Resurgam_Eng

🇬🇪 Protests in Georgia: why does the pro-Moscow "Georgian dream" want Moscow legislation so much? 💬 Recently, there were mass protests in Tbilisi and fights in the parliament. The president of Georgia emphasized that despite the risks, she would use the veto (although it would not help). What happened in Georgia anyway? ➡️ The reason is the "law on foreign agents," which the government party, "the Georgian dream," wants to adopt. Why do the Georgian authorities need this regulation, and why now? The reason is the elections. "The Georgian dream" has close ties to moscow, the capital, and moscow connections of the oligarch Ivanishvili (Georgian version of Medvedchuk) are at the heart of this party. This party won the parliament in the last elections but lost the president. Even though the President of Georgia, Salomone Zurabishvili, is quite active, legislative and executive power is still in the hands of the "Georgian dream," with all the corresponding consequences for Ukraine as well 🇺🇦. As part of requests for Georgia's European integration, the EU once pushed the law on the "electoral system," where the electoral system was changed from a mixed "list + majoritarian" to a proportional system. Georgia also cancels general presidential elections. Now, the president will be chosen by a "collegium," which consists of representatives of the parliament and local self-government. ➡️ That is, Georgia will become a "parliamentary republic." Control of the parliament is a must-have for political power. Last time, the "Georgian dream" won monopoly power thanks to an absolute victory in majority constituencies (2016 and 2020). In 2020, Georgian dream won all 30 majority constituencies out of 30, which made it possible to form a majority in the parliament. At the same time, the "Georgian dream" lost 25 mandates compared to 2016 (because there were not 30 mandates of the majority party, but 75 of which the Georgian dream took 71). ➡️ The new system is proportional, and now there is the biggest chance that the Georgian dream and its allies will not gain the 50+% needed to form the government. The situation is somewhat similar to the Polish one, where PiS, although they won the elections, did not have enough allies to form a majority and a coalition. Government reforms are aimed at the conservation and preservation of power ⤵️ ▶️ The "Georgian dream" did not allow the electoral threshold to be lowered from 5% to 2%, eliminating most of the average parties opposed to the dream. ▶️ Pro-European President Zurabashvili was suspended for artificial but potential impeachment and criminal prosecution. ▶️ Georgia's media field is entirely owned by the pro-Moscow Ivanishvili - once the founder of the "Georgian dream." However, media monopoly before the elections is hindered by "foreign agents," i.e., private bloggers, media initiatives, public organizations, and associations, which can "sway the Georgian media field" with investigations, analyses, and alternative opinions. ⛳️ The purpose of this law, which the "Georgian dream" is trying to implement so critically, is to shut down all alternative media voices before the elections. Georgian elections will be held on October 26, 2024. The parliamentary winner will de facto control the parliament/government/president. Georgian dream, on the fourth, wants to win at any cost. ➡️ For Ukraine 🇺🇦, these elections will be important. They will determine whether Georgia will remain under moscow's influence in the future or whether there will be a change of power to a pro-European one, which will begin to distance itself from moscow, similar to the one gradually introduced by Pashinyan. The elections in Georgia are about whether moscow will continue to lose influence in the Caucasus, whether Ukraine will get a loyal Black Sea partner, whether Georgia will be preserved for its pro-European future, or whether it will slide into an autocracy even more faithful to moscow. Resurgam ➰ Join

Resistance to Moscow's influence is gaining momentum in the EU. 💬 Previously, in the post "How the Czechs and Belgians shook Moscow's information network in Europe, and why now Kyiv and Prague should implement the Qatar experience," we considered how the Czechs and Belgians' investigation became the basis for raising an important topic for us regarding "countering the moscow hybrid operations in the EU". And what Ukraine can do to contribute to this. As a result, the presiding country Belgium promised to raise the issue of countering moscow's operations of hybrid influence at the European level. ➡️ During this time, the Poles 🇵🇱 and the Germans 🇩🇪 actively joined the investigations (the Germans exposed the Moscow network that was preparing sabotage). As a result, there were a number of investigations and arrests, and the Europeans began to collect the collected information to track "Moscow networks of influence" on a systematic basis. ➡️ Yesterday, on the eve of the summit, as a result, Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo and Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala sent a letter to the EU leaders in which they called for quick action to counter Moscow's hybrid influence. In the letter concerning the results of investigations by the Belgian and Czech special services, it was noted that a propaganda network was exposed, which aimed to "promote and appoint "the right people" as employees of (newly elected) members of the European Parliament." In general, this includes the bribery of MEPs and the introduction of "necessary" non-media: advisers, assistants, and so on. As a result of the collective activity of the Czechs and Belgians, I hope that Ukrainian special services also actively cooperate with the Czechs, taking into account where the legs grow from (the speech is for Medvedchuk). Medvedchuk is an "interesting" player: at first, he failed the hybrid operation in Ukraine, then failed the escape, forcing Putin to go for an unpopular exchange. Then, he failed the operation in the EU, exposed the "network of influence," and provoked the EU to intensify countermeasures. I would also issue fake news that the operation in the EU became possible because Medvedchuk leaked information during his detention in Ukraine. So, in the moscow's "decision center," the vipers would eat each other. So here it is ⤵️ ➡️ Due to Belgian and Czech appeals, the EU summit decided to create a temporary crisis working group within the Integrated Political Crisis Response (IPCR) framework for centralized monitoring and information exchange about moscow's attempts to interfere in the June European elections. Belgian Prime Minister Alexandre de Croo, the leader of the EU presiding country, said that after the elections to the European Parliament, they plan to consider creating a permanent system and control body to oppose Moscow's hybrid operations in the EU. ❗️ Now it is essential ❗️ for Ukrainian diplomacy not to forget the Belgian Prime Minister's intention after the June elections to transform the "temporary body" into a "permanent one." Since Belgium's presidency ends in June, it is the great duty of diplomacy to "remind and actualize" this intention of the EU. It will be difficult (because Hungary will preside for half a year from June), but this does not mean "impossible." Moreover, in half a year, the presidency will be passed from Hungary to Poland, which is also interested in raising this topic. I think the Poles will be happy to contribute to the temporary body being successfully formalized into a permanent systematic opposition to moscow's influence. Then the Polish government's collective efforts will now be able to sell "as much as possible its victory." Therefore, the Poles should be highly interested in this. In general, each such event, news, and initiative gradually reduces the influence of moscow on Europe, which allows Ukrainian diplomacy and interests to feel better. Therefore, these events are essential for coverage, discussion, and control. Resurgam ➰ Join

