New flashpoint: US may ask Chinese tech firms to bin Russia

As big tech companies from the West swiftly and happily comply with new rules that prohibit interactions with Russia, Chinese companies will soon feel pressure to do likewise – and counter-pressure to resist such calls. Ride-sharing company DiDi Chuxing is currently the poster child for the dilemma facing Chinese companies. …

[Paul Crawford]

This tangle, dear reader, is why diplomatic corps recruitment programs seek out people who possess both great intellectual prowess and enormous emotional intelligence.

And yet we seem to have government ministers in charge that are as "sharp as a sock of soup", to use one of my colleague's expressions.

[Aladdin Sane]

Your colleague owes me a keyboard.

[Eclectic Man]

In 'Leave it to Psmith' (the 'P' is silent) by P G Wodehouse, lord Emsworth's spine is described as having "all the rigidity of a wet sock".

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Charles my boy, how's it going at the foreign office?

We've finished painting the west side and we start the front on Monday

So no chance of a job inside?

No sorry father, far too dim

[emfiliane]

China has "long held the basic position of respecting all countries' sovereignty and territorial integrity and abiding by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter."

Excuse me while I try to compose myself after that whopper.

[Anonymous Coward]

China has "long held the basic position of respecting all countries' sovereignty and territorial integrity and abiding by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter."

Unless they consider them to have always been part of China, just as Putin claimed Ukraine has always been part of Russia.

Or they decide to help themselves to various bits of other countries / islands they hope no one will care about.

[Eclectic Man]

re: Territorial integrity

When Ukraine voted for independence from the Soviet Union and gave up its nuclear arms, the UK, USA and Russia signed an agreement guaranteeing Ukraine's borders.

I'm sure that the PRC is watching how 'the West' reacts to Putin's invasion, sorry, 'Special Military Action', in great detail, and is calculating how 'the West' would react to the PRC taking over Taiwan, which does not have the benefit of a guarantee of its territorial sovereignty from anyone, and is not even a recognised country and member of the UN.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: re: Territorial integrity

The west would go totally monkey poop and China would gain nothing as the fabs were all destroyed, the engineers asylumed and ASML turned off updates.

But China can happily wait a century as its GOP rises and Taiwan's fortunes perhaps reverse when somebody else takes over as cheapest place to build semiconductors

Gradually it becomes China's Guam, then its Philippines, then its Puerto Rico then its Hawaii

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: re: Territorial integrity

The Philippines are a Conquered colony of the USA, and has the status of a Preferred Trading Partner (laughably like the UK) attacking that is gonna draw a military response.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: re: Territorial integrity

Yes it was a rather clumsy analogy that a place can gradually go from a foreign country through various degrees of colony status until its people finally become part of your country and nobody can remember when it wasn't

[adam 40]

Re: re: Territorial integrity

In the mean time, Chinese technology will return to 3rd century BC - great porcelain and bronzes, but not a lot else.

Take a tour round the National Place museum. (In Taiwan).

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: re: Territorial integrity

> When Ukraine voted for independence from the Soviet Union and gave up its nuclear arms, the UK, USA and Russia signed an agreement guaranteeing Ukraine's borders.

Not only that, but China itself made a similar (albeit weaker) assurance at the time!

> Taiwan, which does not have the benefit of a guarantee of its territorial sovereignty from anyone

Actually, not true! The US is legally obliged to come to Taiwan's defense in the instance that PRC invades the island. This was adopted into US law as part of the same legislation which made the US officially recognize the PRC over the RoC.

[Eclectic Man]

Re: re: Territorial integrity

AC, thanks for that, I didn't know about the USA's legal obligation to come to the aid of Taiwan in the event of an invasion by the PRC. This makes NATO membership in that event very 'interesting' indeed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: re: Territorial integrity

That's wishful thinking only.

From another forum from someone who lived there:

"U.S. is obligated to “aid Taiwan in its effort to defend itself”.

The wording is very clever.

In the event that a confrontation occurs and U.S. believes it’s more beneficial to get military involved, it can.

