Hacker News Reader

Comment by peoplefromibiza | Hacker News Reader

You're being downvoted, I can understand why, but there's some truth that must be addressed before deeming your comment completely bogus.

Gerhard Schröder, former German chancellor, was a big advocate for the Nord Stream pipeline and then was appointed in the board of Gazprom, the sole (Russian) shareholder of the aforementioned stream.

Germany paid the highest price when Russian gas was cut off and the government, led by a coalition that includes the Green party (die Grüne), had to open new coal mines.

Something was obviously wrong in our (the EU) energy policies.

View on HN

What is "wrong" about Germany buying cheap energy from a willing local producer, and profiting enormously from it?

In Washington's fever dream, where it is "right" that Germany should instead buy expensive energy that is shipped across the Atlantic and lose its industrial advantage as as result.

It is totally, comically absurd. Untethered from reality.

What is obviously wrong is that when Schröeder was appointed as the president of the board of Gazprom, Putin had already invaded Crimea.

For example...

edit: I'm not claiming Washington is better than Germany, I'm from Italy, we are still paying the price for both.

My claim is that EU policies were wrong because each country was playing its own game.

EU has problems because of massive foreign influence (mainly Washington), not because individual participant states promote their own interests, as they should.

It's hard enough to maintain a federation of neighbor states. It's impossible to do that while also catering to the whims of a distant superpower.

Could be, not wanna open that discussion, but teaming with Putin (Gazprom equals Putin) it's not the smartest of moves, especially if you are a former influential European politician.

Let's put it this way: there were (are) plans on every desk of every Prime Minister or President in Europe that say "we could let Putin take Ukraine and avoid a conflict that could harm us all".

I fail to see what is wrong about maintaining the spirit of the Budapest Memorandum. Since the events of 2014, it can't be totally restored, but the spirit can be reimplemented (by Minsk, etc). It seems that many thoughtful EU statesmen, like Schröder, believe that.

> I fail to see what is wrong about maintaining the spirit of the Budapest Memorandum.

> It seems that many thoughtful EU statesmen, like Schröder, believe that

I believe one doesn't maintain the spirit of the Budapest memorandum by entering the board of directors of the largest Russian gas supplier and becoming director of the board of Rosneft, largest Russian oil producer, years after Russia invaded Crimea. Don't you think?

But I concede Schroeder that he might have truly believed that he could keep Russia from invading Ukraine. Nonetheless mixing politics and business was a bad mistake on his part.

Because we now have 20/20 hindsight that Russia is an evil actor and would not reform. Therefore Germany should have spent the previous 10 years getting off Russian gas (leave nuclear power plants open is one obvious example)

If your geopolitical thesis includes the word "evil" you need to work harder on it. That word is meant for children's books. The real world is complex.

How would you describe Putin and Russian foreign policy? Bonus points for capturing it in one word.

Self-interested.

Like every other (sovereign) state.

Not bad - but it’s a very accommodating description for actions which are unlike the behaviour of other states in recent times.

Self-interest also implies that it works for Russia. It very clearly hasn’t, and could undo the regime.

The level of violence and aggression is like some mid/late 20th century empire building BS.

What is your definition of 'recent times'?

It's the US that took out international law and beat it to death in sight of the entire world.

> Self-interest also implies that it works for Russia.

define "works".

there's a big divide in the World on this war, it could be considered a victory for Putin, he made friends fight over it, turned allies into adversaries and made enemies even more suspicious of each other. We are at a peak high level of conflict, like we haven't seen in decades.

Not because of evilness though, but because it would make you look bad in hindsight.

An experienced politician should know better.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com