Europe is waking up slowly: for the first time in more than 30 years, pan-European studies have recorded security among the top three key issues. Eurobarometer is a European sociological organization that, since 1973, has been conducting pan-European research covering all EU members. ➡️ Research on the eve of the June elections to the European Parliament recorded a radical shift in the average views of Europeans. It is a good sign, as the change in the political rhetoric of the leaders is also supported by the change in opinions at the level of citizens. ▶️ 1. 37% of EU citizens believe that the priority of the future of the EU should be "defense and security," which for the first time pushed all other directions to second and third places. For the voters of 15 EU countries, this is priority #1. The most in Lithuania 🇱🇹 (60%) and Finland 🇫🇮 (58%). ▶️ 2. As for election campaigns, the topic of security was also included in the top three issues that voters in the EU would like to see in candidates' programs and rhetoric for the first time in 30 years. "Security" scored 31%, giving way to fighting poverty (33%) and supporting health care (32%). Defense is mentioned as the priority in 9 EU countries (in 2019, the indicator was 0). The leaders where the issue of defense is a priority for voters are Denmark (56%), Finland (55%), and Lithuania (53%). ▶️ 3. 81% of respondents believe the June elections to the European Parliament are more important than usual, given the world's geopolitical situation. ▶️ 4. 60% of European voters say they will vote in the elections to the European Parliament (this is 11% more than they said the day before in 2019). Together with "likely to vote" - 71%, which is also +10% compared to 2019. The most significant increase is willingness to participate in the elections to the European Parliament in the countries closest to Moscow: •Czech Republic 🇨🇿 58% (compared to 30% in 2019); • Romania 🇷🇴 74% (compared to 53% in 2019); • Finland 🇫🇮79% (in 2019 — 61%); • Poland 🇵🇱 70% (in 2019 — 52%). ▶️ 5. 83% of Europeans have negative views about russia (12% positive). 47% negative and 48% positive views about the USA. 68% negative and 24% positive views about China. Resurgam ➰ Join

🦑moscow's tentacles in Africa ➡️ In 2023, Gabon 🇬🇦 unexpectedly became the largest supplier of spare parts, engines, and avionics for moscow-based Boeing and Airbus aircraft. ➡️ The Gabonese company Ter Assala Parts allegedly exported spare parts worth almost $1.5 billion to moscow, which exceeds half of Gabon's annual budget. This company is not listed in the Trade Register of Gabon, and its registered address is a residential building in Libreville. Experts believe that this situation resulted from fraud and the cover-up of illegal exports by the Gabonese government. 💬 For example, a Gabonese company without an office or registration first bought 15 used engines for Boeing 737 and Airbus A320/A321 and then re-exported the sanctioned goods to moscow. ➡️ It is interesting that the seller, who is probably a Western company, did not find it strange that a company without registration from a country with a population of 2.2 million, without its own airlines, buys 15 engines... moscow also received oxygen masks, washers, pipes, bolts, nuts, brackets, fuel supply regulators, used computers, and warning systems for airplanes through Gabon. Resurgam ➰ Join

New challenges to the interests of Ukraine in Bulgaria 🇧🇬 The channel has a long list of articles about Bulgaria, its elections, Santa Barbara of the government formation, moscow provocations, and so on. ➡️ But in general, in 2023, it all ended "on edge," but still good for us. In Bulgaria, the two largest pro-European parties formed a government that took pro-Ukrainian positions despite the solid political presence of moscow elements: from the country's president Radev to the pro-moscow financed parliamentary parties "Renaissance" and "Socialist" (renamed the Communist Party). ➡️ The content of the Bulgarian political crisis is that there have already been five extraordinary parliamentary elections in three years. In the last one, pro-European forces GERB and PP-DB took the majority. They somehow formed a coalition and a government on a rotating basis: for nine months, the government runs based on GERB, and for the next nine, based on PP-DB. 💬 An attempt to carry out this rotation has occurred for the last month but is at the failure stage. The representative of the PP-DB party, Mariya Gabriel, who was supposed to form the government, resigned after a whole campaign was "accidentally" launched against her and her persona as the future prime minister. It ended with some influential politicians refusing to support it, and the two parties ultimately clashed over the issue of electing the Minister of Internal Affairs. Separately, the pro-moscow Renaissance party launched an active "anti-Schengen campaign" with distortions regarding Bulgaria's partial entry into Schengen. Bulgarians fuel the renaissance that the pro-European government wants to turn the country into a large camp for refugees from the Middle East. Based on disinformation and outright accusations, pro-moscow forces add fuel to the already tricky process of "government rotation." The very beginning of this campaign "coincidentally" coincided with the rotation of the government, although partial Schengen was known long before that. ➡️Such chaos and aggravation provoked a drop in the popularity of pro-European forces and a rise in the popularity of pro-moscow President Radev, who at one time was jointly nominated for the post of president by the same pro-moscow Renaissance and Socialist (Communist) parties. Bulgaria is a parliamentary republic, so the president's powers are limited. Still, Radev's goal is to take control of the parliament based on the moscow-oriented and personally loyal Renaissance and Socialist parties, which are currently in opposition but may well become the government in the event of another re-election. ⏩ Therefore, it is now crucial that President Radev fails; the "Renaissance" parties and the communists, obviously with the support and partial financing of the moscow special services, shake Bulgaria for new, sixth re-elections in 3 years or not. ➡️ If this happens, the pro-Ukrainian vector of Bulgaria will first be postponed (at the time of the elections). Then, it may disappear altogether (in case of victory of the pro-moscow opposition), which will cause risks in those projects and cooperation currently being built with this important country. So, we will actively follow the Bulgarians again. P.S. I add a list of the main posts and information about Bulgaria in the comments below this post. Resurgam ➰ Join

