Expert: Germany benefits from liquidation of Ukraine as a state

January 14 2022 45

In the West, they do not stop accusing Russia of wanting to "attack" Ukraine, speaking of this as an attempt by Putin to subjugate a neighboring state. Meanwhile, according to the economist and writer Vasily Koltashev, Germany will receive certain benefits from the destruction of Ukrainian statehood.

As the expert wrote on his Facebook page, in the event of hostilities between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, the latter will quickly fall. The West, as the United States has previously pointed out, will not fight against Russia for Ukrainian interests. After that, Moscow will be able to establish control over Ukrainian territory and ensure gas supplies to Europe through it.

As a result of the collapse of post-Maidan Ukraine, Russia will be able to transit natural gas through the territory now controlled by Zelensky and Co. There will be no more stealing. Against the backdrop of the collapse of US authority in such an environment, Berlin will get a situation of gas abundance in the EU. Why is it bad? More gas from Russia. Less influence of the United States, which can be blamed for everything

- writes an expert.

At the same time, the countries of the European Union will become more autonomous from Washington, which will face the fact that the authority of Moscow and Berlin will grow.

Thus, the FRG can gain a lot from the elimination of the current type of Ukrainian statehood, and only the rejection of logical restrained behavior can turn the described situation into problems.

- said Koltashev.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Bulanov

+3

14 January 2022 15: 49

Most of all in Germany they dream of getting rid of the occupation by the US army, which did not conquer Berlin.
wamp

-1

14 January 2022 15: 51

It is necessary to move the borders by 1945 - approved by the blood of WWII.
Bakht

0

14 January 2022 15: 52

The West, as the United States has previously pointed out, will not fight against Russia for Ukrainian interests.

This phrase is repeated, like a revelation, all the last time. What if you think about it?
The United States will not fight at all with anyone for anyone's interests. But they may well fight for their interests. And it's hard to think of a better platform than Ukraine.
Firstly, it is actually on the border of Russia.
Secondly, it is actually on the border with Europe.
Third, you can fight to the last Ukrainian soldier.
It is unlikely that there will be an official war, so as not to run into a retaliatory strike "at the decision-making centers." But fighting on the territory of a foreign state is not at all so bad.

The United States can and will fight on the territory of Ukraine for its own interests.
Pros for the States.
The complete isolation of Russia and the binding of its resources. Under this case, you can try and push some measures through the UN General Assembly.
A complete cessation of cheap energy supplies to Europe and the destruction of the industry of old Europe.
1. Dear sofa expert.
  
  +2
  
  14 January 2022 18: 02
  
  But fighting on the territory of a foreign state is not at all so bad.
  
  The United States can and will fight on the territory of Ukraine for its own interests.
  
  Bakhtiyar, I always read your opinion with interest, but in this case I cannot agree with you. You are mistaken, taking the war in your N. Karabakh as the basis for your conclusions.
  Here is a slightly different scale.
  I do not want to write much myself, just give you an expert opinion. In my opinion, it is very simple and intelligible:
  
  Modern superpower warfare means that the entire territory of the enemy becomes the theater of operations ... In the first few minutes, absolutely all bridges will be destroyed so that the country will be divided in two. All railway junctions, all communication systems, communications, power infrastructure, troop locations, decision-making centers.”
  
  According to him, when people in Kiev talk about the war with Russia, "they must understand that in about an hour and a half this state will not exist." The population will have nothing - no job, no opportunity to warm their homes, feed their children. Because a serious war is a massive blow to the entire infrastructure, including the gas transportation infrastructure...
  
  https://www.mk.ru/amp/politics/2021/11/29/politolog-opisal-scenariy-voyny-protiv-ukrainy-poltora-chasa.html
  And where in all this do you see free space for the participation of valiant American warriors?
  1. Bakht
    
    +3
    
    14 January 2022 19: 26
    
    You are mistaken when you think that I take the war in Nagorno-Karabakh as a basis. By the way, I have a slightly different view on the course of hostilities in Karabakh. Unlike our enthusiastic writings in the media.
    
