабы сделали б те, ктороые мне хочется смотреть.

 СТС, ТНТ, еще куча каналов + кабельное телевидение

----------


## Dimitri

+ RTVi, кстати. Там только и занимаются тем, что поносят власть. Смотри на здоровье %))

----------


## mishau_

> СТС, ТНТ

 пошлая развлекуха, как и вся наша власть.   

> еще куча каналов

  

> кабельное телевидение

 Лежит полностью под префектурами.   

> RTVi

 У меня такого канала нет, так что судить, чем они там поносят не могу. 
Мне, например, важно было бы посмотреть на хари тех следователей военной прокуратуры, которые гонят потерпевших (солдат, пострадавших от дедовщины) строить дачи шишкам из прокуратуры.  И еще интересно, почему за приченение ТТП "дедам" дают условные сроки. И почему по всей стране крыши рушатся. Лучше б рушились, конечно, "крыши", а не крыши. Но вместо этого показывают Его Величество Президента, откушивающего хлеб-соль на очередном российском заводе. Скоро будут давать новости с полей Центрального Нечерноземья. Или Премьера, который по истечении пары лет так и не решил профпригодны его министры или нет. (разнос на парт-ячейке).

----------


## Dimitri

Это канал Березовского вроде RTVi - точно не знаю
короче там говорят о том, о чем не говорят естественно на российских каналах.. практически нет цензуры никакой %) 
В Израиле, Белоруссии, Германии, США и т.д. - этот канал есть.. он кабельный. В России тоже есть, я уверен  
Ну а в остальном согласен. Но что поделаешь?

----------


## Scorpio

Не знаю, что такое RTVi -- мне на память приходят RenTV, RBC-TV и EuroNews.

----------


## Dimitri

> Не знаю, что такое RTVi -- мне на память приходят RenTV, RBC-TV и EuroNews.

 позвони в кабельную компанию и спроси :)

----------


## Dimitri

http://rtvi.ru/# 
Вещание в России: 
На территории России программы каналов RTVi, ДЕТСКИЙ МИР и ТЕЛЕКЛУБ доступны через кабельные сети, сети MMDS и др. Узнайте о возможности получения программ каналов RTVi, ДЕТСКИЙ МИР и ТЕЛЕКЛУБ у операторов сетей, работающих в вашем регионе.  
По вопросам ретрансляции вышеуказанных каналов в кабельных и других сетях на территории России обращайтесь по адресу www.mediamart.ru  
---  
а это их новостной инет-сайт http://newsru.com/

----------


## Scorpio

> Originally Posted by Scorpio  Не знаю, что такое RTVi -- мне на память приходят RenTV, RBC-TV и EuroNews.   позвони в кабельную компанию и спроси

 А зачем? Я за кабельное ТВ платить не буду -- смотрю только то, что приходит на антенну, и вполне доволен.

----------


## Dimitri

> Originally Posted by Dimitri        Originally Posted by Scorpio  Не знаю, что такое RTVi -- мне на память приходят RenTV, RBC-TV и EuroNews.   позвони в кабельную компанию и спроси :)   А зачем? Я за кабельное ТВ платить не буду -- смотрю только то, что приходит на антенну, и вполне доволен.

 а.. я думал, что это один человек пишет :)) ты и mishau_ ))

----------


## mishau_

once again    ::

----------


## Cocos

До чего же Сталин мир довёл!    ::

----------


## Waterlaz

Hm... looks like this will become a tradition... You know... Ded Moroz, the tree, the gas problem, the "Ирония Судьбы" movie...

----------


## Оля

У меня вопрос к жителям Украины: а как ваши власти и ваше телевидение вам объясняет то, что контракт с Россией не был подписан? Ну вот конкретно на этот раз. Просто судя по тому, что _нам_ показывают, складывается ощущение, что у украинской делегации и/или у того, кому она подчиняется, не все дома.

----------


## mishau_

Я не житель Украины, но любопытства ради пробежал по интернету. В общем, говорят, что якобы Москва хочет решать свой кризис за счет Украины, и поэтому предлагает заведомо неприемлемые условия. Что-то типа того. Вот.

