I find line of argument rather odd. So it's all Germany's fault, for having done business with Russia before the invasion? Therefore Germany should "apologize and keep quiet" when a multi-billion euro infrastructure installation of strategic importance is blown up by a country receiving billions of euros of German aid?
So, by the same token -- the U.S. has been doing business with Russia for decades too. We still use their space launch services -- just last week a Soyuz rocket was launched from Baikonur to resupply the astronauts stuck in the (mostly Russian-built) International Space Station because of the Boeing failure. So would you say that if Ukraine had shot down that supply rocket, that would be all our fault too?
You say that "no one in Ukraine cares" about Germany's concerns. Well, a lot of people in Germany care a lot. I bet people in Ukraine will care if Germany cuts off military aid to Ukraine. Oops, didn't they just do that?
Germany painted itself in the corner. This point isn't really up for debate as Germany has admitted as much. Also, Germany had already shut down Nord Stream. Because it knew it couldn't pay for Russian genocide. <-- As bold an admission of guilt as you could ever want. Putin has been very clear about his goals. This wasn't news to Germany. Merkel et al just didn't care. In some case just wanted to cash in.
The US caries blame as well. As do all major powers that did little to nothing to prevent this. I made that point very clear.
The space program is a very special case. It's like the UN.
As for shutting down aid for Ukraine... that's temporary and an obvious political move to put Ukraine "in it place" and also signal to Russia that Germany still wants to do business. Expect France to do something similar soon. This is just global politics. It has almost nothing to do with the pipeline. The fact is that Ukraine is fighting for all of Europe. That's not a slogan. That's the truth. Germans, I hope, appreciate this.
It still doesn't make any sense. That pipeline had a what -- 50 year useful life? 100? Who are the Ukrainians to destroy it? It was not theirs to destroy. The war will be over sooner or later, in one way or another, which may well end sanctions and make the pipeline needed again.
And what about the hypocrisy? Ukraine to this day takes a lot of money from the Russians for transporting Russian gas to Europe.
A retired German intelligence officer was a board member of a bank headed by a 37-year-old Russian oligarch. And now he is making heavy accusations consistent with the Kremlin position. Doesn't that turn on a red light?
Germany is an independent country, but it is bound by the international treaties. Nord Stream was built with the explicit objections of the Swedes, the Balts and the Poles? These countries are military and economic allies and part of the family of 'democratic and European values'. Sacrifice all that for Schroeder's Gazprom job?
Finally: the pipe was not Ukrainian, how dare they destroy it? And the houses in Mariupol and Bakhmut were not in private hands? Who will pay the billions in compensation to property owners or entrepreneurs? Let's say I have no interest in the war. I have a property in Mariupol, advice me, who should I contact to get my money back? No jokes.
Russians destroy houses in Mariupol and Bakhmut which are not theirs; therefore it's OK for Ukraine to destroy a German strategic asset which is not theirs? Seriously?
Nordstream was built over the objections of Swedes, Balts and Poles, and therefore, the Germans have no right to expect their property to not be destroyed? And what do treaties have to do with it?
And what does some retired German intelligence officer have to do with anything? I'm talking about the German people, who are pretty pissed off right now. We went through a lot of economic turmoil after this war started, more than other parts of Europe. Many of the same Germans who are OK with spending billions of taxpayer to help Ukraine are NOT OK with the recipient of our help blowing up our strategic energy infrastructure. That's just the way it is, and it's not going to turn out well for Ukraine.
There is still no proof that Ukraine blew up anything, there was no trial, only suspicions, so if the Germans are pissed then it's not 'logical', nor justified.The claim that Ukraine destroyed the pipe was partly based on the revelations of August Hanning (an official, not an officer, my mistake). I was of course reffering to him. For his Russian connections see the link [to German press]:
Assuming, however, that it was Ukraine that blew up Nord Stream. Was it even a ‘German asset’? I was under the impression that it was owned by the Nord Stream Consortium, in which Gazprom, a company hand-controlled by the Kremlin and Putin, is the majority shareholder. Gazprom (i.e. Russia) covered most of the costs of the construction.
So maybe they have some rights to blow Gazprom property after all, as it is a pirate company since 2014 operating illegally in Crimea, which Germany recognises as an integral part of Ukrainian territory. Gazprom is violating the rules of ownership there, taking over illegally expropriated property, using infrastructure without paying taxes and fees to the legal owners - if we are already reducing this case to a legalistic absurdity
As for international agreements and the broader issue of European integration and cooperation. The argument is not ‘logical’ but political. If Germany wanted to bypass its allies and agree over their heads with Russia. Ok, their business. Surely the Poles, Lithuanians and Slovaks were as pissed back then in 2011 as the Germans supposedly are today.