    I take as a basis, first of all, the economic component. For the first time since 2014, Russia has finally reduced (not completely stopped, but only reduced) the financial support of Kiev. And the state is already on the verge of collapse. So I think it is quite possible mass demonstrations of the population against their own power in Kiev. Given the presence of a huge amount of weapons on hand, it will be worse than Kazakhstan. And it will be necessary to put things in order.
    
    Second moment. I consider a long war in Ukraine (44 days in Karabakh) unacceptable. Order must be put in place immediately. And I wrote about it earlier. No march on Kiev, no destruction of bridges and infrastructure. First of all, not some part of Ukraine should be isolated. And all Ukraine is from the West. This means an immediate exit (a day or two) to the western borders of Ukraine. To cut off the influence of the West (Poland, Romania, Hungary). But there are difficulties here that many do not pay attention to. The operation in Kazakhstan required for the transfer of 3 (together with the CSTO up to 000) military personnel with equipment, 5 transport aircraft. This is 000% of the BTA of Russia (the total fleet of all types is about 75 vehicles).
    
    American fighters will not participate in hostilities. This is what I am writing about. In warehouses in Europe, and in the States, there are a lot of obsolete weapons. He will be gladly transferred to Ukraine. In debt, on credit, under Lend-Lease, as a gift - no matter how. I believe that the grouping of Russian troops on the border with Ukraine stands precisely in anticipation of such a development of events. When the center (Kyiv) loses control of the situation, Zelensky will definitely start a war. Russian troops will have to ensure the isolation of Ukraine from the West. And inside the country, the LDNR will restore order. This would be the best option. Of course from my point of view. I don’t know what they think in the RF Ministry of Defense.
    
    PS I looked at your link. I think that the political scientist is mistaken.
    
    PPS By the way, for information. I. Aliyev is negotiating with Zelensky. He is in Kiev. The official version is economic cooperation.
    https://ru.oxu.az/politics/564187
    What was discussed face-to-face, no one will tell us.
    1. Dart2027
      
      -3
      
      14 January 2022 21: 42
      
      Quote: Bakht
      First of all, not some part of Ukraine should be isolated. And all Ukraine is from the West.
      
      In the age of the internet and cell phones?
      
      Quote: Bakht
      And inside the country, the LDNR will restore order. This would be the best option.
      
      Physically impossible - for this they need to increase their army tenfold.
      1. Dear sofa expert.
        
        +4
        
        14 January 2022 23: 25
        
        First of all, not some part of Ukraine should be isolated. And all Ukraine is from the West.
        
        In the age of the internet and cell phones?
        
        There it will be turned off in two clicks. (together with heating, water and electricity). They will be blind, deaf, hungry and cold for an indefinite time.
        
        And inside the country, the LDNR will restore order. This would be the best option.
        
        Physically impossible - for this they need to increase their army tenfold.
        
        Or sharply reduce the Ukrainian one by 100 times.
        Also like an option, right?
        
        Dart2027
        
        -3
        
        15 January 2022 06: 48
        
        Quote: Dear sofa expert.
        There it will be turned off in two clicks. (together with heating, water and electricity).
        
        It won't be easy. YES, for a while it can be done, but in the end you have to turn it back on.
        
        Quote: Dear sofa expert.
        Or sharply reduce the Ukrainian one by 100 times.
        
        Will not work. Firstly, without the help of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, they will not have enough strength for an offensive war. Secondly, the seizure of the territory means that they will have to allocate troops to control this territory, and this again will require a large number of siodats, which are not there.
        
        Dear sofa expert.
        
        +1
        
        15 January 2022 11: 15
        
        It won't be easy.
        
        Isn't it easy to destroy?
        
        but in the end you have to turn it back on.
        
        Yes, someday you will have to cope with the post-war devastation. But how quickly all this will be restored will depend on the efforts of the “suddenly awakened” Ukrainian people. Well, from the goodwill of those who help from the outside.
        
