Maybe this is just silly, but considering that Russia is involved in a proxy war with the US, it’s interesting that Russian intelligence hasn’t leaked anything pertaining to 9/11 that might legitimately discredit the US government/deep state– maybe there really is nothing there to all the conspiracy theorizing about 9/11 after all.

Posted by: MallardB | May 9 2022 2:01 utc | 127

Anyone who else ever go check in on the Ukrainian telegram channels? Azov’s is pretty hilarious. Right now. Not only the claim of 25K+ Russian KIAs but that they’re expectation is to be extracted by the UN. Apparently surrender wasn’t part of NATO training. I’ve never served in the military, but I understand that at a certain point a soldier’s choice is to either fight to the death or surrender.
The other super Ukrainian channels are no better in their contact with reality. Like ambassador melnyk who claimed today that Ukraine liberated Europe from fascism in 1945.

Posted by: Lex | May 9 2022 2:15 utc | 129

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 0:24 utc | 104
“Why wait?”
To profit until the very last minute, and perhaps beyond because the ban may never materialise in reality – why jump the plank if you were never going to get pushed anyway?

Posted by: Arch Bungle | May 9 2022 2:20 utc | 131

In other words, everyone here has completely misread the last paragraph. At the very least, the last paragraph might be considered ambiguous as to what the author actually was referring to, whether it was geopolitical gains or economic gains. The presumption that it is the latter is unjustified.
Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 1:55 utc | 122
No we haven’t. There is no geopolitics without economics. What geopolitical gains does Europe give the US against China? Europe was integrating with China for economic reasons. A europe without cheap and abundant energy is no threat to China because the only thing europe had was economic power as a market for and investor in China. If anything, the european majors like VW will become more dependent on the Chinese market rather than less.
The US can’t fight Russia and China while supporting europe. It probably can’t do any of the three individually. Are european armies going to be formed to march on Moscow and then across Siberia to attack China?
The author doesn’t explain why europe is such a prize. Probably because it isn’t. Again, demographic issues; a financial sector built on German industry reliant on cheap energy; the rotting corpse of the British empire; internal issues with immigration; and significant economic disparity within the EU. What is it that europe offers the Atlantic bloc except its history of imperial colonialism and a place Americans like to visit to pretend they’re cultured? (I like europe, btw, I’ve lived in it.)

Posted by: Lex | May 9 2022 2:26 utc | 133

This is an impressive interview with an even more impressive panel about Ukraine, Europe/Empire and its outlook. Alistair Crooke, Scott Ritter, Max Blumenthal and Mohammad Marandi. The only regret is that it lasted only 1:30 hours.
https://youtu.be/vrMJoRDfRFI