----------


## Оля

> предлагает заведомо неприемлемые условия.

 Поразительно, как большинство людей покупается на общие фразы. Вот лично для меня фраза "заведомо неприемлемые условия" - это то же самое что "мне (нам) абсолютно ничего неизвестно". 
Вот я могу сказать, какие условия предлагает Москва по сообщениям наших СМИ и собственно по словам представителей Газпрома на многочисленных пресс-конференциях. Москва предложила Украине газ по цене *250* долларов за 1000 кубометров. Это при том, что в Европе его покупают по *418*. Украинская делегация отказалась. И все руководство Газпрома с вытянутыми лицами. И Путин с Медведевым тоже.
А еще Украина открыто заявляет о том, что будет забирать себе газ, предназначенный для потребителей в Европе. То есть воровать.
А еще в Украине президент по телеку заявляет на всю страну, что вопрос по газу с Россией решен. А в Газпроме эту информацию узнают от журналистов и не верят своим ушам.

----------


## scotcher

Oops

----------


## mishau_

No, I don't believe it. It's an intimidating maneuver that is amed to force the Ukrainian goverment to get back to talks.

----------


## scotcher

Anyone know why Russia is selling gas to Ukraine at such a discount in the first place? It can't just be transit charges as they appear to be treated separately.

----------


## Cocos

Ну так отключили Украине газ или нет?    ::

----------


## Оля

> Ну так отключили Украине газ или нет?

 Ты телек не можешь включить?   ::  Да, отключили. Еще вчера в 10 утра.   

> No, I don't believe it. It's an intimidating maneuver that is amed to force the Ukrainian goverment to get back to talks.

 Вообще-то была договоренность, что у Украины будет льготная цена только при условии погашения всех долгов за 2008 год. Так что не вижу причин не верить.   

> Anyone know why Russia is selling gas to Ukraine at such a discount in the first place?

 (according to Putin)
1. They are a brotherly to us.
2. They are poor.

----------


## mishau_

> 1. They are a brotherly to us.
> 2. They are poor.

 Вот это  есть демагогия по-российски. В России есть селения, которые вообще не газифицированы. Почему другое независимое государство должно получать газ по цене Смоленска, в то время, как в Мухозадрищенске газа нет вовсе? И какую выгоду имеют простые люди от льготных цен Укарине?  
Кстати Путин говорит во что: 
"Мы не можем в полцены или бесплатно продавать ликвидный товар", - сказал он, отвечая на вопрос о долгах Украины за газ. 
До сих пор Россия поставляет газ на Украину по ценам в два раза ниже, чем в Европе, напомнил премьер-министр. "У нас есть договоренность о переходе на рыночные цены", - напомнил Путин, заверив, что российская сторона намерена вести себя "по-партнерски". По его словам, переход на рыночные цены в расчетах с Украиной "будет мягким".

----------


## Оля

> Кстати Путин говорит во что: 
> "Мы не можем в полцены или бесплатно продавать ликвидный товар", - сказал он, отвечая на вопрос о долгах Украины за газ. 
> До сих пор Россия поставляет газ на Украину по ценам в два раза ниже, чем в Европе, напомнил премьер-министр. "У нас есть договоренность о переходе на рыночные цены", - напомнил Путин, заверив, что российская сторона намерена вести себя "по-партнерски". По его словам, переход на рыночные цены в расчетах с Украиной "будет мягким".

 Вы почему-то дату интервью забыли указать. Это Путин говорил 4 декабря. На тот момент еще была надежда, что Украина расплатится по долгам до конца года. Договоренность о переходе на рыночные цены была, имелось в виду, что Украина через некоторое время по-любому будет платить такую же цену, какую платят в Европе. А льготная цена в 2009 преполагалась в случае если долгов за 2008 не будет.   

> (according to Putin)
> 1. They are a brotherly to us.
> 2. They are poor.

 Это не демагогия, а законы рынка. Какой смысл просить полную цену с человека, который не может ее заплатить? Украина на грани дефолта. Путь бы заплатила хотя бы столько, сколько сможет.
Если в России и есть негазифицированные селения, при чем тут Украина? Это же не значит, что ни Европе, ни Украине не надо поставлять газ, пока эти селения не газифицируют. Это просто две отдельные проблемы.

