Well, here's what we can say: it looked, of course, quite wild from the outside, but at the same time touching and extremely funny. Last Sunday, after the end of the farewell visit of Frau Bundeschancellor Angela Merkel to Moscow and just during her stay in the glorious ancient city of Kiev, it became known that the laying of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline in the exclusive economic zone of the Kingdom of Denmark had ended rather routinely. and is evidenced by the data of the global positioning system of ships MarineTraffic, which are officially and publicly available.
And after some relatively short time, it was announced that the Russian pipelayer "Fortuna", which is now continuing the completion of the gas pipeline already in German waters, as stated in the specialized maritime services of Germany, should not finish work on the still unfinished second line of Nord Stream 2. later than September 12 of the current year, 2021.
Strictly speaking, everything.
It is done.
After that, the construction of both threads "in iron" can be considered fully completed at the current time: the first one, we recall, is currently being tested with might and main before commercial filling.
There remain, in fact, little things, in particular, additional adjustment and certification.
However, as it became finally clear after the agreements on Nord Stream 2 between Merkel and Biden, these are no longer our problems, not of the Russian side, but of the very Germany, to which the Russian Federation and Nord Stream 2 so fervently and heartfeltly complained in weekend in Kiev Vladimir Zelensky. And that may have been one of his best humorous acts.
For even when this vulgar, but quite amusing stand-up in the past performed his famous experience with playing the piano, it was not so entertaining and funny for people who understand a lot about good humor. In the current performance of a high-profile Ukrainian comedian, humor is of a completely different order. The only pity is that we have to laugh not at him, but at the whole country that was once quite a brotherly country for us. Everything is simple here, and you don’t need to be seven inches in your forehead: the information is completely open (moreover, by and large, and not hidden by anyone), you just need to look at the Nord Stream 2 deal with eyes that are not clouded by “democratic values” and determine who became its main beneficiary. And then it is very easy to understand that, of course, the funniest thing isWhat is tragic and beautiful in what is happening on the stage of this theater of absurdity is to watch from the sidelines how Vladimir Zelensky complains to Angela Merkel about the evil Russians with their insidious Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline.
Merkel, I'm sorry Karl!
Who has devoted half, if not more, of her political career to ensuring that her country, reunified only three decades ago by Germany, could become the main transit country for Russian energy raw materials to Europe, thereby laying the foundations for future prosperity and ensuring the true energy security of her country, whose patriot - there is no doubt about it - Frau Merkel certainly is.
And the problem here is only one thing: this country is called, as you know, well, not Ukraine.
A very worthy career outcome, by the way, which one can be proud of: Vladimir Putin, a very cold and pragmatic politician, will not give flowers just like that, and even before Chancellor Merkel resigns.
This is at least recognition of both the magnitude of the politician and the scale of the global and local tasks he has solved in fact - here, despite all the mutual contradictions, there really is nothing but respect.
And for flowers to the graves of the Soviet soldiers-liberators both in Moscow and Kiev - separately and including.
Yes, Frau Bundescanzler did not succeed in the energy sector, as she wanted, something was fenced off by the NATO ally, not the most pleasant for Angela Merkel - Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in general, it seems, with legs getting into the project of a "single Eurasian energy platform" ... Much to Berlin's annoyance, of course. But this is already a squabble between its own people, and Kiev needs to think not about this, trying to poke at the contradictions between Berlin and Ankara, but about the fact that it was Ukraine and not Russia that replaced Germany and Turkey in this long-term business. This equation is generally extreme, it is not a transit country, it is a supplier and cannot compete with anyone from this position in principle. And the competition was exclusively between transit countries: you would have, for example, complained to Erdogan about the Turkish Stream, inappropriate and extremely, ridiculously ridiculous,if you look from the outside, in this position, a provincial sugary actor. And inappropriateness, absurdity - this is in many ways the nature of the funny. It's even somehow strange that once a professional comedian suddenly ceased to understand the nature of his past profession.
Although, maybe, of course, and understands everything, just fooling around in public.
But then this is generally a disaster ...
If we talk about the serious, then Moscow and Berlin have always - since Soviet times - been interesting to each other precisely in this kind of combination: supplier - consumer. It's just that when the Soviet Union collapsed, "independent" Kiev quickly realized its winning role as a kind of "valve manager" on the still Soviet pipe. Then the same "gas triangle" Moscow - Kiev - Brussels was formed, which regulated the European gas markets as best it could (remember, perhaps, still quite recent regular trilateral commissions mediated by the EU energy commissioners?). This, to put it mildly, did not suit Moscow very much, but it could not do anything until it found (far from now, but back in the distant 2000s) a strategic ally within Europe,which - not surprisingly - has become the united Berlin, accustomed to a "special role" in energy ties with Moscow since Soviet times.
That, in fact, is all.
Both Kiev and Brussels have lost their significance with the commissioning of new gas pipelines (Nord Stream 2 here - we wrote about this more than once - only a kind of cherry on the cake), it seems, completely lost.
The issue of routes for the supply of energy raw materials was also politically resolved in the Moscow - Berlin - Washington format (by the way, it would have been resolved economically if the States could ensure the supply of their LNG to European markets, but this issue is closed for the near historical perspective) ...
And from the point of view of the current transit and pricing policy in the gas sphere on the European markets, the relationship in the "triangle" Moscow - Berlin - Ankara is now much more interesting.
No, this does not mean, of course, that Moscow and Berlin will refuse to cooperate with the Ukrainian GTS and will stop pumping some volumes of gas through it.
If it is beneficial to them, of course. And if it is not profitable, then, as they say in the glorious city of Odessa, who is to blame.
We are talking exclusively about the “loss of significance”: on the European energy maps of Europe, Ukraine is now as a basic player, who - what is it there - could at any moment take the European energy as one interesting place and which therefore had to be reckoned with, no matter how these people were unpleasant to whom, more simply not. The rules of the game in these "gas triangles" are determined by completely different players. Just as an example: it is no coincidence that the price of gas on the European futures market slowed down growth following the statement by Russian President Vladimir Putin at a meeting with the same Angela Merkel that only 15 km of Nord Stream 2 remained to be completed. However, it is still holding above $ 500 for 1 thousand cubic meters, as, at least, the data of trading on the Dutch TTF index - that very liquid European hub,which so far sets prices for gas spots on the continent, which is absolutely satisfactory for Russia as the largest supplier and, naturally, for Europe, including Germany.
And Ukraine - but what about Ukraine?
Ukraine really has nothing to do with it.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.