The European Commission (EC) is inactive. She does not want to influence the situation with gas prices in any way, said the deputy of the European Parliament, Pole Bogdan Zonca. The statement is quite obvious, but it is made by a representative of a country turning up its nose from Russian gas.
Blame and whip. The closer the European winter, the more active the public, experts and deputies of all stripes. They care for their peoples, compassionate chosen ones. And here is such a theme, continental, but what is already there, planetary. For the energy crisis is shaking not only old Europe. The symptoms spread to the whole world.
The rise in gas prices in Europe compared to last year amounted to many hundreds of percent, says MEP Bohdan Zhonca. In his opinion, there may be several reasons for this: low level of stocks in storage facilities, LNG shipments to Asian markets and “low level of supplies from Russia.” And the European Commission is silent, and its inertia undermines the EU’s efforts to ensure energy security and pursue a European green course, writesPole Zhonets. He is now interested in what measures the EC will take in connection with the risk of a gas crisis in the coming winter and how it will react to the rise in inflation. Well, what, excuse me, measures? The European Commission’s mandate does not include services for the extraction, processing and transportation of hydrocarbons. Nor does it deal with alternative energy supplies. So it is not very clear how a large bureaucratic structure should strain itself and begin to meet the expectations of the Polish MEP.
Attention is drawn to the attack on Russia, which maintains a “low level of supplies.” This is already, to put it mildly, not so: Russia has decided to increase shipments to Europe. But only the level of reserves in local UGS facilities is still far behind the norm. So Europe supplies LNG to Asia, which means that it was necessary to take care not to be left without raw materials. But here, of course, contracts.
Zhonets’s words sound as if he just now flew from the far past or from the far future. His rhetoric is free from such mossy conventions as: the Third Energy Package, a desperate fuss over gas supply routes from Russia, legislative restrictions on Russian gas, which are sometimes clearly discriminatory. As if there is no negative articulated in an emphatically sharp form to the mythical “Russian gas needle”. There is nothing and there was nothing.
And Russia, as is clear from the appeal of the MEP, clearly owes something to Europe, and clearly more than is spelled out in the contracts. This is a kind of business primitivism from the category “do we need to move?” Gentlemen, this is not done. This is the market – there will be negotiations. And it is far from the fact that Europe will get everything on the terms that it wants to have.
The EU has been trying to find a consolidated way out of this impasse for several months now. But nothing really comes out. Some time ago the Europeans were hatching the idea of a collective purchase of Ru-ssian gas. They greased the-mselves to Russia. They s-ay, “both the EU and Russia depend on each other in the field of energy.” These are the words of the chief Eur-opean diplomat Josep Bo-rrell. But Europe has long been accustomed to double standards. This, for example, when in every way one of the leading energy partners is branded, and then, as if nothing had happened, they try to work with him. Like, what are you doing, let’s do business.
No one remembers about Norwegian gas supplies, everyone somehow forgot about Qatari and American LNG at once. These stories are not sold in the media. Why are you, then, gentlemen, MEPs, drop a letter to the State Department, for example, or to the US Department of Energy : “We demand, they say, more and right now, submit it sooner.” Subordination does not allow?