On the other hand, if U.S. determines the loss would offset the gain and wants to stay out of the strait, it can claim that “we have sold and supplies military equipment to Taiwan, thus fulfilled our obligation to help it defend itself”.

I suspect a decision on "the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few" would come into play here.

[StrangerHereMyself]

No way, José!

There's no way the Chinese will oblige the U.S. on this part. They'll limit some shipments but will continue others, clandestine or not.

Both nations feel pressured by the U.S. and will keep holding hands to strengthen their resolve.

[codejunky]

Re: No way, José!

@StrangerHereMyself

Of course they will back each other. Biden was sharing intelligence with China about Russia and its plans to invade hoping the Chinese would help stop it happening. Instead China shared the intelligence with Russia and told the US it was just paranoid about the invasion.

Hell even in Europe we must question who is an ally. While sanctions against Russia were applied there is exemption for luxury goods.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: No way, José!

>While sanctions against Russia were applied there is exemption for luxury goods.

That would be the trade where Russian Oligarchs give the last of their scarce dollars and euros to you in return for handbags ?

That might just be brilliant.

[First Light]

Rail "cargo" trains from China to Europe.

Know what else can travel on those rail lines? Troops and weapons, that's what.

What with this Ukraine business, Europe should be a little more careful about its security. China plays the long game well.

[Dr. Vagmeister]

Re: Rail "cargo" trains from China to Europe.

Agree, that China does play the long game. I expect China will indeed annex Taiwan in the future. Covid may have been the saving event where the west implements extra IC fabrication actually in the west, so we are less reliant upon the far east.

China needs Russian energy, so will support Russia for the foreseeable future. The upside is that the acceleration of green energy deployment for the UK to remove our reliance upon gas etc., will further our move to cheaper energy (this would be nice..... but how likely ??).

The possible long term result for Russia is that if Europe follow the UK direction, then Russia will eventually be poor unless propped up by China.

[codejunky]

Re: Rail "cargo" trains from China to Europe.

@Dr. Vagmeister

"The upside is that the acceleration of green energy deployment for the UK to remove our reliance upon gas etc., will further our move to cheaper energy (this would be nice..... but how likely ??)."

I think your right about China playing the long game and possibly trying for Taiwan etc, but what I quoted doesnt make sense. Our growing deployment of 'green energy' aka unreliables has massively increased our dependence on gas (ment to be offset by fracking) and as for cheaper energy that doesnt even register near reality. Unreliables have increased energy costs in the UK insanely and 25% of our bills were purely green crap and the rest increased because of our reliance on unreliables.

"The possible long term result for Russia is that if Europe follow the UK direction, then Russia will eventually be poor unless propped up by China."

The difficult part being to convince some European countries to wean themselves off their dependence on Russia. The very green Germany looking at having its lights put out if it cant get gas and coal from Russia.

[Dr. Vagmeister]

Re: Rail "cargo" trains from China to Europe.

The UK energy supply as of 2020 was 43% green :

https://www.spglobal.com/commodity-insights/en/market-insights/latest-news/energy-transition/100421-uk-targets-power-from-100-renewable-sources-by-2035

As long as energy storage design and development proceeds and is implemented, then green energy could reduce in cost considerably. There are redox flow batteries that can last 25+ years (based on same anode and cathode design) (https://invinity.com/largest-flow-battery-world-first/) The 25 year life was based on another website.

There are microwave boilers - the one aspect i am unable to find out (so far) is the running costs compared to gas boilers. (https://www.heatwayv.com/)

The governments own study by Professor Dieter indicated that the current price crisis for carbon based fuels could have been averted (his words Newsnight a few months ago). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cost-of-energy-independent-review

I am hoping that the Russia issue will mean that we move to green energy faster, and the same for Europe.

This morning President Biden was stating that the US will be manufacturing locally - and as per The Register articles, fab plants in Europe etc, will see China sidelined to some extent.#

I did not downvote you.

[codejunky]

Re: Rail "cargo" trains from China to Europe.