Posted by: Alpi | May 9 2022 2:37 utc | 135

Posted by: Lex | May 9 2022 2:26 utc | 130
“What geopolitical gains does Europe give the US against China? Europe was integrating with China for economic reasons. A europe without cheap and abundant energy is no threat to China because the only thing europe had was economic power as a market for and investor in China.”
Again, geopolitical gains are not economic gains. They determine economic gains. With the EU forced to deal only with the US, the US receives every dime spent by the EU – even if those “dimes” are a lot fewer than they were before. China does not receive them. Russia does not receive them. That’s the whole point of the sanctions – to tie Europe’s economy to the US, while attempting (unsuccessfully) to weaken Russia.
“The US can’t fight Russia and China while supporting europe.”
Who said the US is going to “support Europe”? It’s Europe that is going to support the US economy, slowing the US’ own slide into bankruptcy. That’s the whole point, as Martyanove repeatedly says. Any rebuilding from a NATO-Russia war is only going to benefit the US economy. Any European economic activity divorced from Russia and China is only going to benefit the US economy.
“Are european armies going to be formed to march on Moscow and then across Siberia to attack China?”
No one has suggested that. Straw man much? Europe will still maintain a military, however weak compared to Russia and China (even weaker if my concept that the US intends to sacrifice NATO in a war with Russia.) That’s not the point. The US needs Europe to geopolitically support its war against China and to keep Russia out of Europe, even if that support does not amount to much against China. But the primary geopolitical point is to tie Europe’s economy to the US and to do that it needs Europe to support the US geopolitical concept, i.e., against Russia and China. As I said, the geopolitical determines the economics.
“The author doesn’t explain why europe is such a prize.”
He’s not talking about Europe being “such a prize”. He’s saying that the US needs control of Europe to stop its geopolitical drift away from the US in order to tie the EU economy to the US.
“What is it that europe offers the Atlantic bloc”
Already explained. Whatever is left of the EU’s economy is going to be locked in to the US – or at least that’s what the neocons thinks. Whether that will prove to be true may be problematic but in any event the US considers it worth the effort.
So the point I made remains. What Streeck is saying is that the US intends to dominate Europe economically by cutting it off from Russia and China. The US believes this will benefit the US economically and geopolitically (i.e. the cutting it off from Russia and China.)
Everyone here appears to be assuming that there will no economy at all in Europe due to the sanctions fallout. This is quite obviously false. Even a “collapsed” economy has an economy. Even if Europe ends up with the same level of German hyperinflation as in the 1920’s, there will still be an economy and it will be forced to deal with the US. As Streeck said, the US doesn’t mind losing Russia to China if it gains whatever is left of Europe. Streeck did not make clear whether the “net gain” was economic or geopolitical, but it could be either or both depending on what actually happens to the EU economy.
Dismissing the author as being wildly wrong is incorrect (even assuming that he meant economical value, which as I said is not entirely clear from that paragraph everyone is fuming over.) It seems to me that some people are upset that the US might possibly gain from the economic problems of Europe, which is fine, you can be upset about that (especially if you’re European, you should be) but that doesn’t mean it’s not going to happen. In other words, some people have a degree of cognitive dissonance over this situation.
As Martyanov says, “It is what it is.”

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 2:54 utc | 137

If Poland moves into Poland would that not be the kind of “invasion” the west decrys RF for doing?
RF had an invitation to provide assistance to the Donbass quoting Article 5, why does 404 not extend the same invitation to Poland?
Are they
a. afraid the Poles won’t leave and
b. dont want to legitimise the RF’s SMO?

Posted by: Dadda | May 9 2022 3:05 utc | 139

Manage without me #135

Can you imagine how they feel about the Russians?

Oh yes, I can imagine all of it. Perhaps a bit like Thatchers warmth toward Lenin.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 9 2022 3:32 utc | 141

psychohistorian #120

So, in the past week we have Pelosi and crew, Biden’s wife, Boris, others I am sure to be missing showing up in Ukraine.
Why is there all this personal show of support when actual military support, as reported here, is worthless and too little/too late?
Feeble minds are curious. Does Z really buy the “show of support” as valuable?

I suspect they are collecting their payments in bullion and trust no one bar themselves and their fat escort to take it out of Ukraine.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 9 2022 3:36 utc | 143

Hope someone will post Putin’s speech on the 9th. Damn sure won’t be on our MSM here in the U$A.

Posted by: vetinLA | May 9 2022 3:41 utc | 145

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 8 2022 22:37 utc | 79
Seen pictures of her. She’s kinda hot. Also, it’s “Olena” not “Elena”. She used to be a screenwriter – obviously useful in Ukraine today. 🙂
Her given name is Elena.
Olena is the ukrainisation of the Russian name Elena (by post-Maidan law in Ukraine). Just like Kiev and Kyiv :-/

