Russia - General Discussion.

[Ananda]

This happen because everyone still climb back from COVID recession. Everything still fragile, thus this sanctions just hammering recovery process. If you put too much costs to your still recovering economies, the reverse effect will happen.

How the war in Ukraine is hitting Europe's economy

As food and energy prices soar, what next for Europe’s economy? Real Economy speaks to a leading economist about the economic fallout caused by Russia's war with Ukraine and heads to Germany to visit an aerospace firm attempting to cope with supply chain disruption. #Realeconomy

www.euronews.com

The EU27 and eurozone economies had been on a path of strong recovery and growth coming out of the pandemic, but the EU has recently cut its forecast for growth and hiked its inflation forecast

Euro economy will only minimal impact cause of War ? The economist, market and more importantly data shown the opposite. Some analysts or even politicians that talk otherwise, clearly try to soften the blow perception.

I put quote on my previous post and quote from this article. Because it is bassically talking the same thing. It is the recovery after the Covid that's being hammered by this economic war. Some of mainstream media pundit try to picture Russian economy negative growth, while EU economy still in positive range, as prove that the economy does not affected much by war clearly in delusional mode. I don't know if they are actually read the data.

International Monetary Fund

Before the War IMF predict up to 4% recovery for advance EU economies and 8%+ recovery for emerging Europe economies. This after negative growth in 20/21 for advance economy and negative in 20 and small positive in emerging ones in 21. Moreover the inflations (that being projected increase due to recovery), now projected being double throughout this year.

So yes, the recovery cut in half (on advance Europe), while inflations going to be double. If there are those who still see this as the sign that the Ukraine war (and economic war that follow), has only small costs to EU. I do believe they see pararel universe data.

Practically the war loosing halve the recovery on advance Europe and around a third on emerging Europe. This in fact the mild projection, as some in market already predict can be even more. What's more important the costs that some advance Europe continue to beared next year.

If the purpose to hit Russian economy harder with this economic war, then yes it is. After all the collective west has much bigger economy. However if the talk saying the costs of economic war to West especially EU is just miniscule, then it is clearly day dreaming.

 

[Ananda]

Ukraine likely to end up looking a lot like Syria - Asia Times

The war in Ukraine has been burning for more than 100 days. But outside of the West, the conflict is a “quiet” war – burning away somewhere over the

asiatimes.com

Bit changing the sources perspective from non western and non russian. Yes Asia Times is HK based, and now all HK based media practically (especially by collective West) considered tainted with Beijing yoke. Still it is shown more or less how the world outside collective West see this War.

 

[Vivendi]

The latest from Putin:

President Vladimir Putin: There is no in-between, no intermediate state: either a country is #sovereign, or it is a #colony, no matter what the colonies are called. And a colony has no historical prospects. If a country is not able to make sovereign decisions - it's a colony.

MFA Russia on Twitter: " President Vladimir Putin https://t.co/9WNeji0GGL" / Twitter

Former "colonies" of Russia should take notice of this.

 

[STURM]

Ukraine likely to end up looking a lot like Syria - Asia Times

The war in Ukraine has been burning for more than 100 days. But outside of the West, the conflict is a “quiet” war – burning away somewhere over the

asiatimes.com

It's also starting to look a lot like Mosul which wasn't flattened by Russian ordnance.

 

[Dead Money]

The latest from Putin:

President Vladimir Putin: There is no in-between, no intermediate state: either a country is #sovereign, or it is a #colony, no matter what the colonies are called. And a colony has no historical prospects. If a country is not able to make sovereign decisions - it's a colony.

MFA Russia on Twitter: " President Vladimir Putin https://t.co/9WNeji0GGL" / Twitter

Former "colonies" of Russia should take notice of this.

Which just goes to show what a smoke and mirrors game Russian "security concerns' are. Putin's only security concern is which neighbours might become strong enough to resist his planned reconquest.

 

[Ananda]

Russia and the Ottoman Empire: The Geopolitical Dimension

Published in Russian Studies in History (Vol. 57, No. 2, 2018)

www.tandfonline.com

This is bit few years old historical assessment. Initially thinking to put it in Ukraine War thread, as this perhaps can shown on Russia and Turkey interaction during this War. However I decided to put in here, as this is also shown base phycological thinking on Russian toward West, already exists since Russian Empire, and continue toward USSR and RF era.