@Dr. Vagmeister

"The UK energy supply as of 2020 was 43% green :"

Of that burning wood pellets (shipped from America?) is considered green, also the stable technology of hydro is of little concern. But wind and solar are not particularly great. Worryingly millions are being paid to wind farm companies to stop producing about half the power they could be providing as it makes the grid unstable (constraint payments). The primary issue is of providing energy when people want it which is not something the unreliables is good at.

"As long as energy storage design and development proceeds and is implemented, then green energy could reduce in cost considerably"

As it stands green energy was sold as a way of reducing energy costs and yet that dream is not close to be realised but instead energy costs have shot up due to green energy. The storage idea has been floated for a while but is based on technology that does not exist currently. Maybe it will be eventually developed but the vast costs and increased vulnerability to our energy supply doesnt make this look a good plan. The cost of energy only looks to be going up when there is no reason it should.

"There are microwave boilers"

The gov seems to have set its heart on heat pumps for some reason, I am not a fan of government picking winners. It rarely goes well when they try. The problem with such solutions is the reliance on electricity which is still increasing in cost. We have had decades of being told how cheap energy will be with solar and wind and nothing but increased costs and turning back on coal plants.

"I am hoping that the Russia issue will mean that we move to green energy faster, and the same for Europe."

Assuming the definition includes nukes it could be possible. Unfortunately instead of building such we have had successive govs chicken out and build more monuments to a sky god. There is even the claim that climate change will reduce wind as 'global stilling' is being discussed (reduced wind speeds over past decades).

"This morning President Biden was stating that the US will be manufacturing locally - and as per The Register articles, fab plants in Europe etc, will see China sidelined to some extent."

This is an interesting development I am watching. But manufacturing seriously benefits from cheaper energy. In fact cheaper energy benefits us all and reduces costs across the board for the entire country. Just as the increasing costs inflicts increasing harm.

"I did not downvote you"

Doesnt matter if you do, I dont subscribe to the XFactor of posts and discussion progresses knowledge (I am always happy to learn something new). However I do know I have a certain 'following', pets as I call them.

[Dr. Vagmeister]

Re: Rail "cargo" trains from China to Europe.

Energy storage already exists in the home (solar and battery), for the power networks as per the link, and others such as hydro etc. Old article :

https://www.r-e-a.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Energy-Storage-FINAL6.pdf

The issue is that the government fails to steer the correct direction.

[codejunky]

Re: Rail "cargo" trains from China to Europe.

@Dr. Vagmeister

"The issue is that the government fails to steer the correct direction."

I think that pretty much sums up the limitation of government. But it has landed us in the mess we are in and on the continent made countries more reliant on Russia and for no real benefit.

[Jan 0]

Re: Rail "cargo" trains from China to Europe.

> There are microwave boilers - the one aspect i am unable to find out (so far) is the running costs compared to gas boilers. (https://www.heatwayv.com/)

That sounds utterly crazy! A "microwave boiler" can't put any more heat into water than a simple electric boiler with resistive elements and is going to cost more to manufacture and maintain! The only way an electric boiler is going to compete with a gas boiler, is if it uses some kind of heat pump. (Unless we're talking about keeping people warm in their homes, by generating microwaves in their vicinity to keep their skin warm - hardly a "boiler". I think I prefer the tan I get from sleeping on a 100W atomic pile.)

I see that Heatwavy is remarkably coy about anything but the price of their bolers.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Rail "cargo" trains from China to Europe.

> This morning President Biden was stating that the US will be manufacturing locally

The more I see, the more I wonder what would've happened under Trump if half the media hadn't called every move like this "racist" when he did it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Rail "cargo" trains from China to Europe.

@codejunky

Your posts on many topics read like a Tufton Street memos.

[Denarius]

Re: Rail "cargo" trains from China to Europe.

whatever Tufton is. The single point of interest is : Is codejunky wrong ? Is this site getting infested with ideologues who cant see the wood for the trees?

[nobody who matters]

Re: Rail "cargo" trains from China to Europe.