        Will not work. Firstly, without the help of the RF Armed Forces, they will not have enough strength ...
        
        With the help of the RF Armed Forces.
        
        secondly, capturing territory means that troops will have to be allocated to control this territory, and this again will require a large number of shiodat, which are not there.
        
        Well, firstly, half (if not more) of the Ukrainian army consists of ordinary conscripts - ethnic Russians. They hate the existing regime in Ukraine. They simply will not fight against Russia - from sabotage and desertion, to a direct transition to the side of Russia. By the way, I admit that the Russian side will officially provide them with such an opportunity. This has already worked both in the Crimea and in the Donbass.
        Second: about the "soldiers who are not there (LDNR)". Today, about 2,5 million people live in the LDNR itself. Plus, at least the same amount in the territory surrounding today's LDNR. So there are also quite a few people who want to get even with the hated ruling regime in Ukraine.
        
        Dart2027
        
        -3
        
        15 January 2022 13: 19
        
        Quote: Dear sofa expert.
        They simply will not fight against Russia - from sabotage and desertion, to a direct transition to the side of Russia.
        
        And I'm not saying that it will be difficult to defeat the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the problems will begin with the control of the territories after that.
        
        Quote: Dear sofa expert.
        Today, about 2,5 million people live in the LDNR itself.
        
        And how many of them are fighting.
        
        Dear sofa expert.
        
        0
        
        15 January 2022 13: 39
        
        And how many of them are fighting.
        
        Let's just say: protect the borders of their territory. In the event of the start of active hostilities, all those who will be subject to mobilization are mobilized.
        
        Dart2027
        
        -3
        
        15 January 2022 14: 43
        
        Quote: Dear sofa expert.
        mobilize all who will be subject to mobilization
        
        AND? No, mobilizing is not a problem, but how much time and effort will it take to train? Where to get the required number of officers?
        
        viktortarianik
        
        +2
        
        15 January 2022 12: 36
        
        Yes, I have a feeling that in the event of a war, the Ukrainian army itself will be reduced several times.
      2. Bakht
        
        0
        
        14 January 2022 23: 36
        
        What is the difference between the era of the Internet and the era of the telegraph? Information transfer rate? Basically, nothing.
        There is no need to increase the army. Not ten times, not twice. We need a managerial staff.
        
        Dart2027
        
        -3
        
        15 January 2022 06: 50
        
        Quote: Bakht
        What is the difference between the era of the Internet and the era of the telegraph? Information transfer rate? Basically, nothing.
        
        The telegraph is easy to take under full control, and the Internet allows you to "fight for the minds" on a different level.
        
        Quote: Bakht
        We need a managerial staff.
        
        Of course, but without the army it will not be possible to bring him to power.
        
        Bakht
        
        0
        
        15 January 2022 07: 47
        
        Internet disconnects very easily. For this, the army is not needed at all. Karabakh and Kazakhstan have convincingly shown this.
        
        I have said many times that the army does not solve problems. It is a concomitant element of reformatting the state. Necessary, but accompanying. Majors and colonels cannot manage factories and banks. The "commissars in dusty helmets" won the war, but officials had to be used to manage it.
        
        Dart2027
        
        -3
        
        15 January 2022 08: 47
        
        Quote: Bakht
        Internet disconnects very easily.
        
        Easy, but how long can you chop it off? The point is not to take the territory under control, but what to do with it next. It will have to be turned on again.
        
        Quote: Bakht
        It is a concomitant element of reformatting the state. Necessary, but accompanying.
        
        True, but without it, nothing will work either.
        
        Bakht
        
        0
        
        15 January 2022 09: 04
        
        During the war, the Internet was turned off for two months. Even a VPN didn't help much. The first time I got a warning. On the second came harsh people from the police.
        And nothing prevented extending the shutdown for any desired period.
        
        You think in terms of war with the seizure of territory. Most likely there will be no such war. The army is a necessary attribute of the state. One of the most important. She can crush the enemy army and capture territory. I am trying to explain that such a war is unnecessary and even harmful.
        