Assessment comparing Russian Empire with Ottoman Empire still relevant until now, as both Russia and Turkey consider themselves as legitimate successor toward both empires. Tsar Putin and Erdo Sultan have infact talking bring back each nation glorious imperial past, as way to gaining support domestically.

Both Russia and the Ottoman Turks faced the problem of backwardness vis-à-vis the West.

One of the point that the article put as both have problem with Western advancement.

notwithstanding tensions Russia never questioned Ottoman sovereignty over the straits, because it was the Turks who could close them to foreign shipping in case of Russia’s conflict with European powers. At the same time the Ottoman policy of playing off Russia against the other powers proved to be flexible enough.

Both asside tension with each other, however also always balancing each other, due to their common 'suspicion' toward West. EU keep put down Turkey joining effort just put Turkey (as a Nation not just Erdo Sultan), more and more believe that they have to carve their own way independent from West. Turkey media and forums also always put that Europe will never agree on Turkey in NATO wholeheartedly and only US is what matter for Turkey continue in NATO. So the way I see the Turkey continue objection toward Sweden and Finland is bargaining toward US and not other Euro.

Because basically the way I read their historical assessment just like Russia, Turkey always see other European will never accept them. Thus both always going to put distance to guard themselves against Europe.

Russia seems understand that, which why Russia keep maintain open relationship with Turkey, knowing Turkey will always play double side as they used to do at Ottoman times.

This shown why Russia still shown enough confidence that even the EU and US plus allies keep isolating them, the rest of the World won't do that. After all if EU can't gain full trust from their southern NATO allies, let alone the middle East and North Africa, how they can get that from most of the World ?

This in the end asside the results of the War in the ground (as primary factor), can determine for any diplomatic compromise that will follow. Tsar Putin can dream on Russian Empire glory days, but just like Erdo Sultan dreaming on Ottoman glories, I believe both will still see the realities on the ground.

But Russia will never be integrated with Western Europe dominate EU, as like Turkey. Historical bad blood (even before this war) already make sure it will never happen.

Argument that saying Russia destroy working relationship with West that they're build since 90's, in my sense only half right. Half right, because it is very doubtful EU will ever accept Russia as equal partner. Just like with Turkey, EU deep down will always suspicious on both of them, and seems the feeling are mutuals.

In the end it is US that need to come out, if any diplomatic solution ever come out. Again the primary factor to come to that is always the result of the war in the ground, and more importantly willingness of both Ukraine and Russia on how long they want to keep bleeding.

 

[Vivendi]

Russia and the Ottoman Empire: The Geopolitical Dimension

Published in Russian Studies in History (Vol. 57, No. 2, 2018)

www.tandfonline.com

EU keep put down Turkey joining effort just put Turkey (as a Nation not just Erdo Sultan), more and more believe that they have to carve their own way independent from West. Turkey media and forums also always put that Europe will never agree on Turkey in NATO wholeheartedly and only US is what matter for Turkey continue in NATO. So the way I see the Turkey continue objection toward Sweden and Finland is bargaining toward US and not other Euro.

EU has several requirements that needs to be met before a country can be let in. Turkey has the last few years moved further away from meeting those requirements. Those requirements are also the reason why EU has made it clear that it will take some time before Ukraine is ready to join.

"Turkey is a key strategic partner of the EU on issues such as migration, security, counter-terrorism, and the economy, but has been backsliding in the areas of democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights. In response, the General Affairs Council decided in June 2018 that accession negotiations with Turkey are effectively frozen. " Turkey (europa.eu)

"Erdogan and his AKP, a conservative party with Islamist roots, came to power in 2002, following a decade marked by political instability and a financial crisis. The AKP advanced economic and political reforms to bring Turkey closer in line with EU standards, and the country’s economy grew by 7.5 percent on average annually between 2001 and 2011. On foreign policy, the AKP’s motto was “zero problems with neighbors,” and Ankara aimed to expand Turkey’s influence by building trade ties, encouraging democracy, and emphasizing its Islamic identity.

