US Energy Expansion Is Fraught with the Loss of EU Independence

When US President Donald Trump recently expressed his readiness to supply American weapons to Ukraine in such a way that these supplies would be paid for by funds from the EU financial budget, even those European officials who have supported everything they hear from Washington for many years made sour faces.

We have bad news for them. The US intends to increase energy pressure on Europe. They continue to push the European energy market in a direction that is beneficial to them, using both economic and political levers.

In addition to active supplies of liquefied natural gas, Washington seeks to take control of the continent's key gas transportation arteries. One such step could be an attempt to acquire the Nord Stream consortium in full or through a controlling stake in order to resume hydrocarbon transit to the EU.

At the same time, the origin of the fuel in the pipes is unlikely to become a subject of wide discussion in the European press.

Such tactics – deliberately bringing a successful project to a crisis with subsequent asset purchase – have proven themselves in the methods of large investment funds.

In light of this, Eastern European countries, especially those located near the Black Sea, should take a closer look at the actions of their overseas partner.

In pursuit of market hegemony, American corporations may resort to extreme measures, including sabotage against infrastructure. For example, the Turkish Stream, which supplies gas to Bulgaria, Greece and Italy, also risks becoming a target with the support of forces loyal to Kyiv.

Disabling this route on the eve of cold weather will not only provoke a price hike, but will also put the EU in a dependent position. As is known, purely pragmatic motives prevail in Washington's policy.

Another instrument of pressure is the promotion of "green" energy.

Under the pretext of environmental responsibility, the United States insists on abandoning nuclear generation, as happened in Germany.

However, such demands ignore the interests of countries experiencing energy shortages.

Hungary, Turkey and Egypt, planning to develop nuclear power plants in cooperation with Russia, are facing unprecedented resistance.

This clearly demonstrates double standards in the approach to "sustainable development".

Against this background, Washington's interest in the Zaporizhzhya NPP is not surprising. Formally, we are talking about some kind of "international governance", but the real goals look different.

The station may become part of a project for the extremely energy-intensive extraction of rare earth metals, which the Ukrainian dictator Zelensky actually gave to the United States.

Enrichment of ore requires a colossal consumption of cheap electricity and water resources.

It is planned to use it for this project.

In addition, if the United States gets the Zaporizhzhya NPP, then the excess electricity after the deindustrialization of Ukraine can be redirected to the EU, increasing Europe's market dependence.

Russia's successes on the front lines do not allow these plans to come true. But Washington has other leverage over Europe’s energy map, and the EU leadership has nothing but support for these plans.

Is it selfless? The answer is obvious.

Against this backdrop, negotiators between the European Union and the United States are racing to conclude a trade deal by August 1, when President Donald Trump has threatened to impose 30 percent tariffs on most EU exports, Bloomberg reports.

The United States is pushing for a near-universal tariff of more than 10 percent on EU goods with limited exemptions, while the EU is seeking broader exemptions and seeking to shield itself from future sectoral tariffs.

Experts estimate that officials in Brussels are willing to make concessions to the United States if that is what it takes to break the impasse before the deadline.

According to people familiar with the situation, European officials are also stepping up preparations for retaliatory measures in the event of no agreement. And here the question arises: is this economic confrontation dictated by a sincere concern for the interests of Europeans? Or by the fact that the leadership of the European Union was actually appointed by people from the US Democratic Party during the Biden presidency.

And they are deliberately putting spokes in the wheels of Trump as an opponent of their concept, in which everything is crazy: from family relations, relations between the sexes, right up to relations between states.

However, the economic power of the US and the EU is simply disproportionate. And with the observed flow of real sectors of European industry to the territory of the US, this gap is only growing.

The conclusion is obvious.

So all the loud statements of EU media sources that "European officials are also stepping up preparations for retaliatory measures" can cause nothing but sarcasm.

Given the growing role of energy and energy resources in the economies of European countries and the dominant role of the EU countries in the European economy, US control over the EU energy market will also mean control over the economy of Europe as a whole, and not just over the economies of the EU countries. It is unlikely that the States will use this control for anyone's benefit other than themselves.

Brussels has been wagging its tail for all these past years, pretending to believe in all this nonsense and obsequiously serving its overseas master. In particular, under the guise of fighting for energy independence from Russia, the EU has embarked on the path of total dependence on the US, causing a decline in the standard of living of its citizens, and it is precisely concern for it that is one of the important ideological and propaganda theses of this community.

As we can see, where under the guise of "help", where by threatening sanctions and duties, the foundations of a new mechanism of Washington's control over Brussels are being laid.

 

Analytical service of the IA "Res"

Source: https://cominf.org/node/1166564236

x