Sanctions, aller-retour

Brèves de crise

   Forum

Il y a 2 commentaires associés à cet article. Vous pouvez les consulter et réagir à votre tour.

   Imprimer

 684

Sanctions, aller-retour

MK. Bhadrakumar (voir le 31 juillet 2014) poursuit son enquête furieuse sur la situation entre la Russie et le bloc BAO, après le dernier train de sanctions décidé par les USA et l’Europe. Il constate les premiers effets indirects des sanctions, type-boomerang, avec l’annonce que Moscou cesse d’importer les fruits & légumes polonais (deux tiers de la production polonaise), – et alors, s’interroge-t-il, est-ce le président Obama qui va compenser le manque à gagner des Polonais, qui sont si proches de son cœur ? Ou bien Obama va-t-il dire aux Polonais : “Pour les compensations, adressez-vous à Bruxelles” ? «Is a vicious sanctions cycle beginning?»

Encore n’en est-on qu’aux hors d’œuvre. L’un des plats de résistance, c’est l’énergie, et tout ce qui va avec... «However, in this developing story, all eyes are on the template of the Tier Three sanctions involving transfer of ’sensitive technologies’ in the oil sector to Russia. The impression conveyed by Obama in his speech on Tuesday while announcing the sanctions is that Russian oil exploration and oil production will be badly hit. But Reuters has different story to tell in an insightful analysis on the state of play in the oil market, which suggests that it is a complicated story and Obama may have scored a self-goal.

»The three main conclusions drawn by the Reuters analysis: a) Russia has traditionally depended on Western technology as a matter of convenience, but will now be compelled to take the hard route and develop technologies on its own, which will only incrementally lead to an erosion of the West’s existing monopoly over such technology; b) China in particular will cash in on the situation and may turn out to be a wholesome winner here ultimately, and, c) The Russia sanctions may well come to signify the end of the West’s technology leadership in the oil sector.

»Curiously, oil experts have also questioned the basis of Obama’s hype. Let me quote at some length the expert opinion at the respected Peak Oil News: “The foreign policy wonks at the State Department may not understand that Russian oil production has just hit a post-USSR peak and will be declining anyway. The effect of the [US-EU] sanctions will be to speed the Russian decline, forcing up world oil prices as soon as US tight oil maxes out and goes into its inevitable nosedive in the 2017-2010 time frame. Russia, which will still be an oil exporter then, will benefit from higher prices (perhaps nearly enough to compensate for the loss of production resulting from the sanctions). But the US, which will still be one of the world’s top oil importers, will face a re-run of the 2008 oil shock that contributed to its financial crash.

»“No doubt State Department policy experts sincerely believe the recent hype about America as a new energy superpower capable of supplying Europe with oil and gas to replace Russia’s exports. Maybe the Europeans are foolish enough to have fallen for this delusion as well. But these will prove to be ruinous high-stakes bets. One can only hope that all the players will stir from these hallucinations before the game turns really ugly.”

»Quite obviously, the Europeans are not foolish. They put their foot down and insisted that Russian gas must be exempted from the sanctions package Obama proposed. The point is, European economies simply cannot do without Russian gas. Arguably, the shoe is on the other foot today. Will Russia retaliate by cutting off gas to Europe? Morgan Stanley analysts estimate that Moscow might choose such an option. Hmmm. Getting goose bumps? To my mind, however, there is no need to fear that. For one thing, the income from gas exports to Europe is good money for Russia, and, secondly, Moscow understands perfectly well that the major European countries — except Britain, perhaps — really don’t have their heart in what the thug is pressing them to do, but have gone along only because blood is, after all, thicker than water.

»This also seems to be Moscow’s understanding of the matrix. The most detailed Russian reaction to the Tier Three sanctions has come from Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at a media briefing in Moscow on Tuesday. Lavrov gave a cogent, lengthy resume of what really is going on behind the shadow play over Ukraine, underscoring that the US is deliberately calibrating the tensions by torpedoing all incipient peace tracks. He disclosed that Russia’s European partners have privately conveyed to Moscow their own misgivings about Obama’s game plan. Lavrov assessed in measured words that the European attitudes on sanctions against Russia are “artificial”.»

“Artificiel”, sans doute le mot est-il assez approprié pour définir l’attitude de tels ou tels Européens approuvant la décision de nouvelles sanctions-UE. Le problème est que, jusqu’ici, c’est tout le processus européen concernant cette crise qui est, du point de vue de la politique, marqué de la plus complète artificialité, avec l’essentiel de l’initiative laissé aux pressions constantes de l’opérationnalité bureaucratique des institutions européennes, et à celles du système de la communication (tout cela, beaucoup plus efficace que les pressions US) ; par conséquent, les sanctions sont prises, elles ne sont pas artificielles et c’est bien à partir d’elles que la situation évolue. La question est de savoir si l’un ou l’autre dirigeant du bloc BAO (de l’UE) voudra et/ou pourra rompre cette “artificialité”. (Bhadrakumar cite les tractations secrètes entre Allemands et Russes, selon The Independent [voir notre texte du 31 juillet 2014], bien entendu “catégoriquement” démenties par Berlin, et bloquées, selon le quotidien britannique, par la crise du Vol MH17.)


Mis en ligne le 2 août 2014 à 16H03

Donations

Nous avons récolté 1425 € sur 3000 €

faites un don