I have some sympathy for that frame of thinking - I haven’t read the models in detail, but the discussion appears to be really based on the effects of taking some tranche X out of total energy, and not much else. I think even the impacts in the UK would be significant - it would be a larger price shock than the one over the past Fall/Winter that gutted the energy retailing industry in the UK. You would see similar price shocks in every EU economy.
That said, European total energy use can be very seasonal, the underlying seasonality is disguised by price effects - from October to April there is much less discretionary energy use. If there is a time to do it, it would be now, and I think it is the right thing to do.
Has the argument been framed in that Germany (and others) ought to accept that bearing the economic consequences of rapidly rolling back reliance on Russian fossil fuels is simply the “just” cost of having used it to grow their econom(y/ies); even, in a sense, of not doing enough towards tackling climate change and expanding renewable energy resources?
This could just be the political spur some countries (actually all countries) needed to accelerate the transition to renewables.
Sanctions on Russia and the cost of those is a useful metadiscussion that is not “out of thread” in my opinion. It fits into this thread in between the news
In my mind, the advance of Putin westward into Ukraine and his attempt to eradicate their citizens is parallel to Hitler’s advance into Poland. The only difference is the efficiency of the invading army and the resistance of the defenders. Eventually, Ukraine will run out of bodies and materials as the Russians will bombard them into submission.
I’m shocked and saddened that 6 weeks of full awareness of what’s happening in Ukraine and the West is STILL just standing back and watching the destruction of an entire country instead of putting blue helmets on the ground and forcing Russia to abstain from further aggression. THIS HAS TO STOP. Because the trillions of dollars of damage being done to Ukraine will take generations to rebuild and Russia will never pay reparations.
I think even the simplest hard-nosed argument would just be that it would cost NATO a lot less in real terms to intervene now and put an end to it than if they just let the situation fester. More expensive to rebuild things the more they get destroyed, let alone repairing people’s lives from the trauma and economic devastation.
I should never have mentioned the dollar amount associated with rebuilding the damages. because monetary value is just a small portion of the damages being done. entire cities are being razed, millions of people displaced from their homes. tens of thousands of innocent lives being taken with complete disregard. I’m fully aware that this story keeps happening over and over again in the thousands of years of human existence, but I’d had hoped that the second World War was going to be the last of it. That my parents generation and my generation would be the ones to bring change to the thinking of greed and exploitation by means of force. But that’s the naivety of youth, because as I’ve gotten older I just see the same patterns in the world. Those in power, those with means…they will take what they want from the world and the people and couldn’t give two shits about the damage they’re causing. Complete disdain for the future, because they will be long gone by that time.
Might not be the time or place, as I too am sickened by the human tragedy that has been unfolding in front of our eyes in recent weeks.
But with regard to energy, when everything is rebuilt, I hope it happens with a significant tilt towards renewable energy.
On that note, Western European countries need to wean themselves off fossil fuels too, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine should accelerate that process and nobody should be doing business with Russia for gas.
I’ve got admit that during the first couple of weeks I was happy that the US had taken a back seat militarily on this.
Now, with the stories of what is simply genocide and rendering a country inhabitable somewhere along the line the rest of the world has to look at itself and ask whether it has a moral responsibility to step in.
That will undoubtedly escalate things but Putin is not stopping.
Samuel Ramani interview, a Canadian-born scholar teaching at university of Oxford and a leading expert on Russia’s foreign policy.
Interesting how he downplay Putin ideology and view him more as “non-ideological and heavily motivated by whatever will preserve his own legitimacy and the system he’s set up”.
With the latest atrocity today , and the imminent blitzkrieg in the Donbas , I expect many more countries will be following Slovakia’s example and sending in some very serious weaponry without delay. I get the feeling we’re already past the point of any de-escalation now.
no, nuclear escalation is not the answer. This is not about invading Russia, this is about stopping their invasion and annexation of the largest country in Europe and eradicating the Ukrainian population/culture.
I don’t believe that NATO forces should set foot on Russian soil, but as a defensive situation to prevent Russia from taking over another country and separating the west financially and geographically. This WILL end up as East vs West and quite likely a very big wall separating the two sides at the end of it all.
Took 40+ years to tear down the Berlin Wall… But Russia has proven time and again that it cannot play nice in the sandbox with the others, in both politics and sport. so fuck them, they can spend a generation or two in the timeout box and long may China share their position as far as I am concerned. they can both fuck off.