In 2011, someone (very naive one, to put it mildly) could actually believe that Nord Stream was a business project, not a political one, and that it didn't go against the core of European integration and interests. In 2014 it was already a cynical explanation, and after Ukraine was blackmailed by the Russian government that the ‘private company Gazprom’ would turn off the tap, it became more than apparent that the same could be done with Czechia or Poland, and that Nord Stream could not only harm economic interests and the principles of cooperation in Europe but also the security structure of NATO. Developing this project until the beginning of 2022, in cooperation with a company that so openly violates international law and market rules, is today considered a grave mistake even by the German politicians, so it is difficult to imagine any relaunch of Nord Stream in the near (or even distant) future. Taking this into account, I really don't get, if it was dead already, what all the fuss is about?
Next time don't invest so much with known murders and dictators who have been in power for more than 20 years. It's really that simple.
Also... the Poles and Czechs disagree with you. You are finding yourself in an indefensible minority. When that happens, wise people turn to introspection.
The rules of war are clear. Whether you like it or not.
I'm aware of Russia's political/cultural/business successes in Germany over the decades and how it colors German opinion of Ukraine. It's been well documented in every language.
And that's a great point about Russian gas transiting Ukraine during the war. That's the best example of "geo politics"... probably ever! Good call out. Geo Political Realism is nothing if not hypocritical!
International law allows the defender to defend itself by starving the belligerent's war machine.
By attacking the defender's own allies? You serious?
I happen to be an international lawyer and I can tell you that this is false. Whatever claims you have against Russia don't give you the right to attack your own ally.
I don't know if you follow any German reporting on the war, but the most prominent journalist, which most Germans read about this, is Julian Röpcke from Bild, who does a daily television/Youtube sendung on the war. He is passionately pro-Ukrainian, more than the average German, and this was what he said yesterday, interpreting statements from the Finance Ministry after the news about Nordstream (translated into English):
"Let me translate this:
➡️ No more euros for anti-aircraft missiles.
➡️ No more modern tanks since May 2023.
➡️ No additional artillery ammunition beyond that already promised.
➡️ No Taurus to combat Russian terror bombing on the ground.
➡️ No consequences for Russia.
Great"
So bombing Nordstream, which is German property and a German strategic infrastructure installation -- good result for Ukraine?
I find line of argument rather odd. So it's all Germany's fault, for having done business with Russia before the invasion? Therefore Germany should "apologize and keep quiet" when a multi-billion euro infrastructure installation of strategic importance is blown up by a country receiving billions of euros of German aid?
So, by the same token -- the U.S. has been doing business with Russia for decades too. We still use their space launch services -- just last week a Soyuz rocket was launched from Baikonur to resupply the astronauts stuck in the (mostly Russian-built) International Space Station because of the Boeing failure. So would you say that if Ukraine had shot down that supply rocket, that would be all our fault too?
You say that "no one in Ukraine cares" about Germany's concerns. Well, a lot of people in Germany care a lot. I bet people in Ukraine will care if Germany cuts off military aid to Ukraine. Oops, didn't they just do that?
I can't help you if you don't read the article.
Germany painted itself in the corner. This point isn't really up for debate as Germany has admitted as much. Also, Germany had already shut down Nord Stream. Because it knew it couldn't pay for Russian genocide. <-- As bold an admission of guilt as you could ever want. Putin has been very clear about his goals. This wasn't news to Germany. Merkel et al just didn't care. In some case just wanted to cash in.
The US caries blame as well. As do all major powers that did little to nothing to prevent this. I made that point very clear.
The space program is a very special case. It's like the UN.
As for shutting down aid for Ukraine... that's temporary and an obvious political move to put Ukraine "in it place" and also signal to Russia that Germany still wants to do business. Expect France to do something similar soon. This is just global politics. It has almost nothing to do with the pipeline. The fact is that Ukraine is fighting for all of Europe. That's not a slogan. That's the truth. Germans, I hope, appreciate this.
It still doesn't make any sense. That pipeline had a what -- 50 year useful life? 100? Who are the Ukrainians to destroy it? It was not theirs to destroy. The war will be over sooner or later, in one way or another, which may well end sanctions and make the pipeline needed again.
And what about the hypocrisy? Ukraine to this day takes a lot of money from the Russians for transporting Russian gas to Europe.
Clearly you don't speak German or read the German press. Germans are pissed about this. This will cost the Ukrainians bitterly. Support for Ukraine among the German public was already shaky, even before this. See: https://de.euronews.com/my-europe/2024/07/24/deutsche-unterstutzung-fur-die-ukraine-sinkt.
A retired German intelligence officer was a board member of a bank headed by a 37-year-old Russian oligarch. And now he is making heavy accusations consistent with the Kremlin position. Doesn't that turn on a red light?
Germany is an independent country, but it is bound by the international treaties. Nord Stream was built with the explicit objections of the Swedes, the Balts and the Poles? These countries are military and economic allies and part of the family of 'democratic and European values'. Sacrifice all that for Schroeder's Gazprom job?