🇭🇺 Will the European Parliament elections be the beginning of the end for Orbán? ➡️ Another anti-Orban protest was held in Budapest, demanding the government resign. The protests were provoked by the published recordings of the conversations of Orbán's government officials, which reveal Orbán's government corruption. No matter how big the desire is, it's not worth expecting something large-scale from these protests now. These protests are not so many thousands, not so structural, and not so much a threat to Orbán. BUT ❗️ ➡️ The elections to the European Parliament are just around the corner. These elections are a measure of the mood of protest in Hungary. To what extent did the chain of corruption scandals affect the support of Orbán's party? In the last election, Orbán won a majority, but most of this majority was "majority constituencies." As for percentages across the country, 53% to 36% (in the opposition). According to the lists, the Fidesz party (Orban) received 48 seats, and the opposition received 38 seats. But in majority constituencies, Fidesz won 87 seats, and the opposition only 19. • The majority vote is a key tool for Orbán to remain in power. At the same time, a strange system was created in which the majoritarian and the list do not have a 50%/50% distribution but actually 60%/40%. 106 seats are majority constituencies, and 93 are on the national list. ➡️ But the elections to the European Parliament give hope to the opposition that "the measure of support for Orban will be smaller." If Orbán gets less than 50%, it becomes an argument for the Hungarian opposition to raise questions about Orbán's "legitimacy" because now the entire opposition is united in a formal anti-Orbán bloc. Orbán's government is strongly centralized, and the opposition has a chance to gain weight only through European institutions. The successful results of the European Parliament elections for the Hungarian opposition may be the factor that will generate a further weakening of Orbán's positions, and who knows... At a minimum, the weaker Orbán's internal positions are, the more conciliatory he should be in external matters with the EU. Resurgam ➰ Join

🇺🇸 The madness of the USA: the de-escalators of the White House began to get nervous ➡️ This happened after Stoltenberg's statements and ambassadors' comments regarding the idea of "slightly modernizing the Rammstein format" and reducing the US role in certain processes. The Europeans conditioned this on the grounds of the USA's unreliability and the risks of the presidential elections. ➡️ The White House released a statement in which the suggestion to transfer the United States' management functions within the framework of Rammstein to the "European part of NATO" is denied. The White House adviser on public relations, J. Kirby, stated this:

"This is impossible" because "it (the Ramstein group) is bigger than NATO; it includes more than 50 countries from all over the world, and they are united only by American leadership."

I wrote in the article why the White House hides behind the mythical figure of "more than 50 countries" and why this figure was created precisely by the "de-escalators" of the USA, which to a large extent now does more harm than good but allows the USA to "manage the escalation" so that NATO countries are not fully involved to support Ukraine beyond those forms determined by the White House itself. By the way, it is not the first time that I hear from representatives of the White House "over 50", "almost 50", "nearly 50", such a feeling that they do not know how many members of the bloated Rammstein, behind which the "de-escalators" who act as brakes for increasing initiatives and new forms of support for Ukraine by European NATO members outside the interests of the United States. The US does not want to lose the levers for "escalation management," just as it does not want to lose its security influence on Europe, which has been converted into the spread of American interests in Europe for decades. ⏩ But the USA, with such an approach and policy, will lose all this because this is the fate of a leader who does not live up to expectations, does not meet the challenges of the times, demonstrates a constantly weak position and fear, and even cannot demonstrate the support of his vital external parties partners: Ukraine (this is European security), Israel and Taiwan, which promote and protect the interests of the United States. ➡️ This foreign policy of the USA does not deserve leadership, and 80-year-old myths about Americans from the Second World War cannot be the basis for maintaining long-term world stability because the behavior of the USA demonstrates that psychologically, the leadership of the USA is a myth. I'm talking about the "psychological" aspect, not the military or economic one. Psychological is the conformity of expectations/actions to a specific international status of the country. The US does not want to lose control "over the processes" but does not do enough to be entitled to this control. It is holding back European initiatives to try to improve the coordination of support for Ukraine and reduce risks in the event of Trump's arrival (his NATO policy). 💬 They threatened Macron 🇫🇷because of his intention to place a limited contingent of military personnel, technicians, and specialists in Ukraine. Blinken stated that such an action by France would lead to the involvement of NATO and the USA in the war. Macron very harshly replied to the White House that he does not particularly count on the USA and NATO and that it will be the initiative and corresponding responsibility exclusively of France in any case. Macron actually declared that he would not turn to NATO to apply Article 5 if something happened to French citizens somewhere in Ukraine. 🏆 Leadership is not a quantitative indicator of the economy. It is the readiness to make difficult but strategic decisions, recognize past approaches' mistakes, and try new things instead of using the same "pickle" recipe to get a different taste of "cucumbers." "Insanity is the exact repetition of the same action repeatedly in the hope of change." ➡️ That's why US policy is madness now. Resurgam ➰ Join

*Continuation (part 2/2) ▶️ Sixth, if a combined gasoline/diesel fuel shortage is possible, it can disrupt the sowing. It is unlikely to lead to "famine," but it will reduce another essential export product of Moscow - food. It is a boomerang for exported grain from the occupied territories and blocked ports for two years. ▶️ Seventh, the number and area of refineries' placement allow the use of "fan" attacks. Launch several drones in different directions at different refineries. Even if one gets there, it is a success. The constantly changed emphasis of the attack "twists the neck" of Moscow's air defense. In case of a shortage, Moscow can import gasoline and diesel fuel from China 🇨🇳. Then, due to internal consumption, China can help Moscow to a very limited extent so as not to harm itself. In any way, it will increase costs, amount of money laundering from the budget, and various logistical problems. That's why: ➡️ hit the refinery so that there is a deficit; ➡️ the deficit forces Moscow to introduce a ban on the export of oil products; ➡️ export ban reduces foreign currency income; ➡️ fight further on the refinery so that the fuel shortage becomes a reality even with the export ban. ➡️ Disrupt the sowing process and reduce the volume of food exports. ➡️ Reduce currency flow in the budget. ➡️ Fight on, forcing Moscow to buy gasoline from China, launder funds from the budget, and increase the price of petroleum products. ➡️ Force Moscow to increase inflation, raise Central Bank rates, or launder funds from reserves for their maintenance. Therefore, the conclusion - fight, do not stop, and interesting consequences await Moscow. Resurgam ➰ Join

