What will the nationalization of the assets of "Gazprom" and "Rosneft" in Europe lead to?


The story of the possible nationalization of European UGS facilities owned by Gazprom or controlled by it continued. Now not only our gas monopolist is under threat, but also the German division of the Rosneft company, which in itself raises a lot of questions for "dear Western partners."


The fact that the EU is seriously considering the possibility of solving its problems with gas supplies at the expense of the Russian Gazprom, we detail told previously. In particular, the European Commission came up with an initiative to establish new standards for the mandatory filling of existing UGS facilities to at least 80% by November 1, 2022, and in the future - up to 90%. According to the plan of Brussels, the problem of energy security should be resolved in such a way that the Old World would confidently pass the next heating season. The originality of the proposal lies in the fact that the obligation to fill European underground gas storage facilities is supposed to be placed on their owners or those who exercise actual control over UGS facilities, and not on professional traders or direct consumers.

Given that Gazprom, through its subsidiaries, owns or controls a number of large underground gas storage facilities, this measure is obviously aimed specifically at him. At the same time, the European Commission does not offer any “carrot” for good behavior, only a “stick”. Thus, it is assumed that new rules for the certification of UGS facilities will be introduced in the EU, and operators of gas storage facilities that have not passed this certification will have to voluntarily-compulsorily give up the right to own or manage them. They console only with some kind of “fair compensation” for the value of the lost asset.

Apparently, this initiative of the European Commission was a means of pressure on Moscow, which adopted political the decision to transfer payment for gas into Russian rubles for unfriendly countries. And it didn't work. From April 1, the process of transferring payments for the delivered "blue fuel" into our national currency begins, which President Vladimir Putin directly confirmed at a meeting on March 31, 2022:

In order to purchase Russian natural gas, they must open ruble accounts in Russian banks. It is these accounts that will be used to pay for gas supplied starting tomorrow, from April 1 of this year.

At the same time, it is emphasized that only the currency of settlements is changed unilaterally, but all other conditions of contracts concluded earlier in terms of terms and volumes of deliveries remain in force. However, if consumers from unfriendly countries refuse to pay in rubles, then there will be no deliveries.

In the countries unfriendly to Russia, everyone heard, realized and raised the stakes in this game of nerves. Thus, the well-known German publication Handelsblatt reported that the German government is considering the possibility of nationalizing the subsidiaries of the largest Russian oil and gas companies in their country - Gazprom Germania and Rosneft Deutschland. Curious list.

Everything is clear with Gazprom: firstly, it is a monopoly on the export of "blue fuel" to Europe through an extensive pipeline system, and secondly, through its "daughters" it owns or manages the largest UGS facilities in the EU. But what does Rosneft and its German structures have to do with it? Rosneft Deutschland owns shares in three oil refineries in Germany and accounts for about 12% of all refinery capacities in this country. According to Handelsblatt, Russian fuel is used to refuel aircraft at the Berlin airport and vehicles of operational services of the German capital.

But where is the gas and the problem of paying for it in rubles? This is a pure and unalloyed racket in the style of the "dashing nineties", and the "respectable Western partners" turned out to be banal criminals, living not according to the law, but according to concepts. What a twist!

An attempt to link the issue of payments for gas in rubles and the threat of nationalization of the assets of the largest Russian oil and gas companies was extremely disapprovingly commented by the press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Peskov:

The gangster seizure of property that is taking place is the seizure of funds in bank accounts, private property. We also see completely gangster actions against our reserves, as President Putin spoke about, this is also illegal. If now nationalization will be added to this, then, of course, this does not bode well.

Rosneft has so far kept silent, but the state corporation Gazprom reported the day before that its export division, Gazprom Export LLC, is ending its participation in the German subsidiary Gazprom Germania GmbH, which includes, among other things, Gazprom Marketing & Trading LTD. It must be assumed that similar decisions can soon be expected from Rosneft.