".....The upside is that the acceleration of green energy deployment for the UK to remove our reliance upon gas etc., will further our move to cheaper energy (this would be nice..... but how likely ??).....).

Not likely at all, to be honest. There really isn't an upside :(

There seems to be a myth floating around that 'green energy' is somehow cheaper - it really isn't. Most of the green energy sources have only been economically viable up to now because they are effectively heavily subsidised through being paid a much higher feed-in tariff than that received for energy generated from other sources (principally coal, gas and nuclear). It is only the recent massive hike in the price of gas that has brought the cost of generation from gas turbines up towards that of the supposedly 'green' power generators.

Sadly, regardless of the long term future development of eco-friendly energy, the price of electrical energy is set to soar, simply because green energy generation is not going to get any cheaper, and as its proportion of the total increases, it will give rise to greater pressure on the end price of electricity; all that is likely to happen is that the cost of generation from the eco-harmful sources is going to rise to a similar level.

The politians myth of cheap eco-friendly energy belongs in the same box of horse droppings as their regular predictions of cheaper food from free trade, about which they have been bleating for decades (and continue to bleat about) and which has never materialised, and is almost certainly never going to materialise.

[codejunky]

Re: Consider the long game

@AC

"Trump who may or may not be a Russian asset"

That glorious investigation has turned on Hillary and the Democratic party for fabricating evidence and using the security apparatus of the US against a presidential candidate. People are being arrested for this.

"spent a great deal of energy disengaging China from the west"

And Biden shared US intelligence with China hoping they would prevent war in Ukraine, which the Chinese back Russia as they have done previously. Add the 'virus of unknown origin' and territorial desires of China and it seems buddying up with China isnt smart.

"Now consider the effort of Brexit which basically weakened the EU with the hope of a domino effect of breaking up the union."

That doesnt stand with the evidence. Brexit didnt weaken the EU as shown by EU countries being so dependent on Russia that they have to carve out exceptions from sanctions. Germany is finally taking its military serious now that its too late for them to be effective (gonna take a while for them to be a serious force). Shockingly this is again something Trump railed against and was ready to pull troops out of Germany as they refused to take NATO seriously. The EU however is weak anyway, they still desire to be taken seriously but are far from such a goal.

"All the anti EU and China rhetoric makes a lot more sense if viewed from how it benefits Putin...."

Probably didnt hurt that Biden lifted sanctions on Nord stream 2 before this kicked off. Or that Biden screwed up the Afghanistan withdrawal. Or that a large part of Europe has been riding on US security and not taking NATO as a serious responsibility.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Consider the long game

@codejunky, save your shit for fecalbook where it belongs.

[LybsterRoy]

Re: Consider the long game

Suggestion for you. If you disagree with codejunky then 1) give your identity 2) respond to the points he's made not just sling shit.

How anyone can upvote a post such as your's astounds me.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Consider the long game

Most disagree with him here because he's a denialist of reality. Repeatedly.

Blinkers don't don't equal points.

[DS999]

Re: Consider the long game

Whether Trump was officially a Russian asset or not he sure acted like one. Everything he did from a foreign policy standpoint was to Russia's favor. He did his best to weaken NATO more than it had ever been to the point where allies didn't know whether we'd honor our Article 5 commitments. He changed the republican party platform to remove language critical of Russia's invasion of Crimea and support for Ukraine. He attempted to blackmail Zelenskyy by withholding weapons that have been the only thing keeping Russian tanks at bay so far. He tried to weaken the sanctions on Russia until congress passed a veto proof bill removing his power to do so, which he was forced to sign to save face.

Putin clearly has some compromat on him. Not something stupid like "pee tapes", that would merely be embarrassing, and Trump is incapable of embarrassment. No, it must be proof of something criminal, probably recordings of him talking with Russian oligarchs about helping them money launder via Trump Tower apartments or something along those lines.