What did the strikes on the Moscow refinery lead to and may lead to (Part 1/2) ➡️ In 2021, Moscow refineries processed 285 million tons of petroleum products, of which 146 million tons were for export. Approximately 50-52% of the Moscow refinery's capacity is directed to export. It's true. It is from $35 to $50 billion. Of the 285 tons of petroleum products, 80 million tons are diesel fuel, and 40 million tons are gasoline. According to Moscow's reports, in 2021, the main export of oil products was diesel fuel. Of the 80 million tons of diesel fuel produced in 2021, 40 were for export. " Export gasoline" was only 10% (4 million tons) of the total produced volume. All other gasoline was consumed in the domestic market. Approximately 70% of Moscow's oil refining capacity is concentrated in a 1,000 km zone from the border with Ukraine. 🇺🇦 The specificity of Moscow refineries' location is that they serve the nearest industrial hub, the urban agglomeration. Conventional logistics of petroleum products from the Far Eastern region significantly increase the cost of the product due to logistical factors. Therefore, refineries are closest to where they can "consume their production." What do the strikes on the refinery do? ▶️ First, in February 2024, Moscow introduced a ban on gasoline exports from the country. Only "10%" of exported gasoline is the "reserve" of refinery capacity. If the attacks on refineries exceed the 10% mark of destroyed gasoline distillation capacities, a shortage will accumulate in the market. ▶️ Secondly, it is more difficult with diesel fuel because conventionally, 50% of the current " exported " capacity is reserved for the "domestic market." On the other hand, exporting diesel fuel is an essential source of income for Moscow. To force them to abandon the export of diesel fuel due to an internal deficit will knock out an important item of budget revenues. ▶️ Thirdly, the number of refineries and the area of their location makes it much more difficult to cover them from drones. Moreover, it is not by chance that Ukrainian UAVs fly to moscow or st. petersburg once every few days. It doesn't matter what they hit there and where they fell on the airport or an official's dacha — it forces the enemy to allocate their air defense equipment. Because moscow and st. peter are "holy". Means of anti-aircraft defense near Moscow were collected for several months. The reason for several months of attacks by agencies in the Moscow network, which were often called "ridiculous," should be clear. And now, choose either an oil refinery in the Central-Eastern region or an air defense system over moscow and st. petersburg. ▶️ Fourthly, the denazification of moscow refineries began not by chance in February, and its intensity increased in March. The peak of the consequences should fall during the period of the greatest consumption of petroleum products in moscow: sowing + potential spring activity at the front + general consumer activity of the population. ▶️ Fifthly, I still cannot say what percentage of moscow's capacity is guaranteed to be disabled. Hitting does not permanently disable 100% of refinery capacity. ❗️ BUT at least 4 out of 10 refineries were hit in the most painful place—the rectification column. Hitting it stops the entire refinery and requires Western equipment and technology to repair it (since 2012, most refineries have been modernized for Western equipment and maintenance). It may take months to recover. Crazy money for some parallel import and microcircuits is one thing, and multi-ton, specific, and narrow-profile equipment is a little different when the US and the EU began to introduce secondary sanctions. At a minimum, the available hits should have led to the accumulation of a gasoline shortage on the domestic market if we consider that 90% of the distillation volume was already oriented towards domestic consumption (available demand). *Continuation in the next post 👇 Resurgam ➰ Join

🇪🇺 Why the threat from European Parliament elections is exaggerated? ➡️ From June 6 to 9, 2024, elections to the European Parliament will be held. ➡️ The results of the elections will determine the composition of the executive bodies in the EU. ➡️ The composition of the executive bodies of the EU determines the vector of Union policy. It includes support for Ukraine and its integration into the European Union. ➡️ There are pro-Moscow members in the EU who threaten Ukraine's interests. That is why the EU elections are essential. ✍️ Pro-Moscow-oriented participants include the German "AfD," the French "National Front" (Le Pen's statement does not change anything), and the Italian "League of the North." They are the leading trio that threatens the stability of EU support for Ukraine. ❗️ Their total number in the European Parliament is 73 out of 705 (10%). According to the ratings today, the upcoming elections could "double" them negatively. That is around 120-140, but it is still not enough for a "coup," even in a situational alliance with Hungarian and Slovak MEPs, independent or other forces with which they can talk about the result. ↪️ So, there will be no so-called "coup." Mathematical issue. ⚖️ There is a European association of adequate right-wing "Party of European Conservatives and Reformists" led by Italian Prime Minister Meloni. This association includes the adequate right-wing of Italy, Spain, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, and others. ➡️ Even though a "populist, pro-Moscow coup" should not take place, it is still better for the unity of the EU that its "representation" is smaller and filled with at least adequate right-wing ones. For this EU government, the social democrats and liberals, along with the adequate right-wing (those led by Meloni), are informally united in action to minimize the influence of such parties, which we have outlined as "pro-Moscow." ❓ What caused the popularity of the AfD, the National Front, and other populists? That's right—Europe's failed migration policy. It is one of the weakest points in EU policy, leading to negative consequences. ➡️ So knocking out their migrants' argument means reducing their popularity, or at least making sure that the ratings "move" to the more adequate right-wing ones, who are ready to solve problems, using real, not populist, methods. The EU initially adopted a long-term "Pact on Migration and Asylum," which is a compromise between the center-left, centrists, greens, and ideological rules (normal). This pact is supposed to introduce tougher migration policies and a viral series of problems. 📚 The AfD, the National Front, tried to sabotage this pact as much as possible. Orban also blocked it. The reason is simple, similar to Trump's motivations for derailing the border deal. These parties do not want to eliminate the problems that are the core of the pre-election program in the European Parliament and the national parliaments. Such a cynical paradox: those fighting migration need to intensify it as much as possible (if they are in the opposition) to be popular because the populists have no other alternative. ➡️ And now Egypt. One of the main agreements signed was about migration, which meant to reduce the flow of migrants to Europe. It is very symbolic that Ursula von der Leyen, who is the personification of the current political forces of the EU (mainly Social Democrats + Liberals), came to Cairo together with Prime Minister Meloni, who personifies the adequate right-wing. It is not only because Meloni is the prime minister of Italy but also to demonstrate the difference between the adequate right-wing and the right-wing populists. So, it is possible to extend the strategy the current EU forces are secretly trying to follow to prevent the increase in the representation of "pro-Moscow forces." Two keys: knock out the "migration arguments" from right-wing populists and fill the parliament with adequate and constructive right-wing that should absorb the popularity of right-wing populists. Resurgam ➰ Join

