Why under Biden, Nord Stream 2 will have a chance to launch


The last days of President Donald Trump's rule have been particularly bleak for Russia's Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline. Another engineering company, Danish Ramboll, emerged from it, and the prospect of falling under US sanctions loomed in front of the Swiss insurance Zurich Insurance Group, which Gazprom is counting on. However, the arrival of Democrat Joe Biden in the White House throws a ray of hope for this problematic project. What could this be connected with?


Nicholas Burns, who served as an advisor to Joe Biden during the last presidential campaign, suggested to his boss that he temporarily suspend sanctions against European companies involved in the energy project, in return they would have to suspend construction itself. The consortium Nord Stream 2 AG immediately reacted to this and announced the decision to temporarily slow down the construction of the remaining section of the pipeline. All three sides await President-elect Biden's entry into office in the hope of changing the US approach to Nord Stream 2. But how justified are such hopes?

On the one handJoe Biden is only the "frontman" of the Democratic Party, and such important decisions are made by consensus of the ruling elites. And there is consensus: both the Democrats and the Republicans they beat are opposed to Russian gas in Europe in order to more actively promote American LNG on the EU energy market. The sanctions against Nord Stream 2 and Turkish Stream have already been spelled out in the defense budget, and no one will change shoes so quickly on the fly. Joe Biden's gesture like this can only be a sign of respect for Germany, with which the United States intends to restore relations that have seriously deteriorated under Trump. Perhaps everything will be limited to this scrolling, but economic policy Washington will, by inertia, take its own course.

On the other hand, it should be borne in mind that completely different forces came to power in the United States than in the previous four years. If the "imperial" Donald Trump crushed both competitors and allies in order to make "America great again", then the "globalists", who are personified by the Democratic Party, have completely different interests. It was the "globalists", representatives of transnational corporations and financial and industrial groups, who, after the collapse of the USSR and the transformation of the United States into a sovereign "hegemon" on the planet, began to move production to other countries where their cost is lower. It was with them that a whole "rusty belt" was formed from the States, where, after the closure of factories, white Americans have nowhere to work. This is because of their economic policies, ordinary hard workers and "rednecks" in 2016 voted for Trump, who promised to bring the industry back to the United States.

Where did these production go? It is generally believed that to China and Southeast Asia, and this is so, but this is not the whole truth. American investment banks and hedge funds actively and with great pleasure invested in the industries of advanced European countries, primarily Germany and Great Britain. Let's give a few numbers. The famous German concern Siemens is only 6,9% owned by the Siemens family and 26% by German investors, but 21% is American, 11% is British, 8% is French and 8% is Swiss. German automobile concern Daimler AG is also 21% owned by American capital. And so on, this list can be continued for a long time.

American big business has been very active in investing in German and other European companies. For "globalists" it is not so important where production is located, in the USA or Germany, the main thing is that the invested capital brings money. Therefore, it would not be entirely correct to argue that President Joe Biden really needs to make German industry less competitive in relation to the American one. It is possible that under the Democrats a certain compromise between Washington and Berlin will still be found.

Gazprom will have to complete the construction of the gas pipeline on its own, for which it and its flotilla will be subject to sanctions. Germany will receive Nord Stream 2, but it will only operate at half of its capacity as a backup source of fuel in case of problems with the Ukrainian GTS. In exchange, Berlin will have to increase the amount of US LNG purchased from the United States.
Ad
The publication is looking for authors in the news and analytical departments. Requirements for applicants: literacy, responsibility, efficiency, inexhaustible creative energy, experience in copywriting or journalism, the ability to quickly analyze text and check facts, write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. The work is paid. Contact: [email protected]
7 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Volkonsky Offline Volkonsky
    Volkonsky (Vladimir) 16 January 2021 13: 33
    +1
    Seryoga, well, I wrote nonsense! How can Biden influence the sanctions against SP-2 if they are passed by the Law of the US Congress and are not regulated by presidential decrees ?! We need a new law of Congress, canceling the adopted January 1, 2021, and there is a complete consensus on this score - all the elephants and donkeys are for the sanctions, they even in the Senate with 81 votes to 13 overcame Trump's veto on the 2021 defense budget, where these sanctions were spelled out. The case with the SP-2 is rubbish! The second blooper with American investments in German business. Investments should not be confused with investments in securities! They are not the same! These are completely opposite things! Siemens and Daimler are blue chips on the stock market, their shares are traded on the stock exchange, as long as the profitability suits them, buyers buy them, but as soon as their products become uncompetitive in foreign markets due to expensive raw materials (gas!) down and all their owners will throw them off at the first nix (bearish diver). This is the ABC! Learn the materiel! Nothing personal, for the sake of objectivity. No offense, yeah.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 17 January 2021 06: 44
      -1
      Quote: Volkonsky
      Seryoga, well, I wrote nonsense! How can Biden influence the sanctions against the SP-2 if they are adopted by the Law of the US Congress and are not regulated by presidential decrees ?!