Posted by: Richard Head | May 9 2022 3:57 utc | 147

Posted by: juliania | May 9 2022 3:40 utc | 141
“I simply questioned the basis for his final assumption that a continuance of hegemony was ‘very likely’ the successful outcome, one pairing weighed against the other.”
Well, as I may have mentioned in an earlier post, is the EU going to switch to China? Well, of course, they should. But there is no evidence they will. They’re busy cutting themselves off from Russia. Now eventually, if the predictions of unrest in the EU prove true, as they well might, then perhaps the EU bureacracy will be replaced by politicians more amenable to cutting themselves off from the US. But until we see evidence of that, it’s all speculation. And it has nothing to do with what Streeck said, because he didn’t put a time frame on his prediction.
“Which by the way is not how Russia and China perceive their relationship”
I would agree with that. However, others have also suggested that both China and Russia are viewing the relationship as essential to their core concerns, in other words, realistically, despite all the public “buddy-buddy” stuff. I submit it’s likely a mixture of both, and even more likely no one really knows. Actions count more than words and so far all the action between the two countries says they’re partners and will remain so for the foreseeable future. So Streeck takes a more “realist” tone based on countries looking after their own interests first and foremost. In any event, it’s irrelevant to the overall point.
“maybe you misunderstand our problem with the article, or – more likely – I haven’t explained it properly. Sorry.”
Well, I’m mostly going off Lex’s explanation, which as I pointed out, has major problems. Correct me if I’m wrong but the basic complaint appears to be that his prediction that the US will benefit from cutting the EU off from Russia and China and that it will be more of a benefit to the US than maintaining relations with Russia. It appears the major complaint is this line: “what Europe can deliver to the United States would exceed what Russia can deliver to China, so that a loss of Russia to China would be more than compensated by the gains from a tightening of American hegemony over Western Europe.”
That line, as I said to Lex, is not clear about whether he is talking about economic or geopolitical gains. In the case of Russia and China, as expressed in the previous lines in that paragraph, he emphasizes economic gains from Russia to China and technology gains from China to Russia. But then he switches to “what Europe can deliver to the United States” as exceeding what Russia can deliver to China. One can interpret as the notion that Europe can deliver economic gains to the US vs the economic gains that Russia can deliver to China. But that’s not that clear for two reasons. First, he’s not clear about exactly what economic gains Russia gives to China other than access to resources at cheap prices, and 2nd he then switches to talking about geopolitical gains which aren’t related to Russia and China at all.
There’s just nothing in that paragraph that justifies getting excited. First it’s not clear, mixing two different areas in one sentence, and second, he’s not necessarily wrong in either economic or geopolitical terms. As Martyanov says, the US is sacrificing the EU’s economy to force the EU to tie itself more closely to the US economy. Whether that “exceeds what Russia can give China” is problematic, but not necessarily wrong, absent any actual figures, which neither Streeck nor his critics have provided. As I said to Lex, if the EU is cut off from Russia and China, then every dime the EU spends goes to the US, not Russia and China. Is that more or less, even assuming a “collapsed” EU economy? Does it even matter? Russia and China’s economies will deal with each other at some level. What matters between the EU and US is that the EU will be dependent on the US and thus forced to pay the higher prices, as opposed to what Streeck believes will be lower prices from Russia to China because the West is not longer competing with China for those goods. Is he wrong about that? Who knows? It hasn’t happened yet.
Then in geopolitical terms, the US wants a united front against China. It won’t get it from the Global South or Asia or Africa. So the EU is the only source of geopolitical support for a US confrontation with China. It doesn’t matter whether the EU will have the military clout to provide any actual military support in a war with China. But the EU will still have a military – assuming a war with Russia doesn’t devastate it. And more importantly, the EU will be forced to pay the US for upkeep and expansion of that military if the EU bureaucracy continues to support the US’ geopolitical goals. Which ties the US’ geopolitical goals even tighter to the US’ economic goals of bleeding Europe dry.
Why everyone decided to criticize that paragraph when it’s both unclear and not necessarily wrong on either front eludes me, other than, as I told Lex, it’s another case of cognitive dissonance, in that people don’t want to believe that such a result can happen. But it is by no means certain that it can’t.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 4:12 utc | 149

Gonzalo Lira discusses Ukrainian oligarch Kolomoisky and predicts Kolomoisky’s made too many enemies to survive much longer…
2022.05.08 Ihor Kolomoisky Is In Trouble
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iWkvJKiFEQ
Another video from Lira discusses what it’s like to live in a war zone.
2022.05.08 What Living In A War Is Like
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cj3d1GfVjOQ
RSH

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 4:23 utc | 151

That said, the school bombing will be the story making the rounds through Western zombie heads and not Putin’s speech tomorrow.
Posted by: psychohistorian | May 9 2022 4:05 utc | 145
oh yeah, there is no doubt of that. it’s still an article of faith that the Russians killed those people in Bucha. at least the ghost of Kiev was finally laid to rest, presumably with some garlic and holy water and a crucifix and stake.