🇨🇳 Another peaceful worsening from China; what are the consequences for Ukraine? In the spring, China's Special Representative will visit moscow, Ukraine, and EU countries to hold a new round of negotiations. ➡️ This is not the first tour of Li Hui. The last was in May 2023, and the "peaceful" worsening from China began months earlier. At that time, these visits and "views of peace" were primarily aimed at loosening a certain unity of Europe in support of Ukraine for a counter-offensive in 2023. The Chinese media established the narrative of the Ukrainian Crisis, the War of the United States and Ukraine, and so on. At that time, the weak in spirit, such as Macron or Prime Minister of Spain Sanchez, were still naively discussing a "Strategic Partnership with China" and the need to keep in contact with moscow for future negotiations. ➡️ In 2023, China knocked out a speed of support for Ukraine and covered moscow as much as possible from secondary sanctions. For this purpose, China demonstrated itself as a peacemaker and negotiator to delay these processes. On the other hand "uncertainty" and "not all so clearly" expressions often described the contexts of Europe's actions. ➡️ Peaceful worsening from China in 2024 carries the same message — to beat the momentum in Europe to recognize moscow as an existential threat and to an appropriate increase in Ukraine's support. It is already clear that the rhetoric of Europeans concerning moscow is becoming more definite and radical, and it is reflected in the support for Ukraine. A rather popular thesis of 2022 is that if the US is out of sponsorship of Ukraine — Europe will certainly do the same. Only the presence of the United States keeps Europe's desire to support Ukraine. ❗️ But in 2024, when the United States has been "paused" for six months, Europe not only remains but also tries to compensate for the lack of support from Americans with its capabilities. ➡️ The European Commission has thoughtfully developed secondary sanctions that are also potentially against China. Macron (and Scholtz), who spoke about "Partnership with China," is now promoting the idea of the "geopolitical power of Europe." Scholz has doubled Ukraine's support and united the support for Ukraine in Europe. The recent summit in support of Ukraine partially results from a rather long and open German criticism of France and others on insufficient support of Ukraine. ⏩ If 2023 — the Chinese with their "peacekeeping" tried to bring up support on the eve of the offensive of Ukraine, then just a year later, in 2024, the same China, thus "peacekeeping," wants to knock down European support and the pace of militarization of Europe to support Ukraine in a difficult period (problems with USA). Putin now has a window of opportunity to get as much "something" as possible to demonstrate there is no alternative for Ukraine and Europe. It's worth paying attention that China makes its visit after Putin's elections, which Europe is not to recognize (possibly Hungary and Slovakia). ↪️ The purpose of such visits is to legitimize Putin as a subject in European politics because the more militaristic rhetoric of Europe, the less fear of Putin and, therefore, his subjectivity. Fear, hybrid terror, and bribery are the basis of Putin's legitimacy in Europe. ⛳️ The goal is simple — to make at least the process of exiting Europe from the State of conditional pacifism longer and the consequences for Americans 🇺🇸 even more catastrophic. Europe's support for Ukraine keeps the United States from the geopolitical and image abyss. It's obvious that Americans are actively walking towards those circumstances, and China needs that to satisfy future ambitions. China's actions are evident because, unfortunately, there will always be groups in Europe subjected to this influence. Resurgam ➰ Join

🇫🇷 Macron's army: Are the French close to a historical decision? I have to admit that I was wrong when I underestimated Macron's statement a few days ago and attributed it to the category of populism. ➡️ The statement becomes clearer, and it seems that some Europeans are ready to change the rule from "No NATO soldier in Ukraine, so as not to provoke Putin" to "We understand Moscow's weakness and its unwillingness to a larger scale escalation, and we will use it." If, on the first day after the summit, some Europeans tried to refute Macron's statement, then on the second day, several top representatives of other countries supported the reality of this discussion and the desire to join (the Netherlands, Estonia, Lithuania). 💬 Several influential French editions that are closely related to the insiders from the Elysee fields refer that Macron wants to put Putin in a "strategic dilemma," which will be in the next ⤵️ 📍 The stay of a limited French contingent in the territory of Western or Central Ukraine (remotely from the front line, the main condition) becomes a certain shield for our military and military objects. The stay of the French instructors is for example on the Yavoriv for Moscow with a marked rocket stroke, which can affect the nuclear country, a member of NATO. It is not only about the opportunity to find "own Lusitania" but also to get a political reaction as an increase in Ukraine's support from Europe. All this can still be seen as Macron's populist statements or "media insides", but if indeed, this week, French President collects leaders of all parties and heads of security committees to discuss the sending of a limited contingent to Ukraine, then it is already a political action. In this case, the possible attempts to "jump off" will impact the image of Macron personally (accused of populism). Macron's team is not so short-sighted; therefore, Macron is seriously considering this option. ➡️ No wonder the next day, the President of France reaffirmed the intention and "health of the statement," saying that each of his words is "thoughtful and weighed." ⏩ If Macron implements his intention, it will be the radical rethinking of the war, the role of Ukraine, and the methods of restoring security in Europe. Why does Macron take such risky leadership? ▶️ 1. France's competition for continental leadership with Germany ▶️ 2. Restoration of Macron and France's reputation after a failed foreign policy in Africa, which made it possible not only to displace the French from Mali, Burkina-Faso, and Niger but to secure the interests of Moscow there. There are rumours that when Wagner was preparing a coup in Niger, in 24 hours, the generals suggested that Macron send French special forces, which were based there, to protect the current President Niger. Macron refused because he considered preparation for the coup "unconfirmed." ▶️ 3. The element of revenge on moscow for the displacement of France from the African region. That led to rapid losses for French corporations that mined natural resources (from uranium to gold). You can read about the problems of the French in the post "Closing the Project" colonial France. ▶️ 4. The best opportunity for the French to return the political and economic impact on Africa is moscow's maximum exhaustion and defeat in Ukraine. ▶️ 5. France cannot economically exceed Germany in volumes of help for Ukraine. But why not try to make it a "political leadership" while Scholz is stuck in criticism and scandals with Taurus missiles? ➡️ So, either we are really in the moment of strategic change of the perception of war by Europeans (at least in France and a limited number of countries), or Macron is playing with the fire of populism, which, as a result, can further set fire to his imperfect international image. Resurgam ➰ Join

