Trump Points out Germany's Energy Situation

Comments

danmanjones's picture

"We need you to contribute more money so we can pretend to fight ISIS & use you as a pawn. Also, buy our expensive gas, it's more strategic."

Such finesse.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
subroutine's picture

lovely trumped "facts" ... 

 

Trump is saying Germany gets 60 to 70 percent of their energy from Russia and it's just not true. If he's talking about natural gas imports Germany imports 35% from Russia, 34% from Norway and 29% from Netherlands.

Edit: The 35% of natural gas import from Russia is from 2016 data so while the current rate of import might be higher natural gas still only accounts for less than 20% of Germany's energy consumption.

Source on Germany's energy imports:

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-dependence-imported-fossil-fuels

+1
+2
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

Maybe as a percentage of the gas they import, >60% comes from Russia.

I think the strategy is to suppress Russia's economy & EU ties by competing with the Nord Stream pipeline.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream

https://www.google.com/search?q=us+compete+with+Nord+Stream

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
puttefnask's picture

The former Chancellor of Germany runs Nord Stream, which is owned(51%) by a Russian company.

If Germany wants US and other countries in NATO to protect them against Russia and its allies, the current situation is counter-productive to that process.

 

It's not just the energy situation that is the problem, but the fact that the former Chancellor of Germany runs a Russia based company. If there ever was a perfect target for espionage or blackmail, he is it.

 

And if Germany was to become more dependent on the energy import from Russia, voting to sanction them or for example removing them from the G8, which they did, could be problematic down the line. Even if this is not a substantial amount of the entire country's energy consumption, this deal will leave them open to counter-sanctions which can have serious financial consequences. Cutting off a stable source of energy imports, and perhaps selling it somewhere else can hurt the entire EU. It would register on Wall Street and international markets, and people would react immediately to an event like that to limit their losses.

 

By not paying for NATO they are giving a message that says someone else should suffer the consequences of their fuckups, like letting a former Chancellor of Germany run a Russian company that profits from importing energy to the country, while at the same time having a very public stance towards Russia reminiscent of the Cold War.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

Just so you know how "paing for NATO" works:

https://www.politico.eu/article/primer-for-president-trump-how-nato-fund...

 

Schröder getting involved in this was a cunt move and he never should have done this, HOWEVER, the german government has always been level headed when it came to sanctions or other issues, even if it was somewhat counterproductive or costly to them. There is no reason to believe this attitude would change, there is no unpredictable  ignorant flip flopper like trump in charge after all. 

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
puttefnask's picture

"Of course, Trump’s point (and to be fair it’s the same point as many of his predecessors in the White House) is that the important spending by NATO allies is not on the relatively small jointly-financed annual budget for headquarters and other centralized systems and operations, but on the soldiers, weapons, equipment and other capabilities of each individual country that give the alliance its great military might.

On that score, U.S. spending dwarfs that of all other allies. The U.S. forks out more than $600 billion a year on its military compared to about $40 billion spent by Germany." - Same article

 

This pledge began in 2014, only US and four other countries are up to speed. Germany is not one of them. Though there are no decided consequences for not fulfilling the pledge, not doing so shows that they are not taking defence seriously. Trump is trying to remind the Western world of the consequences if there isn't a strong defence during conflicts(which are not predictable when we don't start them). If they continue to appear weak when it comes to military might, there will be more attempts to undermine it. And that always affects civilians. The people these coalitions are pretending to protect.

 

There are people rising to power in different parts of the world that never should have. We placed some of them there.

 

Trump questioned NATO when he ran for office because of these reasons. Now he is the guy calling for it to actually work. While people are jumping on the "spotted another hipocracy"-train at every chance they get, because it is easiest thing to do, I tend to think, well yeah if they want NATO to work then fucking pay for it.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones's picture

when we don't start them

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt's picture

Germany gets about 37% of their gas and 40% of their oil from Russia.

 

trump is just doing what he does best: impressing his fanboys by misrepresentation (irrespective of whether this is based on ignorance or straight lying) and bullying.

In the process he is pissing off americas allies and trade partners big time on all sorts of levels and issues. This, as well as his love for the apartheid regime israel (most likely because he owes quite a few favours to rich jews) will backfire in the long run.

All we have to do is be patient and watch. It is like a dumb version of house of cards.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down