If Putin is killed by his own staff or forced out, as seems increasing likely as the end game of his disastrous war on Ukraine, Trump will be very concerned who gets their hands on that information. Putin is the kind of guy who might want to leave with a big "F U" to the west and arrange to release everything after he dies, and what he has on Trump would likely be just the tip of the iceberg that would hit tons of western countries all across the political spectrum. Everyone in the west holding or who has held public office should be afraid of what a former KGB spy with the resources of a nation state and some of the world's best hackers has squirreled away over the past couple decades.

[codejunky]

Re: Consider the long game

@DS999

"Whether Trump was officially a Russian asset or not he sure acted like one."

I was reading one of his interviews where he said something about getting on well with Putin, except for putting sanctions on him. And getting on well with Xi, except for putting the tariffs on him.

"He did his best to weaken NATO more than it had ever been to the point where allies didn't know whether we'd honor our Article 5 commitments"

I am not sure he tried to weaken NATO (feel free to show me where I am wrong) but he wasnt for giving Europe the free ride at the US expense while cosying up and becoming increasingly reliant on Russia. Germany is only very recently starting to take its military seriously but the split of opinion through the EU over what to do about Russia was a clear demonstration of the problem.

"He changed the republican party platform to remove language critical of Russia's invasion of Crimea and support for Ukraine"

Trump has his opinions on Ukraine and we may or not agree with them. What should he do? Go to war with Russia over Crimea? The US isnt the world police nor has a reason to step in (Ukraine isnt in NATO) and Trump ran on ending wars.

"He attempted to blackmail Zelenskyy by withholding weapons that have been the only thing keeping Russian tanks at bay so far."

That isnt good I agree. He did so trying to apply pressure to have Bidens son investigated. And for good reason. For example a laptop that does not exist and the FBI didnt have turned out to be yes they had it and was sitting on it seemingly for political reasons. This being one of the agencies which had been used as a weapon against Trumps election pressing a document commissioned by the dems they knew to be fake as an excuse for wiretaps and public discrediting. Or the meeting that didnt happen between Biden and Vadym Pozharskyi. Or Biden pressuring Ukraine to get rid of a prosecutor by withholding funds.

"Putin clearly has some compromat on him"

Why? And if so does he have something more on Biden (removed nord stream sanctions)? Obama left Syria to Russia, maybe he is compromised? Not wanting to alienate some nutter while trying to get Europe to take NATO seriously doesnt sound like a stooge to me. The dems cooperating with the Russians to stitch up a false report against Trump for Hillary's campaign seems more corrupt.

"If Putin is killed by his own staff or forced out"

Personally I am hoping for a third option. If he is killed or replaced we could end up with someone just as bad or worse, but if Putins ass is beat so badly he puts his tail between his legs and retreats to Russia that could bring peace for some time.

"Trump will be very concerned who gets their hands on that information"

The scary part about this conspiracy theory is how little it hangs on. Information that has no proof of existence and an existence that can never be disproved is considered worse than actual factual corruption by the democrats. The weaponising of the countries security apparatus being used on a presidential candidate. The selective releasing of information to imply corruption while withholding evidence of corruption. The monster under the bed is more scary than the physical reality of a beating.

[Anonymous Coward]

China might be playing pal for now, but being in a position where they can dictate terms to Russia (because no bugger else wants to buy Russian) one would anticipate Chinese demands for lower-cost access to those Russian raw materials, possibly straining the relationship.

Russia seriously needs to consider it's situation in the far east. There are a disproportionate number of Chinese immigrants into Russian territory working in those areas; and, if there's one thing we have confirmed at least twice over, Putin is intolerant of alien cultures. There are strategic interests in that region, ports, oil, and manufacturing. The SU-27 for example, was made in Komsomomol-on-Amur, as are some Russian shipbuilding facilities. (China, of course, makes it's own clone of the SU-27 and has modernised variants).

Russia/China has been, and remains an absolutely credible scenario for a Nuke fight. Possibly even one of the stronger candidates for one.

Both states being Pariahs does to a certain extent has put them into the same bed, though they have had upsets in the past and there is no reason to think one could not occur again. Diplomacy, the sort that is not usually seen until way after the event, can have far reaching impacts. Vietnam never got the SA-3 SAM off the Soviets due to clever diplomacy on the part of the US creating division between notional allies.