With all the negatives from what is happening, I want to highlight the undoubted positives. Right before our eyes, the myth of the "enlightened West" artfully imposed by domestic liberals, where everyone acts only according to the law, and the right to property is sacred, rapidly self-destructed. In the future, talk about investing budget funds in "highly reliable foreign projects" should be equated with sabotage, returning the corresponding article to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. You have to take care of your country.
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Jacques sekavar Offline Jacques sekavar
    Jacques sekavar (Jacques Sekavar) April 2 2022 11: 16
    0
    If Gazprom owns UGS facilities and as the owner is obliged to maintain their occupancy at the level of 80%, and in the future up to 90%, this also solves the problem of EU energy security.
    Nationalization or new certification rules for UGS facilities owned by Gazprom automatically remove this obligation.
    I do not understand the benefit of the EU.
    Deliveries will continue as they were, and the losses from the loss of UGS facilities will pay off by increasing the cost of supplies. As reported, Gazprom withdrew assets from its German subsidiaries, how did it manage under the sanctions?
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 2 2022 11: 26
      0
      If Gazprom owns UGS facilities and as the owner is obliged to maintain their occupancy at the level of 80%, and in the future up to 90%, this also solves the problem of EU energy security.

      Gazprom apparently decided to evade this. That is why they threaten nationalization.
      1. yuriy55 Offline yuriy55
        yuriy55 (Yuri) April 2 2022 12: 57
        0
        Quote: Marzhetsky
        Gazprom apparently decided to evade this. That is why they threaten nationalization.

        Russia has something to answer, you can clean it up in the register of owners:

        As of December 31, 2017, the shareholders of the company were:
        - companies controlled by the Russian Federation (50,23%), including:
        - Federal Property Management Agency (38,37%);
        - OJSC Rosneftegaz (10,97%);
        - OJSC Rosgazifikatsiya (0,89%);
        - ADR holders (25,20%);
        - other registered persons (24,57%).
    2. Smirnov Sergey Offline Smirnov Sergey
      Smirnov Sergey (Smirnov Sergey) April 2 2022 21: 47
      0
      There are no such rules. They want to enter.
  2. zloybond Offline zloybond
    zloybond (steppenwolf) April 2 2022 11: 19
    +16
    Never forget - ownership applies to citizens of Europe and the United States. No need to arrogantly believe that you were given something to own - there you were given a favor for good behavior.
    They do not show humanity to the ghouls who come over and over again to our land to rob, then kill and conquer twice - this is called stupidity.
    In our case, in the conditions of an economic war, there is no respect for us, no understanding, no humanity. - So why should we show humanity and understanding to those who have not once attacked Russia???? So that they get the snot again then come to us to rob????
  3. Oleg_5 Offline Oleg_5
    Oleg_5 (Oleg) April 2 2022 11: 39
    -2
    Maybe the second time you read the source? https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_1936
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) April 2 2022 13: 48
      -3
      Legislative proposal to ensure winter storage of gas

      The Commission accelerated its work after the Versailles Summit and today presented a legislative proposal, requiring Member States to ensure that their underground gas storage facilities are at least 80% full by November 1, 2022, and up to 90% in subsequent years. with intermediate targets from February to October. Storage yard operators should report fill levels to national authorities. Member States must monitor fill levels on a monthly basis and report to the Commission.

      Gas storage facilities are a critical infrastructure to ensure the security of supply. The new mandatory certification of all storage system operators will avoid the potential risks associated with external influence on critical storage infrastructure, which means that uncertified operators will have to relinquish ownership or control of EU gas storage facilities.

      Personally, I interpret this text as follows: UGS operators fill up to the level of 80%, the states control this process and report to the EC
      1. Oleg_5 Offline Oleg_5
        Oleg_5 (Oleg) April 2 2022 14: 24
        0
        Well, you even singled out yourself:

        requiring Member States to ensure that their underground gas storage facilities are at least 80% full

        Operators are operators.
        And they demand from those who provide these operators with what to operate with.
        1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) April 2 2022 17: 59
          +1
          So, what's the contradiction? The EC inclines the states, they incline the operators to provide. Like in the army, pass it on to someone else.
          1. Oleg_5 Offline Oleg_5
            Oleg_5 (Oleg) April 2 2022 18: 25
            0
            The contradiction is that the state should buy and transfer to the operator. And not an operator to buy and then transfer to the state.
            1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
              Marzhecki (Sergei) April 3 2022 08: 05
              0
              It's not written there.
              Since when can the state in a country with a liberal economy buy something instead of an operator? You don't understand what you are talking about.
  4. Mikhalych Offline Mikhalych
    Mikhalych April 2 2022 13: 28
    +4
    It is necessary to force not to convert euros into rubles, but to supply Russia with the equipment we need and return to the Stalinist economic system.
    hi
  5. dub0vitsky Offline dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky (Victor) April 2 2022 14: 45
    +9
    ... but the state corporation Gazprom reported the day before that its export division, Gazprom Export LLC, is ending its participation in the German subsidiary Gazprom Germania GmbH, which includes, among other things, Gazprom Marketing & Trading LTD ...