But by the late 2000s, the AKP had become more authoritarian. It consolidated control over media organizations, purged the military of perceived dissidents, prosecuted and jailed critics, and quashed protests. In 2016, Erdogan seized on an attempted military coup to crack down further on his perceived opponents, who he alleges are led by Fethullah Gulen, a cleric living in exile in the United States who was once Erdogan’s ally. Through a referendum the following year, Erdogan replaced the country’s parliamentary system with a presidential one; abolished the office of prime minister, among other major changes; and effectively rendered himself Turkey’s sole power holder.

Erdogan has engineered an assertive shift in foreign policy that focuses on expanding Turkey’s military and diplomatic footprint. To this end, Turkey has launched military interventions in countries including Azerbaijan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria; supplied partners such as Ethiopia and Ukraine with drones; and built Islamic schools abroad." Turkey’s Growing Foreign Policy Ambitions | Council on Foreign Relations (cfr.org)

If Turkey had decided to work towards meeting EU requirements instead of basically doing the opposite the last 10-15 years, the relationship to EU would have been very different. The EU has strict requirements regarding freedom of expression, democratic processes, legal processes, etc.

Regarding trust and Turkey: A recent and highly relevant example is that both Sweden and Finland asked Turkey if they would support NATO membership before they sent the letters to NATO to start the application process. Naïve Scandinavians actually believed what they were told repeatedly (and not just by Erdogan in person but also at various levels in the Turkish administration): Turkey said they would not cause any problems and support the applications. Clearly Turkey lied, and clearly Finland and Sweden is losing trust in Turkey as a result. Turkey is still blocking negotiations, BTW: Turkey rejects Nato offer of trilateral talks with Sweden and Finland | Financial Times

Argument that saying Russia destroy working relationship with West that they're build since 90's, in my sense only half right. Half right, because it is very doubtful EU will ever accept Russia as equal partner. Just like with Turkey, EU deep down will always suspicious on both of them, and seems the feeling are mutuals.

Many EU countries including Germany, France, Italy worked hard to improve relations to Russia. The war in 2008 and even more so the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, and the involvement in Eastern Ukraine the same year, not to forget killing of (or trying to kill) several people in Western countries, and interference in democratic processes in several Western countries clearly did not build confidence. In spite of all of this, Germany and others insisted on working towards "normalizing" the relationship. However, all trust and hope of normalizing the relationship for a long time to come, vanished February 24 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine (again) in spite of telling Macron just hours before that they had no intentions of doing so.

Since you use soft words like "suspicious" etc. I would also like to bring a few other arguments in. The world of sports is very important to many people, and although many argue that politics should stay out of it, that's clearly not the case in Russia. As you are well aware Russia has a horrible track record of organized, state sponsored cheating over many many years. From Sochi to Beijing: Russia's tainted history of doping at Olympics - Sports News (wionews.com) Timeline of Russia’s doping cases and cover-ups - OlympicTalk | NBC Sports

One of the whistle blowers is living a fearful life in the US, afraid that Russia will find and kill him: ‘The Kremlin wants me dead’: Russia's sports doping whistleblower speaks out | Russia | The Guardian

Other countries have been cheating in sports as well -- however to my knowledge nobody has done as systematic in so many different sports and over so many years as Russia (perhaps the exception is the USSR). It is also disconcerting that the whistleblower Grigory Rodchenkov needs 24/7 FBI protection to stay alive -- after all it's "just about sports" right? Still Russia wants to kill him.

It is an uphill struggle to build trust when you look at the whole picture.... Enough is enough. Russia is out in the cold and must remain there until Russia changes behavior. Trust has to be earned, at least in the "Western cultures". Perhaps this is different in the "Asian cultures"?

 

[Ananda]

Russia is out in the cold and must remain there until Russia changes behavior. Trust has to be earned, at least in the "Western cultures". Perhaps this is different in the "Asian cultures"?

What do you think Russia will ever trust West again. So don't bring this western superiority attitude. Don't bring Asian Cultures vs Western Cultures on how on dealing with Trust.

I already put in this thread the bad blood between West and Russia already happen. Trust come to both ways, and don't bring this Western feel betrayed by Russia. Russia also have same feeling to the West. Again EU is also not work on similar trust level toward Russia and Turkey from begining (relative to other European now in EU). Don't talk about Erdogan as reason for EU not trusting Turkey. Face it EU will never accept Turkey even before Erdogan when they can accept country like Bulgaria or other Eastern Euro when their economy and legal infrastructure even worse then Turkey.