One little-discussed item is the status of Russia in a China/Taiwan conflict. Or even in a North Korea/South Korea. I am sure the tinpot dictator is eyeing up the impotence of the NATO response and considering making a move. (Remembering that Japan was persuaded to commit to Yamamoto's plan by the apparent successes of the Germans and increasing resource shortfall).

In the Star Trek Timeline; Irish reunification is listed as happening about "now". And WWIII in a couple years time.

I'm probably not alone in thinking things are looking scarily accurate to meet that schedule, at the whims of a few rich gits with too much personal power.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

This is a total win for China

America has to start being nice to them to keep them onside for sanctions. What Russia is allowed to export can now only go to China who are presumably now 'negotiating' a 90% discount.

Russia's army has demonstrated it is totally crap. The next map redraw is going to be Russia east of the Urals becoming China

[A.P. Veening]

The next map redraw is going to be Russia east of the Urals becoming China

Not only that, at the same redraw Russia west of the Urals is going to be divided up between a couple of countries that are completely fed up with Russia after a couple of centuries of aggression (about all neighbours except for Belarus, which may suffer the same fate).

[DevOpsTimothyC]

Huawei?

So are they going to drop all the sanctions against Huawei and let them sell networking kit to ISP's again?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Huawei?

No. Never in this reality.

It's what passes for Western negotiation these days: "the answer is no, what's the question".

Guaranteed to lead to bad outcomes.

[martinusher]

You're Next

If nothing else this war has served notice about just how much power is in the hands of the US if you're playing at being a Global Citizen. Sanctions have already been a fact of life in Russia for years -- they were the second most sanctioned country after Iran up to last week -- and since China has already been hit with them the writing's definitely on the wall for them. There is no upside for them helping the US. The tariffs are still in place, despite them being neatly turned around to bounce back at us (we're paying for them through a noticeable blip in inflation).

This war is really about global hegemony. We've got into the habit of assuming that our "rules based order" is paramount even though the rules are set up to benefit us (actually, it benefits 'the money' -- our, US, citizens pay the eventual price like every other ordinary person does). We freely sanction countries we don't approve of, forgetting that sanctions are in themselves a form of warfare, especially when they're enforced extraterritorially. To understand how low we can go just look at Afghanistan; we propped up a useless puppet government for years, we negotiated a relatively peaceful effort with the defacto government and when we left we pulled the rug out from under their economy, leaving their people to starve ("until they've seen the error of their ways") and stealing what few foreign reserves they had. Afghanistan isn't the only country we've left like this -- whenever things don't go our way we lay waste to the place both physically and economically. Someone has to eventually say "No!". Whether it was a good time for the Russians we'll leave for history.

[Zolko]

Re: You're Next

This war is really about global hegemony

actually, I think that this war is about the world post peak-oil. And Russians have plenty of that, everyone will want some of it. Most people seem to think in short time-span, the war is not even 1 week old.

Also, Russia and Ukraine export 30% of all wheat in the world market ... imagine what will happen when 2 billion people (Africa + Middle-East) begin to be hungry in a couple of months ? Where do you think will all these hungry and angry people try to go ? And who do you think the Russians will sell that food to : countries that participate in the sanctions, probably not so much.

I'm quite sure Putin and the Russians have made their homework on these questions. Unfortunately, I'm not sure that the "western leaders" did theirs.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: You're Next

> This war is really about global hegemony.

No, this war is about Russia attacking and invading a sovereign and independent country that posed no threat to anyone.

Ukraine's borders were guaranteed by the Minsk Accords, and Russia was one of the guarantors. Membership in NATO for any country - including Ukraine - requires no border or territorial disputes with anyone.

Please take your idiotic shitshow propaganda elsewhere.

[crayon]

Re: You're Next

Funny you should mention the Minsk Accords (no it does not directly guarantee Ukraine's borders). Under Minsk II, there was a timeline of sequential steps that parties to the conflict were supposed to carry out. First and foremost was a ceasefire - even this first step was a fail. Instead Kiev wanted to jump straight to the nearly last step - restoring control of Ukraine's border (with Russia) - bypassing the step which called for local elections.

