Unfortunately (and this is a couple of years as simply an indisputable fact, and not the subject of discussion), any, including environmental, values even their most selfless defenders openly recognize not only as something independent and suitable for that selfless defense, but content factors applied. Moreover, it turns out that it is precisely the millions of all kinds of ecologists and green politicians around the planet who, as it turns out, are simply corny when they say that their environmental values, whatever they may be, are absolute.
It doesn’t matter if it’s not very relevant for ten years already as a “ozone hole” (oh, what Greta opposed them then!) Or what a “trend” climate warming. Or even some other, unknown to the world devilry.
Nothing personal, so to speak: it's only business. If there is any product, including environmental activists, they can be bought, especially if they put up for sale themselves. That is, if literally, the speech in this particular case (however, as always) is about the main value of the Western world, namely the loot. And here we need to understand this very clearly: the same Greta Tunberg, in the end, can arrange photo shoots in the vestibule of the economic carriage of a European train as much as she wants, but then the girl will continue to the first grade anyway - and not because “the Germans forced ", But because" so it should be. "
This is simply the very basic law of the Western world, which, even if you are a rebel, you are not allowed to violate. And this has not surprised anyone for a long time: the person at work, already leave him with all sorts of ethical stupidities from him.
You, in general, are not interested in why these rock musicians, whose personal details, including the use of the most unusual substances, from time to time willingly publish tabloids, are so pleased to participate in all kinds of actions like “rock against drugs”?
Well, nothing personal, yes. It just happened by accident.
And just do not ask me exactly where they spend with such difficulty, through laughter earned at such concerts loot.
This is, in fact, why?
Yes, everything is simple.
We are simply talking about another mass media disaster around another, now ecological scandal connected with the Nord Stream-2.
An ordinary statement of the real state of affairs.
It’s just obvious to all, probably to the world around, as to all more or less civilized humanity, that all this (crazy, by the way, when viewed from the side, ridiculous - and, by the way, expensive from the point of view of PR) American-European drama, evolving around the launch of the European-Russian Nord Stream 2 project should not be evaluated in terms of abstract “value ideals”. And from the point of view of the banal cui prodest, as the lofty but corrupt senators of Ancient Rome used to say.
In short, "look, who benefits." And there’s nothing to bother with all sorts of such “European energy values”.
And this is why, in fact, everything is simple in this energy equation: if proud Denmark finally bowed its head and allowed the Nord Stream-2 gas pipeline to run through its waters, then it’s unlikely that anyone will bet at least one penny after that not only Congress and the US State Department will not oppose this outrage, but also the team of all colors and shades of “independent” environmental NGOs. And other "not at all foreign policy structures" of the USA.
Well, all right, let's get to the specifics.
So, we now have several fairly simple and understandable options for the development of events around the Ukrainian route gas pipeline, which is significant from the point of view of European energy security. The first option is the worst from any point of view: on December 31, the valve is turned on.
No matter who, just didn’t agree. How to live further?
From the point of view of the strategy of Russia's energy policy in Europe, everything is simple: to fulfill - everything that was recently agreed upon. It's so simple. No transiter has the right to press either the supplier or the buyer. He is just a transit. Otherwise, a crisis is inevitable, just purely mathematically.
And in this case, the only way out for the Russian Federation is not by bad will, but again purely mathematically - there is only one: to negate technological losses. So, to multiply by zero that same famous Ukrainian pipe. And for this, believe me, everything is ready: yes, there will be financial losses, but they will more than pay off later - even if Novatek needs to bow to the execution of contracts (and Yamal LNG has already officially guaranteed that it will “insure”) - after all, who is the resident to whom? Therefore - we will say it bluntly - let's not pay attention to this nonsense with the "interfering marsupial of pinnipeds" gas pipeline, because everything is clear how and why this is done. And if German environmentalists believe that winter work can interfere with the wintering of millions of waterfowl off the Baltic coast in the north of the country, then we just have to ask ourselves the same harsh Roman question: cui prodest. And this “who benefits” certainly will not be the “marrying Baltic pinnipeds” that the “ecologists” allegedly care about - these seals simply don’t have the same money as George Soros.
Therefore, he speaks on their behalf.
But seriously, the fact that at the final stage of the Nord Stream-2 project implementation all the instruments available to the counterparties, including environmental ones, would be used against it, you just had to be prepared from the very beginning. And here we must pay tribute to Gazprom and its European business partners, concurrently to the largest European energy giants, while they are holding a decent blow, quite. In the end, the main human right is still the right to choose.
And now, in which concrete direction does Europe choose now to go, it is quite interesting for us, outside observers from the dense Asian Russia, to observe, as always, and always. But it makes sense to stop reacting to candy wrappers. And remember that any declared “value” under certain circumstances and in the capable hands of partners is just and only a tool.
The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.