🫴💰 What procedure is the G7 establishing to seize moscow's assets for Ukraine's use? Confiscate is not to be confused with "freeze." Freezing is the state in which moscow's assets are now in Europe and the G-7 and is not a legal basis for their disposal, namely transfer. ➡️ The G-7 plans to create a framework for seizure. In this way, they do not undermine confidence in their own banking system and have legal grounds for confiscation and transfer. You should not confuse the "transfer of income" (interest) with the transfer of the assets themselves because they are different work areas and related to various news branches. We will talk about the second one. Two Western publications Reuters and Financial Times confirmed the scheme on the fact of "reparations bonds" being developed by the G-7. Reuters released this article before the Davos summit, which is not coincidental. The Financial Times confirmed this information recently, saying that this is the main plan of the G-7. The procedure: ⏩ Step one. Issue bonds for the reparation of Ukraine, which will be supported by moscow's frozen assets. These will be "reparation bonds" since the legal basis for their issuance will be the fact of moscow's armed aggression against Ukraine and the assignment of corresponding fixed losses. ⏩ Step two. The G-7 countries are buying up these obligations, and when they expire, they demand that moscow pay the money. ⏩ Step three. moscow obviously refuses to pay the funds under the reparation bonds. ⏩ Step four. moscow's assets change their legal status from "frozen" to "confiscated" due to non-fulfillment of financial obligations (probably there should be a court decision somewhere at this stage). Asset forfeiture gives the right to "dispose" of what is currently not available because the status of the assets is "frozen"/"blocked." As far as I understand, Ukraine should receive funds at the time of the redemption of "reparation bonds" by third countries. That is, until the moment of confiscation, when moscow refuses to make payments on obligations. The third countries, redeeming these bonds, receive income and compensation from moscow's seized assets. How much time does it all take? It has yet to be discovered, but the FT confirms that this is the main plan promoted by the Belgian government, the main holder of moscow's assets. There are many unclear legal nuances, but for the G-7 countries, this is a working scheme for financing Ukraine without destroying their own financial balance. Resurgam ➰ Join

About the production of mortars and mines in Ukraine The general director of the company "Ukrainian Armor" Vladyslav Belbas told to ABC News about the increase in production. As he says, his company (It is not the entire industrial complex of the country, but one of the enterprises of the sector) reached the production indicators: ⏩ 20,000 (60/82/120 mm) mines per month. It is 240,000 mines per year. ⏩ 1200 units (60/82/120 mortars) per year. To demonstrate the production facilities, ABC News journalists visited several hidden factories, where they saw part of the facilities with their own eyes (I sincerely do not understand why journalists should be allowed to enter facilities where the main thing is the hiddenness of these production facilities). ➡️ ABC News notes that the CEO's words confirm earlier statements about the company's monthly production of up to a thousand mortars. Belbas also stated that from February 24, the company increased production from a few dozen mortars of multiple calibers per month to a thousand and resumed production of multiple calibers of mines. Interesting facts ▶️ According to open data in 2020, the total production at that time had only 78 employees. ▶️ The company's turnover increased 100 times from UAH 103 million to UAH 13 billion. It guaranteed the first position in the rating of the country's largest private machine-building companies in 2023, which Forbes assigned. ▶️ The company is under inspection by anti-corruption authorities to minimize the factor of overpricing and verify the facts of the influence of Pashinsky's entourage. The general director of the company denies connections with Pashinsky and claims that the company's net profit is 3%, which is entirely invested in the expansion of production. The company's shareholders were not paid dividends due to the agreed decision to invest in equipment purchases and relocate production facilities. Among the interesting general facts ⤵️ ▶️ In 2022, Forbes estimated the total production of weapons in the Ukrainian military industry in $1 billion. ▶️ In 2023, according to Forbes, the military industry produced weapons worth $3 billion, which added 1.5% to GDP growth. ▶️ In 2024, the publication predicts that the Ukrainian military-industrial complex will be able to produce weapons worth $15 billion, which will be five times more than in 2023 and 15 times more than by February 24. ❗️ But there is another scaling problem — funds, or more precisely, the number of orders. The power of the military industry will potentially outweigh its available funds in terms of orders. 580-600 billion hryvnias will be needed to load the domestic industrial complex by 100% in 2024. In the budget for 2024, 265 billion + 35 billion (Ministry figures) + 30-40 billion are generated by Ukrainian volunteers for the purchase of equipment and ammunition; still, not all donations go to the order of the Ukrainian military industry (mavics and the like). ➡️ If Forbes makes a correct estimate, then the Ukrainian military industry's production capacity will almost double Ukraine's independent ability to load its military industry with orders. Taking into account the fact that military aid from partners does not go in the form of finances for buying "where" and "what" you want, the scaling of production in 2024 is likely to face the problem of "availability of orders," and not "availability of capacities" as was before. Resurgam ➰ Join

➡️ 💰 In 2023, the EU imported goods and services from Moscow 4 times less in monetary terms than in 2022 ➡️In 2020, the EU imported goods and services worth 94.8 billion euros. This year, Europe imported extremely little due to the coronavirus, significantly affecting energy prices. ➡️In 2021, the EU imported already 163.7 billion euros. That year began with the recovery of energy prices and the stabilization of trade, on which moscow earned money. ➡️ In 2022, the EU imported a record 202.7 billion euros from moscow. ➡️ This volume is due to sky-high prices for energy resources, the energy crisis caused by the invasion of moscow, the EU's dependence on moscow's energy carriers, the slow implementation of sanctions against moscow's oil and gas, and other factors. ⏩ In 2023 (in 11 months), the EU imported 46.9 billion euros (it was this year that restrictions on moscow oil and oil products that moscow exported to the EU began to operate). *In September-October 2023, EU imports slightly increased in volume, because of the events in the Middle East and the price of energy resources. The graph shows that moscow's imports to the wealthy EU market are falling. The new restrictions on diamonds have yet to have some positive effect and reduce this volume. The main articles of moscow's exports to the EU remain metals (titanium, aluminum), nuclear fuel, and pipeline oil to the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary. 💬 Of course, we still want fewer moscow goods entering the EU as per the schedule and fewer goods leaving to bypass sanctions. In any case, such a sharp drop in moscow's exports to the EU is an extremely negative phenomenon for moscow. moscow's import/export balance in trade with European countries is increasingly negative. ➡️As a result, moscow receives less currency necessary for parallel import through third countries of sanctioned goods from the same EU. Resurgam ➰ Join