----------


## mishau_

> Это не демагогия, а законы рынка. Какой смысл просить полную цену с человека, который не может ее заплатить? Украина на грани дефолта. Путь бы заплатила хотя бы столько, сколько сможет.

 Какой же это рынок?   ::  
Если есть денег только на половину газа, пусть берут половину газа тогда. Либо путь берут кредиты. Пусть учатся зарабатывать. Можно Крым продать в конце концов. Вот это будет рынок.

----------


## scotcher

I read what Putin said recently, but I'm pretty sure he referred specifically to the trouble Ukraine is in with the current financial crisis, which is worse than it is in Russia. My question was more general than that. There's been at least one new gas contract since the Oranges took control in Ukraine, well prior to the financial crisis, and I was just surprised that they had been allowed to keep as much of the pos-Soviet discount as is evidently the case, then as much as now, since that discount really amounts to a large financial subsidy of an openly hostile government. 
I just don't think Putin's claims of brotherly concern fly. Russia could have put Yushenko's administration under huge pressure by simply asking for market rates and no one could have accused Russia of doing anything immoral or devious, and yet they didn't. At the very least I would have expected them to use this sort of altruism toward the Ukrainian state as a PR device, but they don't even apear to have done that. Is there some _quid pro quo_ I'm not seeing, or do you think it just suits the Russian government to have this bit of leverage so that they can turn the screw bit by bit whenever it suits, rather than wasting it in one go?

----------


## Leof

> Можно Крым продать в конце концов.

 Вот и я удивляюсь. Давно бы уже предложили Украине много-премного газа за так в обмен на Крым. И всем было бы счастье. 
А то и вовсе, раз Украина делает вид, что никаких задолженностей у ней за газ нет, то и Россия никаких Крымов не дарила.  Обычно у несостоятельных должников забирают часть имущества в счёт погашения долга. Крым покрыл бы все долги с лихвой.

----------


## Triton

Милов ругает "Газпром": http://v-milov.livejournal.com/92042.html

----------


## ST

Проблема в том что все газопроводы идут через них. Захотят, вообще не будут газ пропускать. Поэтому и могут диктовать Газпрому *любые* условия, хоть 200$, хоть 100$. Хотя им конечно тоже не выгодно резать курицу несущую золотые яйца...по крайней мере пока они золотые (т.е. по 250$)

----------


## Leof

Запаздали со строительством балтийского трубопровода, а то вот бы они сейчас где сидели.  ::

----------


## Оля

> Проблема в том что все газопроводы идут через них.

 Ну вообще-то не все.   

> Захотят, вообще не будут газ пропускать. Поэтому и могут диктовать Газпрому *любые* условия

 Диктовать надо было, когда контракт на транзит подписывали. А подписали - извольте выполнять. А так не пропускать-то они "могут", но только по праву силы, не юридически. На них вон уже некоторые европейские потребители в суд подают.

----------


## mishau_

Ой, вот это уже что-то новенькое! 
Киев предлагает Брюссель профинансировать прокачку через территорию Украины поставляемого в Европу российского газа. 
ЕС должен оплатить «Газпрому» весь технический газ, который Украина требует для восстановления штатной работы своей газопроводной инфраструктуры. Одновременно ЕС должен возместить Украине расходы по транспортировке российского газа. Основой для данных оплат должно стать специальное решение руководящих структур Евросоюза, определяющее ситуацию как «угрозу гуманитарной катастрофы» странам-членам ЕС  http://news.mail.ru/politics/2303681

----------


## Оля

> ЕС должен оплатить «Газпрому» весь технический газ, который Украина требует для восстановления штатной работы своей газопроводной инфраструктуры.