      And which party is controlling the Congress now?

      The second blooper with American investments in German business. Investments should not be confused with investments in securities! They are not the same!

      For blunders, choose expressions. I wrote what I wrote and there are no mistakes in that.

      This is the ABC! Learn the materiel! Nothing personal, for the sake of objectivity. No offense, yeah.

      No offense? Colleague, if you are such an all-knowing professional, then learn to write on your own, not being overly inspired by other people's texts, huh? You yourself know whose.
      For objectivity's sake. Huh? And don't poke me around, we don't have such a difference in age. I didn’t enroll in your young Padawans.

      The case with the SP-2 is rubbish!

      Did you read that from someone too? I wonder who has it.
      1. Volkonsky Offline Volkonsky
        Volkonsky (Vladimir) 17 January 2021 12: 45
        +1
        And which party is controlling the Congress now?

        Don't put the cart in front of the horse! Biden is not in command of the "donkey" party, but she is in command. In general, he is a puppet in the hands of globalist donkeys, and they have a consensus on this issue with the party of "elephants" - we need to kill the Russian Federation, so they do it. It's just that the "elephants" wet from their private selfish interests, and the "donkeys" from their global interests. It doesn't make it easier for us. Hence we conclude that the case for SP-2 is rubbish! I read it at myself - https://topcor.ru/18142-severnyj-potok-2-samaja-krupnaja-neudacha-rossi-za-poslednie-gody.html. Will that answer be okay?
        Regarding investments and investments in securities, and what is the difference here, I did not hear an answer. The investor does not invest in shares, but in production, and this money cannot be easily pulled out in the event of a fall in the company's capitalization, which cannot be said about the holders of shareholdings - they will run away at the slightest nix. I put an end to this, there is no need to answer. I will not comment on you anymore.
        1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) 17 January 2021 16: 36
          0
          Quote: Volkonsky
          From this we conclude that the case for SP-2 is rubbish! I read it on my own - https://topcor.ru/18142-severnyj-potok-2-samaja-krupnaja-neudacha-rossi-za-poslednie-gody.html. Will that answer be okay?

          https://topcor.ru/18055-ssha-sdelali-rabotu-severnogo-potoka-2-nevozmozhnoj.html
          https://topcor.ru/18125-akademik-cherskij-budet-dostraivat-severnyj-potok-2-pod-pricelom-korablej-nato.html
          https://topcor.ru/17761-gazprom-popal-v-tupik-s-severnym-potokom-2.html
          https://topcor.ru/17662-gazprom-smozhet-prolozhit-lish-25-kilometra-severnogo-potoka-2.html

          Regarding investments and investments in securities, and what is the difference here, I did not hear an answer. Investor invests not in stocks, but in production

          Investment (English Investment) - placement of capital for the purpose of making a profit. Investment is an integral part of the modern economy. Investments - cash, securities, other property, including property rights, other rights that have a monetary value, invested in objects of entrepreneurial and (or) other activities in order to obtain profit and (or) achieve another useful effect.
          Total: the concept of investment is broader than investment in production. You can invest in a start-up, securities, etc.

          Don't put the cart in front of the horse! Biden is not in command of the "donkey" party, but she is in command. In general, he is a puppet in the hands of globalist donkeys, and they have a consensus on this issue with the party of "elephants" - we need to kill the Russian Federation, so they do it. It's just that the "elephants" wet from their private selfish interests, and the "donkeys" from their global interests.

          Quote myself

          On the one hand, Joe Biden is only the "frontman" of the Democratic Party, and such important decisions are made by consensus of the ruling elites. And there is a consensus: both the Democrats and the Republicans they beat are opposed to Russian gas in Europe in order to more actively promote American LNG on the EU energy market. The sanctions against Nord Stream 2 and Turkish Stream have already been spelled out in the defense budget, and no one will change shoes so quickly on the fly. Joe Biden's gesture like this can only be a sign of respect for Germany, with which the United States intends to restore relations that have seriously deteriorated under Trump. Perhaps, everything will be limited to this scuffling, and Washington's economic policy will follow its own course by inertia.

          You just don't need to pull out a separate paragraph from the general context, where initially different approaches to the problem were considered and poke into it with moralizing.

          I put an end to this, there is no need to answer. I will not comment on you anymore.