    Thus, German subsidiaries deprived of Gazprom's assets. become just offices with computers and unemployed office plankton.
    1. PAUL 7 Offline PAUL 7
      PAUL 7 April 2 2022 16: 26
      +2
      They said exactly.
  6. Roma Phil Offline Roma Phil
    Roma Phil (Roma) April 2 2022 18: 48
    0
    Somehow, all this is incomprehensible to me and seems to be fake information about the intentions of the German Ministry of Finance.
    Why should the German Finance Ministry nationalize the German subsidiaries of Gazprom? I don't think there are brainless fools sitting there. Moreover, the representative (or representative) of the German Ministry of Economy, Beate Baron, said to this question:

    I do not comment on such press reports and do not speculate on this topic.

    The Gazprom Germania company operates several large underground gas storage facilities in Germany, and it is clear that without the Russian Gazprom, these storage facilities will not be filled with gas, so why would the German government nationalize empty UGSFs?
    Perhaps the abandonment of Gazprom's subsidiaries is more beneficial for Moscow?
    But again, it is not entirely clear what this benefit is.
    1. Smirnov Sergey Offline Smirnov Sergey
      Smirnov Sergey (Smirnov Sergey) April 2 2022 22: 01
      +1
      Well then why talk about it? If you don't understand, what's the benefit?
      For Gazprom, the benefit is understandable - it a) does not risk the volumes of gas already delivered in these UGS facilities - according to the above scheme, these gas were paid for in these UGS facilities. Now they are empty, but if they accept a directive on obligations to fill, they will have to follow, and then the risks increase.
      And for the Germans, these performances are something of a preparation for a raider takeover and squeezing out of business. Such a state racket.
      1. Roma Phil Offline Roma Phil
        Roma Phil (Roma) April 2 2022 22: 40
        0
        Quote: Sergey Smirnov
        Well then why talk about it? If you don't understand, what's the benefit?

        And that's why I "say", I.e. I write that this is not clear to me.
        Unfortunately, I didn't get a response from your post.
        And the question was:

        Why should the German Finance Ministry nationalize the German subsidiaries of Gazprom?

        And then in my comment:

        The Gazprom Germania company operates several large underground gas storage facilities in Germany, and it is clear that without the Russian Gazprom, these storage facilities will not be filled with gas, so why would the German government nationalize empty UGSFs?