Posted by: pretzelattack | May 9 2022 4:26 utc | 153

Maybe Putin’s May 9th speech is not going to live up to my expectations….
Below is a quote from a TASS report about Putin’s speech

Congratulations to leaders of Donbass republics, citizens of Ukraine
“In his congratulation telegrams for the leaders of Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, the Russian leader noted that our servicemen, just like their ancestors, are fighting together to liberate their soil from the Nazi filth, and expressed his certainty that victory will be our, just like in 1945,” the Kremlin said.
The Russian president underscored in his address to the veterans of the Great Patriotic War and the people of Ukraine that “a revanche of ideological successors of those defeated during the Great Patriotic War is unacceptable.”
According to the address, also published at the Kremlin website Sunday, Putin pointed out that, 77 years ago, thanks to the bravery and heroism of front fighters and partisans, resilience and dedication of home front workers, Nazism was crushed, “which sought to enslave Europe, and which brought pain and suffering to tens of millions of people.”
“The countless casualties, sustained in the name of our common Victory, have become essential for our life and freedom. This memory must not be left in oblivion,” the Russian leader underscored, adding that, unfortunately, Nazism today “again raises its head and seeks to impose its barbaric, inhuman order.”
In general, the Russian leader sincerely congratulated Ukrainian veterans and citizens of Ukraine with the Victory Day, calling it “a common great celebration”. The Russian President wished the veterans spiritual fortitude, good health and longevity, and peace and fair future for all people of Ukraine.

Posted by: psychohistorian | May 9 2022 4:46 utc | 155

Re: Posted by: One Too Many | May 9 2022 0:47 utc | 110
“A propaganda win”?
You can’t be serious. Western propaganda is irrelevant to Russia’s conduct of the war in Ukraine.
Completely irrelevant.
When do you suppose Russia will be “WINNING” this propaganda war you speak of?
I can tell you – Russia will win the “Propaganda War in the West” on the 10th of NEVER.

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 5:05 utc | 157

Posted by: Dadda | May 9 2022 3:05 utc | 136
Ukraine

Posted by: Dadda | May 9 2022 5:19 utc | 159

Posted by: Hausmeister | May 9 2022 5:01 utc | 153
You bring up a point. Most people think Europe is going to bankrupt itself forever. Short of nuclear war, that’s not going to happen. Europe will recover from the cutoff of Russian oil and gas. It might take a decade or two, but they will dig themselves out of this situation – at least if the bureaucracy doesn’t do anything more over that time to wreck the economy. In the short term, the EU is screwd, no doubt about that. But once the economy recovers, and assuming, as the neocons probably do, that the geopolitical situation remains as now – the EU cut off from Russia and China due to geopolitical concerns – then the US will benefit from the increased EU economy.
Actually I don’t even think the neocons care what happens to the EU economy or even how much that will benefit the US. They just want to dominate the EU economically and geopolitically. As I said above, as long as every dime the EU has goes to the US instead of Russia and China, they consider that a win, even if those dimes are only ten percent of the dimes being sent to the US now.
Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 5:07 utc | 155
Perhaps China isn’t quite ready to buy all the oil and gas Russia produces. Also perhaps Russia needs to enhance its transit mechanisms before it can do so.
In other words: let’s stop trying to assume we know more than Russia about what Russia needs to do about its oil and gas. I assume the same discussion goes on in Russian government circles – and so far the decision is to do what they’re doing.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 6:19 utc | 161

Moldova Separatists Report Drone Strikes Near Ukraine Border
https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2022-05-07/moldova-separatists-report-drone-strikes-near-ukraine-border