        Dart2027
        
        -3
        
        15 January 2022 13: 16
        
        Quote: Bakht
        You think in terms of war with the seizure of territory. Most likely there will be no such war.
        
        And in no other way. In another case, all the imprisoned managers will be primitively killed and everything will end.
        
        Bakht
        
        +1
        
        15 January 2022 14: 23
        
        Only in a different way and you can act. Occupying the country will not work in any case.
        
        Saving the drowning - the work of the drowning
        
        Dart2027
        
        -3
        
        15 January 2022 14: 41
        
        Quote: Bakht
        Saving the drowning - the work of the drowning
        
        And if they not only do not want to save themselves, but also want to drown others?
        
        Bakht
        
        0
        
        15 January 2022 17: 15
        
        I believe that most want.
        
        Dart2027
        
        -1
        
        16 January 2022 07: 21
        
        We just have what we have.
        
        Sergeyjluf
        
        0
        
        15 January 2022 11: 05
        
        Noticing!!!! your ideas. Take the career of Ronald Reagan: film actor-unionist-Governor of California-President of the United States. So majors and colonels can run factories and banks. In the USSR, in the former republics and autonomies, the director of the plant was always "national", and the chief engineer was Russian (crest, Belarusian, etc.). And the factories worked great.
        
        Bakht
        
        +2
        
        15 January 2022 14: 33
        
        Take the career of Ronald Reagan. A person from the student's bench participated in political actions, was active in political life all his life. At the age of 30 he was elected to the union. 8 years governor, presidential candidate since 1976. He is a politician. The fact that he once and somewhere starred in episodic roles does not make him a famous actor. But he became a famous politician at the age of 30. Since 1941. And he became president in 1980. Feel the difference? And take Zelensky. So which one is the president? Or even just a politician.
        
        Your ideas about Ronald Reagan and factory directors are clearly primitive.
        
        PS After the revolution in Cuba ministerial portfolios were divided. When F. Castro asked which of them was an economist, Che Guevara raised his hand. To Fidel's surprised question, "When did you become an economist?" Che replied, "I thought you asked which of us is a socialist"!
        
        PPS Famous quote "A cook can NOT run a state."
    2. Dear sofa expert.
      
      +4
      
      14 January 2022 23: 15
      
      no destruction of bridges and infrastructure.
      
      If in fact it comes to a war between Russia and the enemy state of Ukraine (and everything is going to that), they will start with this: transport hubs, bridges, airfields, power plants, telecommunications systems, warehouses, water treatment facilities, state. institutions, etc. Something will be destroyed, something will be captured and taken under control.
      It will happen with lightning speed.
      If the Americans still want to participate there somehow indirectly (sell weapons, etc.), then they will have to do this at least yesterday.
      Looking at today's agenda, they hardly have any time left for this at all.
      Here is a distraction maneuver with Venezuela and Cuba at the right time and diverts the attention of Americans from distant Ukraine, to their loved ones.
      
      The spiral began to spin at breakneck speed. This is in Russian - they harnessed for a long time, they will go quickly.
      1. Bakht
        
        +1
        
        14 January 2022 23: 40
        
        All this must be restored later. And a small nuance. Destroying a country in order to rebuild it later is not a good idea.
        I have a suspicion that there will be no war, as many people imagine. Everything will crumble quickly. The problem of Ukraine is that the people do not trust the authorities. Otherwise, they would not have chosen a clown. Unfortunately, he turned out to be an evil clown.
        
        Dear sofa expert.
        
        +2
        
        14 January 2022 23: 49
        
        All this must be restored later. And a small nuance. Destroying a country in order to rebuild it later is not a good idea.
        
        So that's just fine. Here the Ukrainians will finally at least do something useful in their country - restoration. At the same time, the brains will fall into place. Work ennobles.
        And by the way, there are many who want to help them in this, so to speak, not for free. This is where Russia needs to be the fastest.)
        