 А мне казалось, раньше это уже Путин предложил.   ::

----------


## Leof

> Ой, вот это уже что-то новенькое! 
> Киев предлагает Брюссель профинансировать прокачку через территорию Украины поставляемого в Европу российского газа. 
> ЕС должен оплатить «Газпрому» весь технический газ, который Украина требует для восстановления штатной работы своей газопроводной инфраструктуры. Одновременно ЕС должен возместить Украине расходы по транспортировке российского газа. Основой для данных оплат должно стать специальное решение руководящих структур Евросоюза, определяющее ситуацию как «угрозу гуманитарной катастрофы» странам-членам ЕС  http://news.mail.ru/politics/2303681

 А мне так и думалось. Эта наглая клика киевских воров всё выставит так, чтобы за российский газ для Украины платил Евросоюз. А винить во всём станут Газпром.

----------


## mishau_

У Украины началась газовая гангрена. 
ЗАПОРОЖСКИЕ КАЗАКИ ПЕРЕКРЫВАЮТ ГАЗ ЗАМОРСКИМ СУЛТАНАМ

----------


## Оля

> А винить во всём станут Газпром.

 Ну разве только в Америке. В Европе всё прекрасно понимают.  (Слышала по телеку в обзоре прессы отрывок из какой-то статьи в "New York Times" - там говорится, что Россия перекрыла газ в целях политического давления на демократическую и ориентированную на Запад Украину. Хосссспади, и неужели ж американцы это хавают?....)

----------


## Ramil

Not exactly. It is clear for everyone in Europe that this quarrel is not economical but political. Europe (officially at least) blames both Russia and Ukraine for that. As for Ukraine - its economy cannot afford paying the so called 'market prices' (by the way, the term 'market price' assumes that there IS a market for gas, in reality there ISN'T since Gazprom practically is a monopoly).

----------


## mishau_

> Not exactly. It is clear for everyone in Europe that this quarrel is not economical but political. Europe (officially at least) blames both Russia and Ukraine for that. As for Ukraine - its economy cannot afford paying the so called 'market prices' (by the way, the term 'market price' assumes that there IS a market for gas, in reality there ISN'T since Gazprom practically is a monopoly).

 I think this row is neither economical nor political. It's a greatist corruption scandal, that shows up how deeply corruption has penitrated into all verticals of authority of both countires. And now it's become beyond control. What makes me think so is that there are some middlemen who made the gas price so high, like $350 or so for Ukrainian consumers instead of $180 Ukraine got for.

----------


## rockzmom

This TV ad just started running (at least the Washington, D.C. area) on February 22, 2009. 
I am posting two links in the event that you don't have access to the actual Web site that the tv spot comes from. 
Now coming from a film background, this spot takes advantage of ALL the typical tricks, like how it starts with shots of Russia being in black and white, not even that ...more gray and dark, ominous foreboding along with the menacing clouds overhead ... all to make Russia look evil. Yet, what is the commercial about? Is it about big bad Russia?  
I am not making any political statement here... I just find it very interesting how this ad was created and produced and what the message is they are actually trying to get across. 
Take a look...  
[video:1qhv1ejk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaSNG9sxqcA[/video:1qhv1ejk] 
This is who sponsors the tv ad spot: http://www.pickensplan.com/news/2009...plan-ad-is-up/

----------


## Ramil

Typical for them. Sometimes I wonder what would have happenned if Russia and the Russians were at least 10% as bad as they say we are... ))) 
Unfortunately I don't have any sound system here so I can only guess that this video is about alternative energy resources. I still think no alternative presently would satisfy American demand for energy. US burns every fourth gallon of oil produced worldwide. There are no alternative for oil, unfortunately, until fusion power plants start working.

----------


## rockzmom

> Typical for them. Sometimes I wonder what would have happenned if Russia and the Russians were at least 10% as bad as they say we are... ))) 
> Unfortunately I don't have any sound system here so I can only guess that this video is about alternative energy resources. I still think no alternative presently would satisfy American demand for energy. US burns every fourth gallon of oil produced worldwide. There are no alternative for oil, unfortunately, until fusion power plants start working.

 Ramil...you are right... it is about alternative energy. 
Here is what is said in the opening of the ad in a very "southern drawl" of a voice:  

> Now get this one. Did you know what happened when Russia cut off Europe’s natural gas supplies in the middle of winter? Europe begged Russian, real nice, “Please turn it back on, it’s cold.” Europe even said they’d pay more. Why? They had to. Russia control’s Europe’s supply of natural gas. They don’t have a choice.