CHISINAU (Reuters) -Pro-Russian separatists in Moldova said on Saturday their region had been hit four times by suspected drones overnight near the Ukrainian border.
Nearly two weeks of similar reported incidents in the Transdniestria breakaway region have raised international alarm that Russia’s war in Ukraine could spread over the frontier.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 6:46 utc | 163

CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 6:19 utc | 158
I am not convinced about how Europe could recover after having made the wrong geopolitical decision. Europe as it is now cannot afford to work with artificially increased energy expenses unless it would protect its interior market against the rest of the world. How could it export then to those markets?
No, the only intelligent solution for Europe now is to leave NATO immediately. To continue with it means suicide. After realizing that Putin cannot be demonized as a new Hitler, they try it, though, the phantasy is served that Putin continues the old Russian expansionism.
But it is dumbfuck easy to compare the situation of 1992 with today – so who is „expanding“?
As an European citizen I do not need to apply any anti-American sentiment. I could even say: fine, let us continue our relationships as until now, but we get out of this NATO, it does not serve our interests. We simply do not need a petro-dollar defined currency.

Posted by: Hausmeister | May 9 2022 7:04 utc | 165

Posted by: Hausmeister | May 9 2022 7:04 utc | 162
“I am not convinced about how Europe could recover after having made the wrong geopolitical decision. Europe as it is now cannot afford to work with artificially increased energy expenses unless it would protect its interior market against the rest of the world. How could it export then to those markets?”
I did say it might take a couple decades to recover. First, they obviously have to set up the infrastructure to handle LNG from the US and elsewhere (at high prices compared to Russian oil.) Beyond that, they probably should restart their nuclear energy program if they can get the uranium and can ignore the Greens. Where they’ll get the money to do so is unclear, however. I wouldn’t expect them to even begin this project until the Russia-NATO impasse is resolved (if it is.)
The point is they can get energy from somewhere eventually. There’s nothing stopping them. In fact, they have no choice but to do so. At this juncture they might not, but eventually they will be forced to.
As Martyanov says, the issue is always the real economy, which is based on geography. Europe is on the fringes of the geography that produces a “real economy”. Russia, China, the Stans, they are the “real economy”, the EuroAsian heartland. The EU is going to have to come to terms with that, either by reestablishing relations with Russia and China and/or changing the focus of their entire economy to something other than heavy industry dependent on resources they’ve cut themselves off from.
But I don’t see them staying an agrarian wasteland forever.
“No, the only intelligent solution for Europe now is to leave NATO immediately.”
Obviously. But that’s not going to happen without a complete change not just of current political leaders but the entire political framework of the existing parties. Not going to happen soon.
The rest of what you say is fine.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 7:19 utc | 167

There is an english language live feed of the May 9 parade at here only problem is it is a Telegraph feed with an englander army nato feed who sledges all the gear.

Posted by: Debsisdead | May 9 2022 7:57 utc | 169

I keep looking for more information on the alleged capture of Canadian and NATO Lieutenant General Trevor Cadieu but can’t find anything. It’s been over a week. This is what I’ve got on the episode.
https://johnplatinumgoss.com/2022/05/09/lieutenant-general-trevor-cadieu-and-azovstal/

Posted by: John Goss | May 9 2022 8:08 utc | 171

There is one May 9 Victory parade that stands head & shoulders above all others May 9 1945 Watch out for Marshall Georgi Zhukov galloping on his white charger – magnificent.

Posted by: Debsisdead | May 9 2022 8:15 utc | 173

Posted by: uncle tungsten | May 9 2022 1:26 utc | 117
Brilliant, thank you.

Posted by: anon2020 | May 9 2022 8:36 utc | 175

somewhere in all the gossip of daily battles over one trench or another people have forgotten putins words that nato will rereat to the 1997 borders . keep the long game in mind when reading western msm articles about russia running out of missiles or fuel.