So don't talk on mighty western value toward Russia and Turkey. The reason is simple, EU not going to treat Russia and Turkey at the same level with other European. Why then EU will expect Russia and Turkey will trust EU whole ?

Trust work both ways.

 

[STURM]

Erdogan has engineered an assertive shift in foreign policy that focuses on expanding Turkey’s military and diplomatic footprint. To this end, Turkey has launched military interventions in countries including Azerbaijan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria; supplied partners such as Ethiopia and Ukraine with drones; and built Islamic schools abroad." Turkey’s Growing Foreign Policy Ambitions | Council on Foreign Relations (cfr.org)

So? Are you suggesting that Turkey should not be allowed to shift its ''foreign policy'' to expand its ''military and diplomatic footprint''? Or is it only acceptable when it's in line with the interests of Turkey's Western partners? As for ''Islamic schools abroad'' it's part of it's policy of spreading goodwill and the influence that comes with it but it does not spread ideology.

Clearly Turkey lied, and clearly Finland and Sweden is losing trust in Turkey as a result. Turkey is still blocking negotiations

Irrespective; the fact remains that Turkish acquiescence [as per NATO rules where each member has to commonly agree] is needed and even
NATO 's Secretary General has openly acknowledged that Turkey's security concerns are legitimate. Also note that years before Finland and Sweden had even openly considered NATO membership; Turkey had been complaining about certain things effecting the bilateral relationship. No I'm not suggesting that the Turks are angels; merely that they aren't the only ones who get assertive or perhaps a wee bit unreasonable when it comes to pursuing national interests/security goals.

NATO’s Stoltenberg says Turkey’s security concerns are legitimate

Sweden and Finland applied to join NATO, but face opposition from Turkey, which accuses them of supporting ‘terrorists’.

www.aljazeera.com

“These are legitimate concerns. This is about terrorism, it’s about weapons exports,” Stoltenberg told a joint news conference on Sunday with Finnish President Sauli Niinisto in Naantali, Finland. Stoltenberg said Turkey was a key NATO ally due to its strategic location on the Black Sea between Europe and the Middle East, and he cited the support Ankara has provided to Ukraine since Russia invaded on February 24.' We have to remember and understand that no NATO ally has suffered more terrorist attacks than Turkiye,” Stoltenberg said, using the Turkish word for the country’s name, as preferred by Turkey and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.''

On trust; indeed trust is essential and vital between partners/allies/friends but ultimately ''trust'' can also be an issue between other NATO members which are widely seen as more trustworthy than Turkey. All countries ''lie'' and engage in behaviour they shouldn't - let's not make it sound that this is unique to Turkey.

U.S. spied on Merkel and other Europeans through Danish cables - broadcaster DR

The U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) used a partnership with Denmark's foreign intelligence unit to spy on senior officials of neighbouring countries, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Danish state broadcaster DR said.

www.reuters.com

Many EU countries including Germany, France, Italy worked hard to improve relations to Russia. T

Over the past few decade since the end of the Cold War the Russians also ''worked hard to improve relations'' and cooperated in various areas. Yes I know in your narrative it's all the fault of the Russians and only the Russians but I'm merely pointing something out; not interested in a who's right or wrong discussion or who holds a monopoly on truth and righteousness.

Trust has to be earned, at least in the "Western cultures". Perhaps this is different in the "Asian cultures"?

I suspect you know fully well it's not; earning trust is universal....

Also the term ''Asian'' is a broad one; technically Arabs are ''Asian'' being in the ''Middle East'' but in the Asia Pacific an 'Asian' in say Myanmar could be very different from say an ''Asian' in the Korean peninsular.

 

[SolarWind]

I think one reason for this dichotomy in Russia's behavior was a divergence in Russian central leadership's intent and the actions of Russian local authorities. There is a distinctive lack of democratic institutions in Russia and freedom of the press is non-existent. All individuals pushing diverging opinions are systematically suppressed, discredited, and persecuted. As a result, information must reach the top in a vulnerable diminished state, leading to irrational diplomatic behavior. There is a term in Russia "access to the body", which means access to Putin himself, of course implying the ability to brief him on events while injecting opinion. I would be interested to hear commentary on this from other members if anyone agrees or disagrees.