For the past 7, the west conveniently "forgot" about Minsk II. Since it was signed, Kiev made no efforts at all to implement it. Look up the OSCE reports on the violations of the ceasefire. A week before Russia's special operations Putin again reminded the west (if they would listen) that the way to peace in Ukraine is through Minsk II. Zelensky when asked about Minsk II replied that he would never implement it, furthermore as he didn't even know who the leaders of the 2 breakaway republics were he had no-one to talk to.

Since the path to a peaceful settlement was not going to happen - the UK and US wouldn't allow Zelensky to implement it, Ukraine's own Nazi elements were openly threatening Zelenksy with consequences should he implement it - Russia decided to commence special operations.

And surprise surprise, suddenly the west lost it's collective amnesia and remembered Minsk II and declared that it was Russia that had destroyed it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: You're Next

> Since the path to a peaceful settlement was not going to happen - the UK and US wouldn't allow Zelensky to implement it [ ... ]

Uh-huh.

The primary reason why Minsk II could not be implemented is because Russia financed and maintained an armed conflict in the Donbas region of Ukraine. Effectively granting Russia veto power over Ukraine's NATO membership. That conflict alone was enough to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO. On top of that, there was the annexation of Crimea - also by Russia, which wasn't recognized internationally, and which created another border conflict for Ukraine.

You said your piece. Now fuck off. You'll be more successful working for the TASS News Service - if one can call it that.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: You're Next

"Russia decided to commence special operations."

The fact you used that phrase with no trace of irony says more about you and what you posed than anything else possibly could.

[adam 40]

Re: You're Next

Special Operation Storm-333

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Storm-333

[Anonymous Coward]

There is absolutely no way...

...that China did not give Putin the nod about this invasion.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: There is absolutely no way...

But as an ally or enemy?

I suspect it was entirely self interest.

China wins either way.

[Anonymous Coward]

Since October, the end of the winter Paralympics has been earmarked in certain circles as when Pacific activities will start in earnest. The Russians started amassing troops at that time which appeared to be coordinated as a potential attempt to open two future invasions within weeks of each other. The forecasting in October pointed to the end of the Olympics; lets see if sanctions and international unity on Russia are sufficient to change minds away from an invasion in Asia.

[Anonymous Coward]

rail cargo shipments from China to Europe, through Russia

Yeah I'm sure that's going to happen now.

Good luck with that.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: rail cargo shipments from China to Europe, through Russia

Europe is still importing gas. As Russia gets more desperate for hard currency and less able to say no to China then rates on the run might actually drop

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: rail cargo shipments from China to Europe, through Russia

> Europe is still importing gas.

Via train? From China?

The Nord Stream 2 pipeline is dead.

The Nord Stream pipeline is still operational.

However, Germany announced three days ago it is building two new LNG terminals. And that will be the end of the Nord Stream pipeline and of Germany's dependence on Russian gas.

France and Italy can build LNG terminals too. And France announced last month it is building new nuclear power plants, which means (a) their own dependence on Russian gas will gradually decrease and (b) surplus production can - and will - be sold to interested EU countries. They are, in fact, aiming for surplus production.

I'm not suggesting these problems will be solved overnight, but I am definitely suggesting that the EU's dependence on gas imports from Russia is on its way out.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: rail cargo shipments from China to Europe, through Russia

Meanwhile, the UK holds 4 days of gas storage.

And their politicians claim they have a world leading energy program.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: rail cargo shipments from China to Europe, through Russia

"France announced last month it is building new nuclear power plants,"

Let's hope they can do a better job than the UK. Over here, it takes 20 years just get from the initial announcement to turning the first sod. The the actual build gets delayed by everything from protestors to last minute design changes, to backers pulling out because it's taking too long. I mean, FFS, we'll probably have fusion plants on line elsewhere in the world before the UKs next fission plant come on line. And flying cars!