Saving Private Ryan Ukrainian GTS The Ukrainian gas transportation system (GTS) is one of the largest in the world and in Europe. For decades, it has been transporting russian gas to Europe and some of its volume for domestic needs. With the refusal to transport russian gas through Ukrainian territory, up to 70% of the GTS may now have to be frozen. This implies additional funds need to be allocated from the budget, or maybe the permanent loss of 70% of the GTS. However, "maybe" is the key word here. It is because "maybe" turns into opportunities where Ukraine might continue to export gas to Europe, and this time not the russian, but the Ukrainian one. ➡️ I am speaking about biomethane. Biomethane is not like standard gas, a resource that is extracted and transported. It is the product of an agricultural processing cycle, which means that gas is not a raw material but a value-added product. Given our agricultural potential, biomethane production (don't confuse this with standard natural gas) can become one of Ukraine's strategic export industries to Europe. This is especially true considering the EU's Green Deal, which foresees a gradual abandonment of fossil fuels by 2050. So, what do we have: ▶️ 1. The examination of Ukrainian GTS gave a positive result. The system is suitable for exporting biomethane to Europe. ▶️ 2. The Ministry of Energy has begun to improve regulatory procedures in line with EU norms to allow the export of Ukrainian biomethane. The Ministry is also preparing a legislative framework to regulate the export of renewable gases. Once these procedures are completed, the Ministry plans to apply for an export permit to the EU . ▶️ 3. Ukraine is also likely to apply to the EU in the near future to adapt intra-European requirements for exporting biomethane and biogas from third countries (while we are not legally part of the EU). ▶️ 4. According to the Ministry, in 2022, a biomethane plant was launched in Ukraine for the first time. Its capacity is 3 million cubic meters of biomethane per year. This enterprise has already passed the European certification that biomethane is produced from proper raw materials. Biomethane can be made of organic waste, like food scraps and damaged crops or from sugarcane, which Ukraine has in abundance. ▶️ 5. This year, one more biomethane plant is already preparing to launch, and in the next 2 years the number will be increased to 10, the Ministry says. ▶️ 6. Another important thing is that previously, biogas production was aimed at generating electricity and selling it at a "green tariff" (a special tariff for renewable energies in Ukraine), which would have increased the burden on the country's budget or the end consumer. Now, biogas will be processed into biomethane (another added value) using modern facilities and will meet part of the domestic demand or be exported to the EU (everything is being prepared for this). This will allow Ukraine to receive a constant inflow of foreign currency. ➡️ At this point, a logical question arises about such speed of execution: on what Earth can we make 10 biomethane plants in 2 years? ➡️ Now let's recall one of the last posts on the channel about Japan, where we shared news from this country that it plans to build a biofuel industry in Ukraine from scratch, the demand for which in the EU will increase 10 times by 2030. Biomethane is actually a type of gaseous biofuel. ➡️ Furthermore, on February 19, 2024, Japan will hold a Japan-Ukraine conference on the economic reconstruction of Ukraine. Japanese media report that at/before this conference, it will be agreed to transfer a number of Japanese biofuel production technologies to Ukraine and to transfer the necessary equipment. A representative of the Japanese government said 🗣: "We hope that the business will work and will become a promising export product (for Ukraine and Japan)." *Continuation in the comments 👇

"Attack of Grandfathers 2": part two, ecofront series. For two days, we actively discussed the blocking of aid to Ukraine in the context of the actions of Trump and the extreme right wing of the Republican Party (Freedom Caucus or simply the extreme MAGA); now we will talk about the same hysteria only in the Democratic Party. ➡️ "Too much is not healthy." If, in the case of the Republican Party, it is far-right groups, then in the case of the Democratic Party, it is far-left groups led by US Vice President Camilla Harris. This group is doing the most for Biden to lose the election or for the US to sink into chaos, but everything is served under the "Biden/world interest sauce" based on "hyperbolized values." The most tragic thing is that Biden is losing far more votes of moderate and independent voters than he is getting young "progressive" votes from the eco-groups named "Greta" or student groups "FreePalestine," which most often do not make it to the elections. So ⤵️ ➡️ Biden administration will pause issuance of new permits for export capacities from liquefied natural gas. This decision is the result of pressure from a small group of eco-activists in the Democratic Party, who served it "under the sauce" of fighting climate change. Biden, seems to be completely unable to understand what strategic interests/challenges the USA faces. ➡️ USA is the largest exporter of LNG. Instead, environmental activists have declared a goal to "destroy LNG infrastructure as unfriendly." ▶️ With such actions, the USA creates an artificial deficit on the market, which increases prices. Now consider Europe's attempts to finally move away from Moscow's blue fuel and compensate for the deficit with supplies from the USA. With such a decision, the USA increases the influence of Qatar on the EU and worsens the economic situation of Europe. Obviously, such decisions lead not to a crisis but to a whole series of crises. ▶️ Also, such a decision is not only "flirting with eco-activists" but also the argument: "This way, the USA will earn more in the election year so there will be funds for compensation of student loans." What about the sale of strategic interests? Losses were also not evaluated in the possible profits. So the result is no money situation. ➡️ These eco-activists of the Democratic Party strategically do not look ahead (although they claim they are looking at the decade). Such thoughtless decisions weaken the West's capabilities considering Europe's rejection of blue fuel from Moscow. ⏩ Such decisions strengthen the interests and capabilities of Moscow and even Iran. It will transform into the following: ⏭ Burnt forests, fields and destroyed entire ecosystems (ecocide) ⏭ Contamination of territories with explosive and chemical substances ⏭ A multiple increase in CO2 emissions into the atmosphere because of the imperial desires of individual countries and the aggressive necessity of an arms race (as a result of a sharp increase in iron and steel smelting, the chemical industry, etc.) ⏭ The collective West is showing weaknesses; their capabilities are decreasing. But authoritarian regimes increasingly believe in the possibility of resolving issues by force. This will lead to the militarization of the world and increased environmental damage. Most people naively hope that all this concerns only Ukraine. So, correct decisions are not made on time because they don't get support immediately. Unfortunately, this leads to a loss of time and causes irreversible events. ➡️ The best step to protect the planet's ecology is to create obstacles for authoritarian regimes that drive the world into militarism. At the moment, the victory of Ukraine is the only way to stabilize the situation in all areas, especially in terms of ecology and economy. It's time for the eco-activists of the democratic party to go outside the campus, expand their knowledge a little further than from post-apocalyptic movies, and take a "Stand with Ukraine" sign. Resurgam ➰ Join