 

[T.C.P]

Erdogan has engineered an assertive shift in foreign policy that focuses on expanding Turkey’s military and diplomatic footprint. To this end, Turkey has launched military interventions in countries including Azerbaijan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria; supplied partners such as Ethiopia and Ukraine with drones; and built Islamic schools abroad." Turkey’s Growing Foreign Policy Ambitions | Council on Foreign Relations (cfr.org)

Since the other members have replied to the various points on your post, I will just focus on the part about Islamic schools.

Preface- I am an atheist in a country where the population is 90% muslims and where 99% of the population are religious one way or the other, and if you made people vote on whethere aethists should be hanged outright or not, a good chunk would vote for me to be hanged. This is despite my country being one of the most progressive muslim majority countries( significant female labour force participation, multiple women head of governments, advanced transexual rights movements etc). My country is Bangladesh.

I start with this anecdote, just to ensure that there is no confusion about my stance on religious schools. That being said, turkish Islamic schools are "progressive". What do I mean by this? The countries that turkey builds the schools in, have domestic religious schools ( and non religious schools) which are significantly more regressive and for lack of a better phrase, more 'fucked up'. Hell the Turkish schools built in my country are probably more progressive than the average 'secular schools'. The Turkish brand of Islam, known in my country as the 'hanafi'school of thought is the predominant islamic influence and it is more prgressive and lenient than most. Its a farcry from the core mid east wahabi schools. There is a reason, why Turkey is the only large muslim country where there are pride events. A pride march in the capital of my country would lead to a genuine massacre and my country is one of the most progressive muslim majority countries in the world.

So, Turkey building Islamic schools is not only something that is not a threat to the 'Western' goals, but something that the West should be happy about. This level of nuance is missing in the west. To you, just the words 'building Islamic schools' is a redflag and something you negatively view Turkey for, without taking into consideration the actual impacts of these schools. Its this type of view, why we 'Asians' as you put it, and most non Westerners righfully think of you as condescending. Turkey building their relgiious schools around the Islamic world has a more progressive impact than American "charity" groups building Baptist schools in Africa which lead to increased homophobic attacks and policies.

Regarding use of Turkish military diplomacy, what is wrong with that? Turkey is finally being a competitor and alternate supplier of higher end military gear to Russia and China. For poor countries like mine, Western gear is too expensive to buy and manitain and comes with too many strings. France is the only country that actually sells the full specification we want to get without hamstringing us with 10000 strings and requirements, but unfortunately, their gear is too expensive for the likes of us. Turkey has become a key supplier filling an important niche. Their after sales support is much better than the Russian and Chinese so far and Turkey is also more willing to share the technology. With the current situation of Russia, if it was not for Turkey we would be dependent on Chinese suppliers alone and monopoly is never a good thing. The Turkish competition in this market will hopefully push the Chinese to improve their after sales support as well.

@T.C.P Well said.

Ngatimozart.

 

[swerve]

What about South Korea?

Though I suppose most of their stuff probably has US content & restrictions to match.

 

[T.C.P]

What about South Korea?

Though I suppose most of their stuff probably has US content & restrictions to match.

We are pretty close to South Korea, but the last major purchase we did from them was our flagship, the Ulsan Mod frigate. Korean gear is a bit more on the expensive side when compared to Chinese and Turkish projects. Chinese are better when it comes to ships( thanks to all the ex PLAN Jianghu and Jiangweii they are selling off), and their ships come with all Chinese weapons configs, C-802 and C-704 are proven and China is willing to share the tech on both. Our Ulsan uses Italian missiles. Turkey is cheaper when it comes to Artillery, rockets and drones. A lot of people are looking at Byraktars sales, but Roketsan is low key making a huge headway in the international market. Their long range Tiger MLRS have been received well and I know that talks are ongoing for the ATMACA. Now whether the ATMACA are for the new indigenous frigate/LPC plans or to even upgrade the Ulsan, I dont know yet. This info is very recent. Turkey's aftersales support has been really good so far. China is now seeting up a missile maintainance factory for the C-704 and the Fm-90 after we started looking more closely at Turkish AD systems, now whether these two things are related are pure speculation, but no doubt that China is feeling the competition. Tb-2 sales are eating up the markets where the chinese Ch-4 and other drones previously had no competititon.