          We agreed, mutually.
          1. Volkonsky Offline Volkonsky
            Volkonsky (Vladimir) 17 January 2021 19: 00
            +1
            Sergey, I asked you not to answer and put an end to this. To me, to be honest, to prove something to someone. As you know, they don't pay for it here. I wrote my first comment (which I already regret) just to assert the truth. I wrote in "you" because of a good attitude towards you (when I change to "you", you know - this is a bad symptom), therefore I chose a somewhat jocular tone, which was interpreted by you as arrogance. What a waste!

            Now in essence. All complaints were against the text, not the author. What was the name of the text? "Why, under Biden, Nord Stream 2 will have a chance to launch." I explained why this is not possible. Because Biden himself, even with all his desire to please Frau Merkel, does not have the authority to do so. Alas and ah for us and Frau Merkel! The sanctions are formalized as a law of Congress and can only be lifted by another law of Congress, and not by presidential decree. And in the US Congress there is full consensus on this issue, if for this they for the first time both houses (both lower and upper) overcame Trump's veto on this bill. And the congressmen and senators are not going to change their minds, even if Biden and Frau Merkel kneel before them. Why should I bring your other texts on this topic, where you contradict yourself in this text, I did not comment on those your texts, I comment on this one, which means I had no complaints about those texts. You asked where I got the conclusion that SP-2 is a haplyk, I gave my text. I would not ask, I would not bring. And I did not pull any paragraph out of context. I disputed the very idea behind the title.

            Investment (English Investment) - placement of capital for the purpose of making a profit. Investment is an integral part of the modern economy. Investments - cash, securities, other property, including property rights, other rights that have a monetary value, invested in objects of entrepreneurial and (or) other activities in order to obtain profit and (or) achieve another useful effect.

            Total: the concept of investment is broader than investment in production. You can invest in a start-up, securities, etc.

            Now, with regard to investment. Reread what you have written again. The first paragraph contradicts the second. Investments can be considered investments in the form of cash, securities, etc. property with nominal monetary value into someone else's business for profit. In business, and not in shares (securities) of this business, which are issued by the issuer to increase its own capitalization and increase working capital. Investments in securities are not investments; they are an opportunity for the investor to earn money. If the company is profitable (or shows profitable reporting), then its shares rise in price, which brings profit to their owners. If the enterprise is unprofitable (and this is exactly the fate awaiting Siemens and Daimler when the price of raw materials rises), then its capitalization and shares fall, which leads to the flight of their owners from them (no one is waiting for the shares to fall to zero!). This is possible only because stocks are just an analogue of money (fiat money), money frozen in securities (money itself does not generate income, but it does, invested in stocks), you can get them out of stocks by selling them. And how to get the money out if it is invested in production? No way! Only through reorganization. This is the fundamental difference between investors and investment bankers and venture funds.
  2. gorenina91 Offline gorenina91
    gorenina91 (Irina) 16 January 2021 20: 57
    -1
    after the collapse of the USSR and the transformation of the United States into a sovereign "hegemon" on the planet, they began to withdraw production to other countries, where their cost is lower. It was with them that a whole "rusty belt" was formed from the States, where, after the closure of factories, white Americans have nowhere to work.

    - Well, everything is so ...

    Where did these production go? It is generally believed that to China and Southeast Asia, and this is so, but this is not the whole truth. American investment banks and hedge funds actively and with great pleasure invested in the industries of advanced European countries, primarily Germany and Great Britain. Let's give a few numbers. The famous German concern Siemens is only 6,9% owned by the Siemens family and 26% by German investors, but 21% is American, 11% is British, 8% is French and 8% is Swiss.

    - Well ???
    - So what ??? - From this for white Americans there were working meta, or what ???
    - What has changed for ordinary American workers from the fact that the US "transferred industry" from China and Southeast Asia to industrial Europe. ???
    - Trump is a loser - nothing burned out ... - And his change ... - is just natural ...
    - But American financial investment capital invested in Europe will give American democrats the opportunity to flourish today ... - And Europe (especially Germany) ... - will again become "like silk" (as it was under Obama) and will again fulfill the will of the United States in everything ...
    - So the fate of Nord Stream 2 ... - will remain a "one-way pipe" ... - And Russia will face such problems with this SP-2 that it will not seem like a little ...
    - In general ... - today Russia should be seriously afraid ... - lest the Americans outbid all our mediocre Russian Gazprom ... - and deploy their business on these Russian, ready-made pipes ... - this will be just a real national catastrophe ... - No Daggers, Yars and Zircons will help here ...
    - It only seems ridiculous at first glance ... - but in real life ... it is quite possible ...
    - The mighty Russian Cosmos was "poisoned" (no one knows who) ... - And now it is absolutely hopeless and weak ... - And who could have believed in this before ...
  3. Stop for Sevpotok, here Silsib 2 needs to be raised! And let Europe clang its teeth!