 Now... I showed this ad to my girls (remember ages 11 & 12) and asked them if they did not know anything about Russian or Russian's what would they think about them based upon this ad? 
They both had the same reaction...  

> That Russians are meanies. Not nice people. Why would they cut off the gas in the winter when it is cold and not turn it back on? Looks like an awful place to live.

 How sad that one 60 second spot could make that kind of impression.

----------


## Оля

> How sad that one 60 second spot could make that kind of impression.

 Especially when it's Ukraine who cut off the gas, not Russia.

----------


## Ramil

Hm, technically it was Russia, when it realized that no gas pupmed into the pipe appears on the other side.
Of course, we are meanies. Still, rockzmom, if you show your girls something about what US did to the world they would too think that the Americans are definetely NOT NICE )))

----------


## rockzmom

> Hm, technically it was Russia, when it realized that no gas pupmed into the pipe appears on the other side.
> Of course, we are meanies. Still, rockzmom, if you show your girls something about what US did to the world they would too think that the Americans are definetely NOT NICE )))

 Yes, Ramil... Americans, like many humans, have been unkind, cruel and have done many indefensible things. While I try my best to be like "Switzerland" in many cases, I too have my mean streaks and uncalled for prejudices.  
Since being on MR, my daughters and I have begun to learn a great deal about Russians. Little things that can’t be taught in books at school. Treasured nuggets of information that will help me and my girls to question an advertisement like this one.  
Instead of my family seeing this ad and thinking as I would have in the past “the evil empire is at it again” now, I stop. I question. I look at it from a different perspective. I think of all of the people who I have exchanged posts with on threads here. I begin to think of *Russians vs. Russia*.   
And because my girls often read some of the posts with me or I tell them about them, they have begun to think of ya’ll as quasi friends and hopefully will never think of you as I once did...enemies from a nation that wanted to kill me.

----------


## Оля

Honestly, when I think how much of propaganda and politics disunite us and often make us to hate each other, I begin to cry.

----------


## Crocodile

Итак, соглашение о строительстве "Набукко" подписали. http://www.bbc.co.uk/russian/internatio ... _gas.shtml
Что дальше? Забьёт ли Россия на них (ну конкуренция и ладно) или будет бороться? И если да, то как? Ограничивать существующие поставки? Повышать цены пока "Набукко" не готов? Как бы вы поступили на месте России?

----------


## Leof

Ой, а я как раз сегодня после репортажа на Евроньюз задумался об этом.
Там Ангела Меркель говорила, что, мол, надо уменьшать зависимость Европы от поставок российского газа.
Вот, что я подумал, это то, что во-первых - да. конкуренция, и Европа имеет полное право печься о своей выгоде.
Во-вторых - подписать они сегодня подписали, а вот не выйдет ли так, что пойдут на попятную - скажут, приняли поспешное прешение, но в связи с устойчивой сложной экономической ситуацией воплощение планов откладывается. а потом, глядишь, построят балтийский трубопровод, и они вообще с этой своей идеей расстанутся.
Мне вот показалось, что Европа как бы хочет показать - нам не нравится быть в такой слабой позиции, знайте это, это дело нашей гордости, нам неприятно видеть, как Россия становится сильнее и в состоянии манипулировать нами. Но признать невоплотимость своих планов однажды вдруг придётся. То есть, грубо говоря, всё это "понты".
В третьих я подумал, но ещё не знаю наверняка, что у России запасов может оказаться чуточку больше, чем у остальных поставщиков. То есть лет через сто эти трубы опустеют, а Российские будут давать газ и всё остальное.
А ещё, я слышал звон про то, что со строительством Набукки сопряжено множество нерешённых проблем, и идёт он через опасные регионы. 
Ну, дешевле он на полтора млрд евро, но в конечном счёте это просто цена, которую Россия готова выложить за выигранный тендер.

----------


## BappaBa

Ни одна из стран _стан_ (Тадикистан, Узбекистан, Киргизстан) ничего не подписала. Посмотрим, может Еуропа заполнит эту трубу газом из Азербайджана. =)

----------

