The struggle for Europe

In the last few years, all the rage of passion to build one of the most controversial branches of the gas paths Europe under the name "Nord stream - 2". Let's try to understand what lies behind this "War for resources" and how this is reflected in the alignment of geopolitical forces in the middle east-the European arena. For anybody not a secret the existence of the saying "Who owns the information, owns the world". However, even during the "Young america" became clear, and another principle: "Who owns resources owns the world". Who-who, and the United States, built his "Power" on the plundering of resources untouched until the 17th century in North america, are unlikely to challenge this statement. Since the early 20th century, the United States waged a bitter struggle for control of resources on other continents, to argue this conclusion can only does not understand geopolitics.

And if it was expressed in the ability of the us beneficial to trade with the growth of the "Military power" of the us ambitions overseas "Partners" began to grow, and they began openly to abuse and military force. Can be long to enumerate the list of countries where the United States invaded "Politically" (using revolution and regime change), or by using military force, if more budget and less bloody for the first scenario did not work. In the process of conquering the world's resources outside the country 1989-2000 began the "Golden era" of the us. Losing a strong geopolitical rival in the face of the Soviet Union and amid still lacking in economic and military power of China, the United States government in league with transnational corporations could with impunity and cheaply to overcome the local discontent of the local population of the countries-exporters of oil and gas and to take control of the most important hydrocarbon deposits and arteries of the planet. Always to the United States was the most attractive areas of oil and gas artery between Russia and the eu. They had large reserves of hydrocarbons, powerful throughput, a ready transportation system (hereinafter the cta). Just needed to get this all under control.

And succeeded. On the territory of the Russian Federation, there have been many companies that have produced hydrocarbons in different parts of the country and drove them solvent of the eu, which experienced its "Development boom" in the background of the loss of the Soviet Union of its markets in Europe and in other countries. Free there are many estimates and economic calculations on the basis of which it is possible to find the total "Profit" obtained from the U.S. Commercialization of formerly state tcu Soviet Union, which for us, the inhabitants of the largest country in the world, expressed as "Loss" or "Lost profit". With the change of power in Russia in 2000, the government of the Russian Federation "It is understood" that the main issue of restoring sovereignty of Russia is to return control over export of resources, but a sudden "Nationalization" of large energy companies could contribute only a sharp outflow of capital and investment abroad, which probably would have led to the lowering of the investment climate in russia, which badly affected to the overly credited the country. Moreover, many industry "Laid down" in the 90-ies and demanded the arrival of foreign investment and technology. Have chosen a different way: the Russian Federation began to acquire private oil companies, and if there were such a legal opportunity, to freeze their activities with all the fields bringing the company to bankruptcy and buying it for a song with part of the gts and fields. And it's not in the "Raider" capture, but rather the reluctance of the old owners of these companies to fulfill the new requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation (remember the "Yukos").

By the way, many private companies have adopted the new laws of the Russian Federation in the field of regulation of export of resources and called them acceptable. Buying small companies of the Russian Federation has entered into structure "Gazprom" increasing the proportion of their shares in this corporation. The main task was to bring the stock to "Control". And it was a success. After receiving a "Vote" in the corporation, Russia received the right to sole decision in matters of "Policy" of the corporation.

The policy of "Gazprom", by the way, has changed, in the case entered a "Competitiveness strategy" and the company has put other gas producers in such conditions that their survival outside the corporation became impossible, which has led, actually, to the fact that the state has received the control packet over all participants in the gas market in russia. This was done not through legislation, but with the help of dumping prices that put other companies at a level of profitability below profitability. Everything is legal, clean business. It was returned to the gas market of the Russian Federation under state control, although today a decent share of "Gazprom" still belongs to other countries. However, "The scheme was launched the most pernicious and shameless player in the United States that deprived them of the right to vote in matters of gas supplies from Russia to the eu within russia.