The Kf-21 though could be a game changer for the South Koreans though . We have not moved in any direction at all as far as our MRCA acquisition goes. The Kf-21 would be the perfect fighter for pretty much any developing nation.One key thing to consider when it comes to fighter aircraft acquisition is politics. Its what is preventing us from getting J-10s (issues with India) or Jf-17s ( our own issue with Pakistan), and less said about the politics of acquiring western aircraft the better. The Koreans sit in the sweet spot that no one domestically or internationally are opposed to them (as far as Bangladesh is concerned). And they could bypass a lot of the political issues when it comes to selling aircraft

 

[Vivendi]

Irrespective; the fact remains that Turkish acquiescence [as per NATO rules where each member has to commonly agree] is needed and even
NATO 's Secretary General has openly acknowledged that Turkey's security concerns are legitimate. Also note that years before Finland and Sweden had even openly considered NATO membership; Turkey had been complaining about certain things effecting the bilateral relationship. No I'm not suggesting that the Turks are angels; merely that they aren't the only ones who get assertive or perhaps a wee bit unreasonable when it comes to pursuing national interests/security goals.

I did not question Turkey's legitimate security issues. The topic was on "trust" and I merely pointed out that the way Turkey acted, was not trust-building. Had Turkey told Sw/Fi upfront that issues had to be addressed before they would accept Sw/Fi as NATO members it would have been a completely different story, and it would have been trust-building. Sw/Fi have legitimate concerns about what Russia might do in the period between NATO application and NATO membership granted. Turkey has created a hostage situation to get maximum leverage.

 

[STURM]

I merely pointed out that the question of "trust" applies to everybody and not just Turkey; that this issue of arms embargoes or restrictions and PKK people is nothing new and that Turkey isn't the only country which uses various means to meet its goals.

 

[Ananda]

Saudi Arabia cuts back oil supplies to China, amid global shift in energy supplies

Saudi is cutting down its oil supplies to China, in what is a fresh reallocation of its crude supplies to customers worldwide amid the shifting distribution of Russian oil. According...

www.middleeastmonitor.com

This is the example of market shifting that I've mention in this thread several times ago. When some of Russian oil being cut by their Euro buyers, then Russia just go find new buyers. In this case China, which Russia giving them discount.

In the mean time Saudi which only want to sell on full market price, knows they are being under cut in Chinese market by Russian. However does not matter, since the Euro customers need more oil to exchange Russian supply.

This is what happen on commodities market like Hyrocarbon. The supply is finite and the demand increasing due to increase economic activities after Covid. More importantly people still need oil and gas (hydrocarbon), no matter what. While this talk of green energy still years away at the soonest to be able as alternative.

Thus the US and Collective West dream to deprive Russian from Hydrocarbon and other commodities revenues, simply will not work. Market just shifting, and the more Euro taking oil from other suppliers in middle east or Africa, the more Asian market will take Russian ones.

New market equilibrium will be reach afterall, it is just matter time to adjust.

 

[SolarWind]

Saudi Arabia cuts back oil supplies to China, amid global shift in energy supplies

Saudi is cutting down its oil supplies to China, in what is a fresh reallocation of its crude supplies to customers worldwide amid the shifting distribution of Russian oil. According...

www.middleeastmonitor.com

This is the example of market shifting that I've mention in this thread several times ago. When some of Russian oil being cut by their Euro buyers, then Russia just go find new buyers. In this case China, which Russia giving them discount.

In the mean time Saudi which only want to sell on full market price, knows they are being under cut in Chinese market by Russian. However does not matter, since the Euro customers need more oil to exchange Russian supply.

This is what happen on commodities market like Hyrocarbon. The supply is finite and the demand increasing due to increase economic activities after Covid. More importantly people still need oil and gas (hydrocarbon), no matter what. While this talk of green energy still years away at the soonest to be able as alternative.

Thus the US and Collective West dream to deprive Russian from Hydrocarbon and other commodities revenues, simply will not work. Market just shifting, and the more Euro taking oil from other suppliers in middle east or Africa, the more Asian market will take Russian ones.

New market equilibrium will be reach afterall, it is just matter time to adjust.