Finally: the pipe was not Ukrainian, how dare they destroy it? And the houses in Mariupol and Bakhmut were not in private hands? Who will pay the billions in compensation to property owners or entrepreneurs? Let's say I have no interest in the war. I have a property in Mariupol, advice me, who should I contact to get my money back? No jokes.
Perfect!
Trying to unpack this mass of illogic.
Russians destroy houses in Mariupol and Bakhmut which are not theirs; therefore it's OK for Ukraine to destroy a German strategic asset which is not theirs? Seriously?
Nordstream was built over the objections of Swedes, Balts and Poles, and therefore, the Germans have no right to expect their property to not be destroyed? And what do treaties have to do with it?
And what does some retired German intelligence officer have to do with anything? I'm talking about the German people, who are pretty pissed off right now. We went through a lot of economic turmoil after this war started, more than other parts of Europe. Many of the same Germans who are OK with spending billions of taxpayer to help Ukraine are NOT OK with the recipient of our help blowing up our strategic energy infrastructure. That's just the way it is, and it's not going to turn out well for Ukraine.
There is still no proof that Ukraine blew up anything, there was no trial, only suspicions, so if the Germans are pissed then it's not 'logical', nor justified.The claim that Ukraine destroyed the pipe was partly based on the revelations of August Hanning (an official, not an officer, my mistake). I was of course reffering to him. For his Russian connections see the link [to German press]:
https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/august-hanning-bankenpleite-und-ueberwachungsflugzeuge-die-abenteuerlichen-beratergeschaefte-des-ex-bnd-a-a337df27-329c-4928-9414-a11835968490
Assuming, however, that it was Ukraine that blew up Nord Stream. Was it even a ‘German asset’? I was under the impression that it was owned by the Nord Stream Consortium, in which Gazprom, a company hand-controlled by the Kremlin and Putin, is the majority shareholder. Gazprom (i.e. Russia) covered most of the costs of the construction.
So maybe they have some rights to blow Gazprom property after all, as it is a pirate company since 2014 operating illegally in Crimea, which Germany recognises as an integral part of Ukrainian territory. Gazprom is violating the rules of ownership there, taking over illegally expropriated property, using infrastructure without paying taxes and fees to the legal owners - if we are already reducing this case to a legalistic absurdity
As for international agreements and the broader issue of European integration and cooperation. The argument is not ‘logical’ but political. If Germany wanted to bypass its allies and agree over their heads with Russia. Ok, their business. Surely the Poles, Lithuanians and Slovaks were as pissed back then in 2011 as the Germans supposedly are today.
In 2011, someone (very naive one, to put it mildly) could actually believe that Nord Stream was a business project, not a political one, and that it didn't go against the core of European integration and interests. In 2014 it was already a cynical explanation, and after Ukraine was blackmailed by the Russian government that the ‘private company Gazprom’ would turn off the tap, it became more than apparent that the same could be done with Czechia or Poland, and that Nord Stream could not only harm economic interests and the principles of cooperation in Europe but also the security structure of NATO. Developing this project until the beginning of 2022, in cooperation with a company that so openly violates international law and market rules, is today considered a grave mistake even by the German politicians, so it is difficult to imagine any relaunch of Nord Stream in the near (or even distant) future. Taking this into account, I really don't get, if it was dead already, what all the fuss is about?
Well said. Thank you.
Next time don't invest so much with known murders and dictators who have been in power for more than 20 years. It's really that simple.
Also... the Poles and Czechs disagree with you. You are finding yourself in an indefensible minority. When that happens, wise people turn to introspection.
The rules of war are clear. Whether you like it or not.
I'm aware of Russia's political/cultural/business successes in Germany over the decades and how it colors German opinion of Ukraine. It's been well documented in every language.
As I pointed out... it's just geo politics. In a week we will be on to something else. Germany fainted towards being tough on Ukraine, now reality will set in: https://x.com/Bundeskanzler/status/1825559216490418231
And that's a great point about Russian gas transiting Ukraine during the war. That's the best example of "geo politics"... probably ever! Good call out. Geo Political Realism is nothing if not hypocritical!
International law allows the defender to defend itself by starving the belligerent's war machine.
By attacking the defender's own allies? You serious?
I happen to be an international lawyer and I can tell you that this is false. Whatever claims you have against Russia don't give you the right to attack your own ally.
I don't know if you follow any German reporting on the war, but the most prominent journalist, which most Germans read about this, is Julian Röpcke from Bild, who does a daily television/Youtube sendung on the war. He is passionately pro-Ukrainian, more than the average German, and this was what he said yesterday, interpreting statements from the Finance Ministry after the news about Nordstream (translated into English):
"Let me translate this:
➡️ No more euros for anti-aircraft missiles.
➡️ No more modern tanks since May 2023.
➡️ No additional artillery ammunition beyond that already promised.
➡️ No Taurus to combat Russian terror bombing on the ground.
➡️ No consequences for Russia.
Great"
So bombing Nordstream, which is German property and a German strategic infrastructure installation -- good result for Ukraine?