If it is brief. Realizing that this tidbit gets out of control, geopolitical and once the enemy begins its recovery, the return of loans and the restoration of sovereignty, not corresponding to their interests, the us has tried to "Bring forth" a new "Project" of the gts from the middle east. Cheap gas production in qatar was supposed to compensate for the costs of multi-stage transit and the protection of the pipeline on the "Troubled" areas, to give us full control over the gas transport system and to weaken russia. Europe, of course, interested in this project. Then began the progress of american "Democracy" in the middle east, through which was to pass this pipeline. However, in the beginning of the second decade of the 21st century the main supplier of gas to the eu has gained political clout, it became clear that international solutions are not able to influence the policy of Russia and its reliability as a gas supplier to the eu was assessed as "Very high". The eu began to lose interest in the "Project long perspective", the more that the constant infusion of funds in the middle east "Hot-project" began to tire of the eu, and the volume of gas supplied from Russia is quite satisfied her needs. And it demanded from us new actions, active, and resolute. 2013 can be considered decisive, it is at this point began the hard struggle between Russia and the U.S.

Over the eu gas market. Today, i often hear that "A third world war" between the us and russia. In fact it is something else as the battle for the paying customers in the oil and gas industry. Nothing more. Hardly anyone in an attempt to seize the new market will be to put yourself under a real threat of destruction, lost profit is not worth the candle, especially because the us and Russia know perfectly well that the chances of the USA in this game to win is minimal. And the reason is the eu country whose word in the field of gas Europe are becoming louder and stronger every day - Germany. Loss of interest from Europe to the middle east "Hot projects" did not like much of the United States, in the light of this "Fading attention" the most interesting option for us was a blow to the stability of gas supplies to the eu from its Eastern neighbor.

As Germany is a very strong player on the regional scale was chosen second gas transit to the eu - Ukraine. Many political analysts say that thus NATO closer to russia's borders and seeking to block the military potential of russia, but to me this statement seems very doubtful. We live in an era quite a developed and modern weapons negate the need to be closer to the "Potential enemy", especially that the proximity to the capital of the Russian Federation baltic countries, already NATO members, the maximum. The ukrainian "Project" of democracy, the promise of strong support from the United States is nothing more than an attempt to limit the supply of gas to the eu, making it clear the last thing thread of gas pipelines from Russia to the eu is not as stable and safe, in order to reignite the eu's interest to alternative sources of gas supply. Russia is also involved in this struggle, knowing that at least one of the gts lost as reliable, and is forced to seek eu alternative sources of gas supplies that will reduce not only the geopolitical influence of Russia in the eu, but, primarily, will deprive Russia of revenues in the budget and will allow "Someone" to rise again at its loss. In this situation should act as quickly and decisively "Inertia" of the decisions of Russian leaders have led to the fact that Russia lost an industrial partner, although Russia could benefit in the long term. The transfer of production to Russia is long overdue, and this was the "Final push" to increase the industrial sovereignty of the Russian Federation. The annexation of crimea can be considered an act of military struggle, the return of the peninsula plays a purely military significance, he lowers Ukraine as a potential NATO asset below the threshold of liquidity, and the deployment of military means of defense of the Russian Federation on the peninsula would eliminate the military benefits of the West from the capture of Ukraine and even, on the contrary, long-term military perspective, obviously, the West has lost this microswitch in the military aspect. Also became actively worked project "South stream" as an alternative to ukrainian transit gas transportation system, but here all were "Against", as it was not clear who will be the main gas transit country in this regard.

It is no coincidence then mr. Obama went to Germany, and not brussels. Former president of the United States understood that the project has the interests of Germany, a regional power in the framework of the European union. It was after obama's visit to Germany was adopted by the "Energy package" that blocks the construction of South stream and that was the beginning of "Speculation" on the topic of "Poor Ukraine," and the need for its support by maintaining the transit.

Even then i understood that already discussed the "North stream-2" will share all the who sang about "United support of Ukraine" and "The need to preserve its status as a transit country", and i wrote about this many "Patriots" "Zhevto-blackit.