Posted by: hankster | May 9 2022 9:08 utc | 177

Latest from Jaob Dreisin… He’s seems fairly convinced the Polish incursion is going to happen…
Military Developments Over the Weekend
https://thedreizinreport.com/2022/05/08/military-developments-over-the-weekend/

As I have written, the probability of tactical nuclear weapons being used inside the Ukraine, goes from precisely zero point zero zero, to “something”, if a NATO country army or armies become involved openly, directly inside the Ukraine.
Of course, use of tactical nuclear weapons may lead to the use of strategic nuclear weapons.
I trust that all readers are prepared to die for the Ukraine.

RSH

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 9:27 utc | 179

Let us look at the bigger picture and not be bogged down by particulars. In the above discussions about the Streeck article there is a lot of discussion. But absent are the long term goals.US has no interest in using the EU for its economic or other purposes, merely as an extension and as a buffer. The Question is that of ideologies. The EU and the US belong to the same ideology of pirate rentier capitalism. The old Marxian exploitative capitalism whereby the capitalist owns the means of production in order to make goods is no longer needed, it is about the control of money and of making lots of it by controlling money flow. In this way Russia ideologically belongs more to this school of thinking than to communist China. The current grouping of US and EU vs China and Russia is therefore on the Russia China side not ideological but that of convenience and potentially unstable in the long term. The real battle is that over Russia itself. The golden days of the empire was the Yeltsin years when Russia was brought to its knees , converted to the worst form of capitalism and compliant with the west. The two stage regime change in the Ukraine has been more successful in transforming Ukraine to a complete dependency on the west and even with a considerable undeclared NATO presence and capabilities.
Russia is a vast country with rich resources but is relatively underpopulated and with a population of 150 million is comes as 9th in world order. It is unlikely that Russia will suddenly turn ideologically to embrace socialism or communism and join China ideologically.
In precipitating the current crisis, it is clear that the empire has its sights on no less than regime change in Russia and nothing less will be acceptable.
I am sorry if I did not express my thoughts clearly but I feel that these questions lie at the heart of the current dilemma that many who profess to be on the left do not really address with clarity.

Posted by: Orage | May 9 2022 9:46 utc | 181

General mobilization in Russia.
Not clear to me what this means. Don’t think It means everyone puts on a uniform and gets sent to the front. Does anyone here know? Sounds ominous.

Posted by: oldhippie | May 9 2022 10:01 utc | 183

#–Posted by: aquadraht | May 8 2022 16:21 utc | 27
I wouldn’t be sure either, if my survival strategy was using civilian hostages.

Posted by: Anne B | May 9 2022 10:17 utc | 185

Link from TheSacker: https://media.un.org/en/asset/k1p/k1pvngjn8e (original site: https://thesaker.is/sitrep-operation-z-yeah-we-have-some-big-deals/)
There was a very interesting revealing of how Reuters is manipulating with facts.
Natalia Usmanova was interviewed almost 2 minutes by a journalist where Reuters only showed 1min including a framing that Russia caused damage and agony and that she is so terrified.
When you listen to everything she said, she calls out the Asov as the bad guys.
A very good example on how western media is manipulating the facts supporting a certain narrative.

Posted by: Rasta | May 9 2022 10:22 utc | 187

Re: Posted by: ERing46Z | May 9 2022 8:03 utc | 167
Naming names?
Like George Bush Sr? DEAD.
Like Donald Rumsfeld? DEAD.
Like several others – probably DEAD as well.
If they were going to expose 9/11 – they would have done so by now – there is not much utility to exposing something in which many major participants are now DEAD.

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 10:30 utc | 189

Posted by: Richard Head | May 9 2022 9:56 utc | 179
In other words, you’re saying that without Ukrainian law, Olena would become Elena? I think not. She is Ukrainian, not Russian. She would use the Ukrainian spelling, regardless of the law. most likely. As for trying to say Wikipedia just removed the reference, I think not, since they didn’t. They listed Elena as an option for Olena.
Fail.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 10:39 utc | 191