        I have a suspicion that there will be no war, as many people imagine. Everything will crumble quickly. The problem of Ukraine is that the people do not trust the authorities. Otherwise, they would not have chosen a clown. Unfortunately, he turned out to be an evil clown.
        
        It would be nice, as you say, but who will let them “quickly crumble” then?) The Moor has not yet done his job.
        NATO has not yet fully come to life, in acquiring a new meaning for its now unnecessary existence.
        
        Bakht
        
        +1
        
        14 January 2022 23: 58
        
        Returning to the article. "Germany benefits from the liquidation of Ukraine as a state." I have always said and I say - the liquidation of Ukraine as a state is beneficial to Germany, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Russia. And with all that, she's still standing. The preservation of Ukraine is beneficial to the United States and Great Britain. But removing these props without a big nix is unlikely to succeed. We must wait for the events "a la Kazakhstan". Only this can move the situation from a dead point.
        Apparently, the Kremlin decided that the denouement was near. Here we are, just in case.
        
        Dear sofa expert.
        
        +1
        
        15 January 2022 00: 11
        
        The preservation of Ukraine is beneficial to the United States,
        
        Naturally beneficial. "Smoldering" in the "fight with Russia" Ukraine helps to maintain the image of the enemy for Western inhabitants, and with it to justify the existence of NATO, in which "ordinary members" diligently unfasten the "godfather" (USA) 2% of the annual GDP. Who would miss such a business?
      2. viktortarianik
        
        +1
        
        15 January 2022 12: 42
        
        At the headquarters of the Russian army, they already know what to destroy right away, what to leave for later, where to drop troops just to turn it off.
        
        Dear sofa expert.
        
        +1
        
        15 January 2022 12: 49
        
        At the headquarters of the Russian army, they already know what to destroy right away, what to leave for later, where to drop troops just to turn it off.
        
        Naturally .. I also think so.
        
        ..Something will be destroyed, something will be captured and taken under control ...
2. EMMM
  
  +1
  
  14 January 2022 20: 33
  
  It is beneficial for the United States to stop the transit of Russian gas to Europe in principle. The economic interests of Europe are deeply parallel to them.
  However, Ukraine's annexation to Russia will not force them to try to change such a decision by force of arms. Chatter will begin about "super" sanctions, the effectiveness of which we have already felt for several decades.
  But the thought of the possibility of going to war with my brother is hateful to me. Although she is ...
  1. Bakht
    
    0
    
    14 January 2022 21: 36
    
    Accession of Ukraine to Russia is not on the agenda. Like Belarus. More like an alliance. In the future - the confederation. I propose the option of Kazakhstan. Quick entry, restoring order in the country by the forces of the LDNR, a change of government in Kiev and the withdrawal of Russian troops. I hope Belarusians too.
    "War on brother" was never a good idea. If you consider a Ukronazi as a brother. Russians in Ukraine are your brothers. Ukrainian (in its widest form) is your enemy. This difference must always be remembered.
    Oles Buzina said about himself "I am a Ukrainian. I am Ukrainian. I am Russian." People like him are your brothers. Those who killed him are your enemies. By the way, a memorial plate was installed at the place of death of O. Buzina. Not a victim. His killers.
    1. EMMM
      
      0
      
      17 January 2022 00: 30
      
      In the case of Ukraine, this option will not work. The economy is so collapsed that if you enter, you will stay forever, and our economy simply cannot stand it.
      1. Bakht
        
        +1
        
        17 January 2022 07: 51
        
        I believe that the economy will only benefit. But depending on the economy. Globalism is no longer so obvious as the only way of development.
        And then, did I mention entry? I spoke about an independent Ukraine. In the maximum version - about the confederation. Ukraine has an external debt of $100 billion. Of course, it is beneficial for the West to hang this debt on Russia. Why attach such a debt?
  2. viktortarianik
    
    0
    
    15 January 2022 12: 44
    
    But with a "kind word" this, today's, Ukraine cannot be changed.
3. Vladimir501
  
  0
  
  16 January 2022 13: 10
  
  It was, but not now. Blows will also be applied to decision-making centers. And if you think that the decision to start a war between Ukraine and Russia will be taken by the Ukrainian leadership, this is stupid. If they could and could decide to start a war or even create a "Casus Belli", they would be immediately handed over with giblets and the whole question is what and in what quantity is needed from Russia's stolen goods.
Pandiurin

+1

14 January 2022 15: 52

If Germany acted logically in accordance with its interests, then SP2 was certified long ago, and there was no dependence on either Poland or Ukraine. Gas could be supplied using these territories for transit or not using them at all and supplied completely through SP1 and SP2.