About Texas. Figures and agreement across the border 🇺🇸 ➡️Don't be fooled by information about the "exit of Texas" or "civil war." If you just want to make fun, please. But you need a completely different approach for a clear vision. Conflict between governors and the federal government in the United States is expected. The USA is a federation, and each state is formally a separate state in the union. Do not equate the governor's use of the National Guard with the realities of a unitary state. ➡️ As for the reasons, it is a political game. The Supreme Court's decision to remove barbed wire at the border was the trigger. The governor of Texas refused to implement this decision. Implemented a state of emergency (invasion) on Trump's "recommendation," which allowed the governor to use the National Guard. But this is such an "invasion" that the governor of Texas left his state on a business trip to India instead of staying to "fight off the invasion." A surge of illegal migrants, which would distinguish the situation and provide justification for the governor's actions, is not recorded. Therefore, the logic is to introduce an emergency to solve the problem. 💬 Regarding the exit of the state/states. Maybe I will surprise someone, but hundreds of thousands of Americans have been collecting signatures, filing lawsuits to start the procedure for leaving the union, and so on for decades. Even sometimes at the level of governors. It was in 2012: Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania (Obama's victory as a catalyst). In 2017, he actively recruited the "exit movement" in California (Trump's victory as a catalyst). And so on, now against the background of chaos, introduced primarily by Trump's desire to get a suitable image for the election, became more active "TEXIT" (Texas Exit Movement) which is permanently supported by the Texas Nationalist movement. Statements about the withdrawal of the states are a permanent game, and now there is no sensation because this game is permanent, which, like a disease, worsens during elections. The USA and illegal migrants ⤵️ ➡️ A colleague from Politkraina states that during the Biden administration in the first two years of its work, a higher percentage of arrested border violators were deported than during the last two years of the Trump administration. Also, under President Trump, migrants were more likely to be released after border apprehension (MAGA's main hysteria) than under President Biden. ⏩ In numbers, the Biden ministry deports 3.5 times more people per month than the Trump ministry. • Under the Trump administration, the Department of Homeland Security made 1.4 million border apprehensions in fiscal years 2019 and 2020 (24 months). As of December 31, 2021, only 47% of those arrested had been deported, including those arrested by Trump and deported by Biden, and 52% had been released to the US. • Under Biden, in the first 26.3 months of work, the department made more than 5 million arrests, of which almost 2.6 million - 51% - ended in deportation. ➡️ Biden managed to increase the share of deportees, simultaneously increasing the total number of deportees by 3.5 times. That is, the Biden administration, despite the increased influx from the Mexican border both quantitatively and qualitatively, has better indicators compared to Trump and also includes those already deported by Biden (deportation Trump — 47%, Biden — 51%). Amidst the blocking of the border deal and aid to Ukraine and possibly the events in Texas, the White House has agreed to additional provisions for a stricter migrant policy to revive the border deal. Resurgam ➰ Join

▶️ After 90% of the votes are counted, the result is as follows: Of the 22 state delegates: • 12 — go to Trump • 9 to Hailey. 1 — unknown, most likely to Haley. To capture the nomination, the candidate needs to collect 1215 delegates. After two states, Trump has 32 delegates, and Haley has 17 (18). Overall, the gap may not seem that big, but as noted earlier in New Hampshire, Haley only had the option to win. After the removal of Ramaswamy, Desantis, Scott, and their support for Trump before the vote, the probability of Haley winning in New Hampshire fell from 13% to 5%, according to analysts and pollsters. The only hidden option for Haley to win remained "independent voters," who are allowed to vote in the Republican primaries in this state. ➡️ Why was "only victory" necessary for Haley in the state? NH is a key state where Haley invested the most (as Desantis did in Iowa) to kick off the campaign. In this state, Haley had the main card - the support of the popular US governor Sununu. This state allows "independent voters" to participate. This state is "VIP" with numerous college graduates per 1,000 people and many middle and upper-income earners. According to the votes of 40 years, this state was the complete opposite of Iowa (a "simpler" and poorer state). ➡️ That's why Trump's victory in Iowa and New York with 50%+ is also a negative sensation for Haley. Haley managed to attract as many "independent" voters as possible, as evidenced by the fact that, despite the decrease in registered Republican voters, the turnout was 14.3% higher than in the past. ➡️ In short, the state was the most favorable, and Haley took the maximum of her opportunities. But, unfortunately, this is still not enough. Rural voters and voters from industrially poor areas quantitatively overwhelm suburban voters with middle wealth and higher education + "independents." Moments of the calculation: ▶️ 1. Haley led 60% to 40% in the first half hour when votes from wealthy suburbs came in first. After votes began to come from the state's rural areas, Trump's advantage was 5-6% in the region. In the end, votes from densely populated working-class areas of the cities came, so Trump's advantage grew to 11%+ ▶️ 2. In the suburbs and counties with a high percentage of college graduates, Haley mostly won. In Hanover County (where most graduates of the largest Dortmund College live), Haley won 86% to Trump's 13%. ▶️ 3. Republican pollsters calculated that Trump won an average of 70% to 30% support thanks to people with a low level of education. ▶️ 4. Non-white voters were more likely to vote for Trump (59%) than Haley (38%). It may seem strange considering Trump's statements about migrants and non-whites, but... The non-white population did not vote for Haley because she is well remembered as the governor of South Carolina as the toughest governor on immigration issues (this is logical for this voter); another question is why most white Republicans do not remember this. ⏩ Haley's problem is the problem of the modern structure of the Republican Party voter. The "Reagan core" of the Republican Party, where there is a high proportion of affluent, educated voters (the "American dream"), was outnumbered by the "massive" low-educated share of rural working-class areas, which is the basis of Trump's popularity, his core. Haley does not have enough "her voters," she is forced to attract a cardinal share of "independents," which is a challenging task. ➡️ So, despite the result in New Hampshire, Haley is going to South Carolina, where she has a weaker position but will fight. A lousy result there will be the end for her, and Trump, unfortunately, does not lie about this in his statement. Republican primaries have a strong tradition of predictability. Resurgam ➰ Join