The new market equilibrium will more likely than not involve reductions in Russia's total oil exports and in terms of world market share. Their oil will also be priced less than what it would have been if they were still able to export to North America and Europe. You say so yourself, because they can no longer sell to the collective West, they have to pay China to switch suppliers in the form of a discount. This price cut should be effective as long as sanctions hold, lest other players like Saudi Arabia displace Russian oil on the Chinese market again.

 

[Arji]

This price cut should be effective as long as sanctions hold, lest other players like Saudi Arabia displace Russian oil on the Chinese market again.

I'm kind of an amateur when it comes to international commodity trade, so correct me if I'm wrong.

The thing is, the way I see it, the sanction increase the price of energy to an extent that the Russian could still make considerable profit selling their product at below market price. I don't know to what extend though (perhaps someone more knowledgeable could clarify), it could be that these profits are less than what they could be getting had they are not sanctioned by the west, perhaps not, or perhaps their profit actually increase. From what I've read, OPEC are willing to increase production to drive down the price of oil, but to what extend? With the risk of recession thanks to the recent interest rate hike by the fed, would that not drive demand for oil down? Based on my own limited knowledge and logic, The only way for Saudi to displace Russian oil in Chinese market, is if the market price for it becomes competitive with respect to Russian oil, because I doubt the Saudi wants to sell them at anything other than the market price. So they have to increase production, but they don't want to tank the price of oil too much, which is likely with risk of global recession in the horizon. So even with increased production, I doubt the price of oil will be competitive with what Russian is offering, and as long as the situation remains the same, there will always countries, especially poorer ones, that will look to Russian source to meet their domestic needs.

 

[Ananda]

new market equilibrium will more likely than not involve declines in Russia's total oil exports and in terms of world market share.

It depends with the overall Global market demand some years in the future. If the 'greenies' wishes comes through, that the green energy will replace most of the hydrocarbon, then the most efficient oil producers that will keep the market (whatever left of that).

However with demand of the energy rising, even green energy can replace some hydrocarbon demand on some more advanced economy, doesn't mean the rest of the world will transfer into that direction for at least another decade or two.

I don't see even from EU and North America (unless they go big on nuclear again), those 'other' green energy can replace much of hydrocarbon demand. Thus if they cut off Russia, then they will take supply from other producers. Which means some other buyers still have to go to Russia.

This discount price that Russia done, is an incentive from them to entices new buyers. One of the effect of sanction that work well from Collective West actually not cutting off Oil procurement from Russia, but creating difficulty for Russia on payment system and Insurance coverage. This's which making the logistics costs on getting Russian oil increase, which in turn making Russia offer discounts.

However it is just part of market adjustment. There will be adjustment on Tankers and payment system also different insurance coverage later on. The new equilibrium perhaps going to make Russian still provide discount for some market, but I don't think it will be for all.

This price cut should be effective as long as sanctions hold, lest other players like Saudi Arabia displace Russian oil on the Chinese market again.

If that happen, then it's means West still buying Russian oil. If not, where they can get the oil if other producers like Saudi fill most of Asian market demand again. Again that's where the market shift comes. The supplies is finite, then if Middle east still send most their Hydrocarbon to Asia (as it is now), it will happen if EU already got other Oil. Remember most American oil (not US oil, but continent of America), also already slotted for North American demand (despite huge North America production).

So where EU will get Russian oil replacement if not most from Middle East ? Then how Asian market will get oil if supply from Middle East taken by Euro ? The answer is Russia. That's how market work.

 

[Ananda]

With the risk of recession thanks to the recent interest rate hike by the fed, would that not drive demand for oil down?

Very probable, the demand increase because the global economy begin to recover from COVID. However if this war (including trade war that follows) create additional costs that hit back this fragile recovery too much, then the demand will goes down. This off course will push down the price and oil production.

That's why most oil producers (not just OPEC, but also North American producers) reluctant to increase the production right away, no matter how hard Biden ask. Every market players still want to calculate where this new equilibrium will end, and how far the adjustment costs will be.

Besides with low oil prices few years back, the oil producers got hit hard. Now it's time for them to get pay back. That's including Russia, afterall their discount still give them heathy margin (imagine the margin the Rich Gulf kingdoms get).