With the "liquidation of Ukrainian statehood", Germany is likely to introduce / support some kind of serious anti-Russian sanctions, refuse Russian gas as much as possible, independently or under pressure.

For Germany, this will be a huge loss. The Britons will probably be very, very happy for the Germans. And what is the benefit of Germany?
1. alexneg13
  
  0
  
  15 January 2022 22: 30
  
  And who said that the launch of SP2 is beneficial for Russia now? A couple more months of the idiocy of the Eurogay administration and the construction of SP2 will pay off. If it had been launched on time, it would have paid off in several years or decades. Remember the art of hauling the Fortuna pipelayer from the Far East to the Baltic, you just think like that. With SP2, Russia had a long game against the United States and the result is now in sight. So Sharkhan was blown away, and tobacco is out and in shock.
  1. Pandiurin
    
    0
    
    15 January 2022 23: 24
    
    Quote: alexneg13
    And who said that the launch of SP2 is beneficial for Russia now? A couple more months of the idiocy of the Eurogay administration and the construction of SP2 will pay off. If it had been launched on time, it would have paid off in several years or decades. Remember the art of hauling the Fortuna pipelayer from the Far East to the Baltic, you just think like that. With SP2, Russia had a long game against the United States and the result is now in sight. So Sharkhan was blown away, and tobacco is out and in shock.
    
    Probably Gazprom is interested in launching SP2,
    - it is a matter of principle to show that our project, despite opposition, has been implemented and is working.
    - I don't know the share of Gazprom's participation in SP2, probably 50%, except for Gazprom, which profits from the general deficit situation, there are partners who do not receive anything. They started a business together with Gazprom, they incurred costs, there is no profit. Although not the fault of Gazprom, but bad for business reputation.
    - the situation on the LNG market may change, the price will fall, it is better to make a profit at the expense of volumes.
    - if SP2 is activated, then Gazprom can fulfill its obligations with zero deliveries AND through Poland AND through Ukraine.
    - then it may turn out that there will be a situation of confrontation between the EU and Russia. Again Russophobic fantasies of the EU. Certification of SP2, if it does not happen now, then in the future it may not happen at all.
    - if 404 starts stealing gas, it will be possible to terminate the contract and close the valve, the gas could be sent through SP2. SP2 is not possible to use, you have to deal with Poland.
    
    But the main thing is that SP2 has been built, in the event of excesses in 404, a humanitarian catastrophe will not occur in Germany, gas will be pumped without certificates for SP2, and this is the most important thing.
gorskova.ir

0

15 January 2022 19: 11

Oh mein Goth! Well, why does Germany need the liquidation of Ukraine? She has a sufficient resource in obtaining gas and Russia without this rusty pipe. But they are on their own mind. So far (I suppose) they are making money on the sale of their gas already received at low prices at exorbitant prices ... When it ends, they will launch JV 2 ....
Baltika3

0

15 January 2022 20: 30

Germany benefits from the liquidation of Ukraine as a state

Of course it's beneficial. To share with Russia - along the Dnieper, for example. Common border again. We will sign a non-aggression pact. Moscow needs to develop this line more energetically.
zenion

0

16 January 2022 16: 04

A strange benefit from the loss of Ukraine. This is how to cut off a leg so that nothing rubs against it and savings in shoes.
Yuri Bryanskiy

0

18 January 2022 21: 32

Everyone benefits from Great Russia, except for the fiend overseas.