←back to thread

Europe is locking itself in to US LNG

(davekeating.substack.com)
151 points hunglee2 | 4 comments | 16 Sep 25 13:56 UTC | HN request time: 0.015s | source
Show context
neves ◴[16 Sep 25 14:06 UTC] No.45262447[source]▶
Wasn't it the point of Nord Stream sabotage? https://brian-whit.medium.com/nord-stream-sabotage-a-look-at...
replies(5): >>45262603 #>>45262646 #>>45262665 #>>45263319 #>>45263975 #
SiempreViernes ◴[16 Sep 25 14:24 UTC] No.45262665[source]▶
No, Ukrainians bombed it for their own reasons and not on behalf of the US.

The exact reasons aren't entirely clear, originally they hated NS because it allowed Europe to ignore Ukraine in the gas trade which left them more exposed. By the time of the full scale war I would bet the reason was more "fuck Russia" than anything more carefully reasoned.

replies(5): >>45263152 #>>45263344 #>>45265566 #>>45265587 #>>45266556 #
eptcyka ◴[16 Sep 25 14:55 UTC] No.45263152[source]▶
Anything that makes it harder for Russia to make foreign currency and decrease the demand for Rubles is a strategic win for Ukraine.
replies(3): >>45264205 #>>45267038 #>>45273131 #
1. bgwalter ◴[16 Sep 25 19:46 UTC] No.45267038[source]▶
Nord Stream money is being replaced by China in the new gas deal:

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/russia-china-bless-v...

So Russia can now export gas, get foreign currency, and buy weapons with the money. I do not see any strategic wins here.

Additionally, China gets an economic boost. That is a sublime strategy.

replies(3): >>45267236 #>>45267410 #>>45267879 #
2. Detrytus ◴[16 Sep 25 20:02 UTC] No.45267236[source]▶
Russia selling gas to China is completely orthogonal to Nord Stream issue.

The strategic win in bombing Nord Stream was that Ukraine finally got Europe on their side. Before NS was blown up many countries, especially Germany were sitting on the fence, reluctant to give Ukraine any help. They were hoping for Ukraine to lose the war quickly, then they would give Putin some slap on the wrist punishment, and return to "business as usual" with Russia. Nord Stream being destroyed removed the biggest incentive for doing that.

3. ponector ◴[16 Sep 25 20:17 UTC] No.45267410[source]▶
Three points there:

1. Power of Syberia 1 throughput is not fully utilized.

2. China pays half of the EU price.

3. Power of Syberia 2 not be build in the near future. It's not the deal to actually do something. It's too continue further discussion.

4. inglor_cz ◴[16 Sep 25 20:52 UTC] No.45267879[source]▶
The devil is in the details. The conditions that China wants aren't very lucrative to Russians, and the second pipeline, if it is even built, will take about a decade to build, so not "now".

Russian negotiating position is weak and Beijing knows that.