Posted by: Orage | May 9 2022 9:46 utc | 178
Yes, the US wants Russian resources. By cutting the EU off from Russia, and starting a war between NATO and Russia, the US hoped to weaken Russia, cause regime change and put everything back to the 1990’s. Of course, that isn’t going to happen. The secondary goal with regards to the EU is to weaken the EU, prevent it from drifting into Russia and China’s orbit, and then bleeding it dry like every other colony.
In other words, the US wants Russia as a colony, and it wants the EU as a colony. In general, it wants every nation as a colony. Fortunately that ultimate goal is not going to happen, and neither will Russia become a colony. The EU is much more likely to be a “success” in that regard depending on how one determines what is a “success”.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 10:48 utc | 193

Posted by: Julian | May 9 2022 10:26 utc | 185
A “few shekels? $66 billion in two months is not “a few shekels”. Listen to yourself.
Russia Nearly Doubled Its Income From Energy Sales To The EU During Wartime, Study Shows
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-energy-sales-europe-doubled-study/31825742.html

New research by the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) released on April 28 shows that Russia has nearly doubled its revenues from sales of fossil fuels to the EU during the two months of war in Ukraine.
Soaring prices have more than compensated Russia for the loss in sales volume due to sanctions, the research shows.
Researchers at CREA also say new sanctions promise to drive up prices even more, nullifying efforts to prevent Russian President Vladimir Putin from using energy to pressure the EU and to finance the war against Ukraine.
Since the start of the war, Russia has sold 46 billion euros worth of energy resources to the European Union, and the figure continues to rise. This is about twice as much as the amount of sales in the same period in 2021,according to CREA.
Even though there was a decline in the volume of sales, the increase in the price of oil brought Moscow about 63 billion euros ($66 billion) on the energy exported on ships and through pipelines since the invasion was launched on February 24.

Posted by: CharlesLutherThanos | May 9 2022 10:57 utc | 195

#–Posted by: bevin | May 8 2022 19:03 utc | 52
This should wash the taste of Bono out:
It did – thank you.

Posted by: Anne B | May 9 2022 11:08 utc | 197

It is unlikely that Russia will suddenly turn ideologically to embrace socialism or communism and join China ideologically.
I feel that these questions lie at the heart of the current dilemma that many who profess to be on the left do not really address with clarity.
Posted by: Orage | May 9 2022 9:46 utc | 178
I don’t know how you can say its “unlikely” that Russia will suddenly turn ideologically to embrace socialism or communism and join China ideologically.
I just watched a great video that I think someone here posted of Putin in an RT interview from many years ago, explaining that the difference in ideology between Russia and the US, is that the US is based on the primacy of the individual, where as Russian culture and society is based on the welfare of the collective. You could feel his genuine appreciation and respect for Russian culture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JVR0zAiyw0&t=9s
So the ties between Russia and China run deeper than westerners can appreciate with our dog eat dog phosophy. They are both very old collectivist societies, Russia has been communist before and is witnessing the absolute decadence and depravity of the liberal capitalist system breaking down before their eyes.
Meanwhile China is rising, dignity and culture intact and not by raping and pillaging other countries. China is not demanding that Russia change its ideology, that’s a point that westerners do not understand and can’t accept, China doesn’t historically, politically or culturally want or need to dominate the world. Neither does Russia, so they are actually a very good match.
I would suggest that Russia has its eyes wide open to all of this and not being naive or stupid will honor their commitment and friendship with China.
Of course this incorporates trade and defence issues, but i think its a serious mistake to presume that either China or Russia made their alliance based solely or even primarily on $$$
Also your statement “The old Marxian exploitative capitalism whereby the capitalist owns the means of production in order to make goods is no longer needed” doesn’t make sense since Marx wrote about the workers owning the means of production not the capitalists, so I’m not sure what you meant by this.
As to leftists addressing this issue with clarity there are many eloquent socialist/marxist leftists on this blog who regularly post excellent commentary. From my perspective even though Russia is not currently communist, they also aren’t imperialist or colonial so less like the US and UK, I have no expertise to make predictions but my hunch is that Russia will become more of a conservative socialist democracy perhaps in a unique way that has not been done before.
I hope that gives you a perspective that might be worth considering..

Posted by: K | May 9 2022 11:36 utc | 199