        And why Gazprom sold its subsidiaries to Gazprom Germania is understandable.
        1. Smirnov Sergey Offline Smirnov Sergey
          Smirnov Sergey (Smirnov Sergey) April 2 2022 23: 34
          0
          The answer to your question is to squeeze out of business. For them, this is the elimination of risks - how will they talk about energy independence if Gazprom actually owns the gas distribution infrastructure? In the 90s, how was it hinted at the need to sell the business? Checks, searches .. other methods of pressure.
  7. Pavel57 Offline Pavel57
    Pavel57 (Paul) April 2 2022 21: 39
    +2
    The difference between capitalism and banditry is rather arbitrary.
    Find 10 differences.
  8. Smirnov Sergey Offline Smirnov Sergey
    Smirnov Sergey (Smirnov Sergey) April 2 2022 21: 52
    +4
    As soon as Gazprom's subsidiaries in Germany are nationalized, German assets in Russia are immediately nationalized. Mercedes shares in KAMAZ along with design documentation, for example, and you never know what else. Now they have no opportunity to withdraw investments from the Russian Federation.
    1. sgrabik Offline sgrabik
      sgrabik (Sergei) April 3 2022 11: 05
      +3
      But we shouldn’t be shy, we need to respond in a mirror way, stop pretending to be gentlemen and play by their rules, it’s time to remember our national interests, their interests shouldn’t worry us at all, let them solve all their problems themselves, but not for our account.
  9. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
    Sapsan136 (Alexander) April 2 2022 23: 24
    +1
    Well, it means that the property of NATO and its supporters in the Russian Federation must be nationalized. You can start with Sakhalin-2 and the Roshen factory in Lipetsk, it's time to confiscate ALL the property of the fascist Poroshenko in the Russian Federation
  10. lance is gone Offline lance is gone
    lance is gone (lance) April 3 2022 07: 04
    0
    Well, who among the liberals will finally dare to close the valve? after all, even in England there were protesters with hammer and sickle banners.
  11. Jurijs Lukijenko (Jurijs Lukijenko) April 3 2022 08: 29
    -5
    Russia leased the planes and appropriated them. After that, an article appears on the reporter in which respected Western partners are taken in quotation marks. Explain how you can rob someone and then resent that they are doing the same to you.
    The Irish lessor did not impose sanctions against Russia and did not freeze accounts. He was outright robbed.
    1. sgrabik Offline sgrabik
      sgrabik (Sergei) April 3 2022 11: 18
      +2
      Well, why lie so brazenly and write this ridiculous nonsense, they have long announced to everyone that they first pay a penalty for violation of contracts on their part and all the losses incurred on our part, as soon as all these amounts are paid, then let them themselves aircraft are picked up, we are not obliged to transfer them to the lessor at our own expense.
    2. Sergey Pavlenko Offline Sergey Pavlenko
      Sergey Pavlenko (Sergey Pavlenko) April 4 2022 18: 51
      +2
      So Russia didn’t take anything ... let them come and take their iron ... but what to do with it next? - push it along the ground, to their countries? - let them push it. It was not Russia that closed the sky, but the West...
  12. borisvt Offline borisvt
    borisvt (boris) April 3 2022 16: 44
    0
    Very useful article, thanks to the author!
    Unless, about the final chord, I will object: in theory, the international division of labor improves, in the sense that it makes the life of any consumer cheaper. The international division of labor is complemented by the interpenetration of investment, and China is a clear example of this. Russia in this respect is a cook, a primary school student.
    To defend one's investments, to be able to protect them and protect them in the future - this is a more interesting and promising task than introducing amendments to the Criminal Code. Now, if the Germans dare to continue to be daring - punish the scoundrels, close the valves. Moreover, all the valves, to announce sanctions in everything we can, up to the arrest of cargo ships and the blockade of ports, the same Hamburg, Christmas trees!
    After all, we have to fight for the next two or three years, unfortunately ((
    1. Luenkov Offline Luenkov
      Luenkov (Arkady) April 21 2022 11: 50
      +1
      It was necessary to close relations with unfriendly states immediately. Don't snot.
  13. kriten Offline kriten
    kriten (Vladimir) April 3 2022 18: 45
    +1
    Liberals understand about the observance of laws only for liberals, and then almost nowhere. Already neither Europe nor the United States is far from an example. And not only in relation to Russia and Russians. The US doesn't care who to rob. Those who do not resist are robbed. Today it is the EU countries.
  14. Astronaut Offline Astronaut
    Astronaut (San Sanych) April 3 2022 19: 12
    +3
    There is no international law. There is only one right - the right of the strong!
  15. dub0vitsky Offline dub0vitsky
    dub0vitsky (Victor) April 3 2022 21: 30
    +1
    Quote: Marzhetsky
    So, what's the contradiction? The EC inclines the states, they incline the operators to provide. Like in the army, pass it on to someone else.

    Do operators have their own gas fields? Or, having concluded an agreement with the SUPPLIER, they dilute gas through pipes, storage facilities and deliver the product to end consumers?
  16. Luenkov Offline Luenkov
    Luenkov (Arkady) April 21 2022 11: 46
    0
    Westerners do not live by laws, but by rules. This is kinda different. Why we supply almost a month of gas on credit and this is to unfriendly countries (states).
  17. Blast Offline Blast
    Blast (Vladimir) April 25 2022 11: 13
    0
    On the part of the EU, this is just a step of desperation, which suggests that they do not know at all what to do with Putin's "gas for rubles." Let me explain, from the point of view of how the financial system works, when they pay for gas in rubles, they have a question of conversion. It would seem that there is nothing easier, exchanged for rubles and paid. But the whole point is that during such an operation it turns out that our Central Bank can freely issue exactly the same number of rubles, in simple words, print. It is for this reason that inflation jumped sharply in the West, and the ruble strengthened, and this is just on expectations ... The West is used to exporting its inflation to third world countries, and then suddenly it got the full reverse. No "nationalization" will save you, you still have to pay many times more ... This is such a kind of "ultimatum from Putin", all that remains is to burn everyone in a nuclear fire ... or negotiate. It is in this canvas that the reminder from "Putin" in the form of the subsequent test of Sarmat falls. Want to? Not? Then we resolve all issues at the negotiating table, including on Ukraine.