[drmohitg]

Originally Posted by goacom

Yeah, apparently Ukraine was so over run with Nazis that 20,000 Indian students chose to put their lives in danger and live in Ukraine instead of the peace loving and non-racist Russia.

Well to be honest, an equal number of Indian students do study in Russia as well. In fact, it is one of the preferred destinations for Medical students who cannot get a seat in India. So I am not sure if this can be equated with the political situation in that country.

[thanixravindran]

Originally Posted by goacom

In the short run, Germany is attempting to replace Russian gas with a)imported gas (70%), b)more coal (5%), c)extending its nuclear plants (5%) d)conservation (10%). This covers most (~90%) but not all of the potentially lost Russian gas.

In the longer term, it is going all in on expanding renewable energy, but this will take time.

Of all these substitution Russian gas and conservation are the two main short term thrusts. Setting up LNG terminals is as much as a 5 year process. It is planning to do this within a year in part by purchasing two pre-fabricated floating LNG terminals which will be linked to its domestic pipelines. However, this will not be ready until early next year so if Russia were to cut off gas this winter, it would be a problem. This is why Germany has been very lukewarm (no pun intended) in its support of Ukraine.

Even after the infrastructure is established (in record time!), it will still need to secure imports of LNG. It is working with many suppliers (US, Australia, Qatar) as well as piped gas (North Africa, Azerbaijan, Norway....) etc. It is uncertain if they will be able to replace all of the lost Russian gas.

For the longer term, it has increased expenditures into renewables by 400%, with the aim to become almost energy independent by 2030, but that is still 8 years from now and will not help in the short run.

This is in line with what I read online. Couple of more questions

1. I read USA is the largest producer of natural gas. Their current supply to Germany is quite less I guess as Germany imports 60% of gas from Russia. So can USA increase their production to that much level to cater to German demand. Is it possible?

2. Will the economics work for long distance LNG from Australia or USA? Will it not increase the domestic cost for residential and business purposes? Will still Germany will be able to compete with china with increased energy cost? I believe there is a reason German Russian relationship is formed on the practical economic sense than the democratic angle as evident by the Nord stream 1 and 2 pipelines. I guess it took decades to build it. Down the line, is there any possibility Germany abandon the European unity for its energy security?

I agree on the renewables in long term as necessity is the mother of innovation and hope next 'green' revolution justifies it.

[dragracer567]

Originally Posted by mygodbole

Suffering cannot be diminished by human political opinion.

You are right mate. Then why is the existence of far-right groups in Ukraine (which is found in each and every democratic country right now + even Russia) being used as an excuse for the invasion and the same is being defended in this thread?

To repeat your outrage, I object, I object and I will repeatedly object to the opinion that fringe far-right groups can be used as an excuse to invade a country.

Originally Posted by Gansan

They have petitioned to join NATO. Not actually joined. It will take time to fructify. And Russia has clearly stated they will attack.

Putin said there will be "serious military and political consequences". Sufficient to be a vague warning but not something that would force Putin to attack to keep his word.

Anyway, most pundits including the anti-western ones know that it is a done-deal with the only wild card being Turkey and there's basically nothing Russia can do to stop this. Russia opening another front, that too with two European Union countries would be foolish at best.

[Gansan]

^^ Can we be sure they won't be foolish? They have said they are prepared to nuke and be nuked in return if necessary. May be they will act. May be it is just a bluff. The west has to call the bluff. The US has not dared to call the bluff even with North Korea.

But one thing is sure. They will drag other countries in and start a world war if necessary, but will not allow Nato on their borders. Why is Biden foolishly bent on pushing it?

[dragracer567]

Originally Posted by Gansan

Why is Biden foolishly bent on pushing it?

The same reason why India doesn't bend over to nuclear blackmail by its neighbor to the West. Because blackmail is the only card these nuisance states bring to the negotiating table. Once you call their bluff, there's nothing left.

[Gansan]

I think it is the other way around. Russia is calling Biden's bluff.

Do you seriously believe America or UK or France will go all in to support a non NATO member country if there is a real risk of nukes involved? Even if a NATO country is hit by a small nuke? And attract nukes towards their own soil? I don't think they have the stomach for it. They will definitely start attacking Russia but only with conventional weapons. And that is Putin's bet.

[dragracer567]

Originally Posted by Gansan

I think it is the other way around. Russia is calling Biden's bluff.

Do you seriously believe America or UK or France will go all in to support a non NATO member country if there is a real risk of nukes involved? Even if a NATO country is hit by a small nuke? And attract nukes towards their own soil? I don't think they have the stomach for it. They will definitely start attacking Russia but only with conventional weapons. And that is Putin's bet.

Which bluff did Russia call? Last I checked, Russia hasn't invaded Sweden or Finland yet and hasn't even explicitly said it would.

Finland and Sweden might be non-NATO but they are still EU members. So, France (nuclear-armed) and Germany will almost surely have to respond in case of an invasion. Meanwhile, UK has a separate defense treaty with Finland and Sweden. By extension, the whole of NATO is already invested in the defense of Finland and Sweden.

I'll say it again, threatening to be reckless won't get you anywhere.

[mygodbole]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

With all due respect did you object when dozens upon dozens of posts in this very thread applauded and metaphorically celebrated the attack on Ukraine and in thinly disguised fashions tried to justify the killing of innocents in the name of war, in the name of "America did that too" . Did you object then? What @goacom has stated are simply the facts. I can't see what is objectionable, unless you are not familiar with the facts.

I withdraw all objections and withdraw from this conversation. Two wrongs do not make a correction. I stand corrected. Thank you

[thanixravindran]

Originally Posted by dragracer567

The same reason why India doesn't bend over to nuclear blackmail by its neighbor to the West. Because blackmail is the only card these nuisance states bring to the negotiating table. Once you call their bluff, there's nothing left.

Originally Posted by Gansan

^^ Can we be sure they won't be foolish? They have said they are prepared to nuke and be nuked in return if necessary. May be they will act. May be it is just a bluff. The west has to call the bluff. The US has not dared to call the bluff even with North Korea.

But one thing is sure. They will drag other countries in and start a world war if necessary, but will not allow Nato on their borders. Why is Biden foolishly bent on pushing it?

Concept of nuclear deterrence has held peace and is sacrosanct for the last 75 years. There are multiple war theories and simulations to overcome that with low yield tactical nukes without collateral damage. Any country that breaches this threshold and gets away with it, is the one which will be calling the bluff of nuclear deterrence and it will open the flood gates of a completely new world. My personal opinion is it will most likely be USA rather than Russia.

[vishnurp99]

Originally Posted by thanixravindran

1. Will still Germany will be able to compete with china with increased energy cost? I believe there is a reason German Russian relationship is formed on the practical economic sense than the democratic angle as evident by the Nord stream 1 and 2 pipelines. I guess it took decades to build it. Down the line, is there any possibility Germany abandon the European unity for its energy security?

Now I am also really curious about the dynamics for the German economy. I feel that there are two options for Germany.

1. German economy reorients from it's heavy manufacturing/engineering focus (essentially energy intensive industries) to a more Intellectual property driven model which focuses on light engineering, consumer electronics, computers/software etc. This is quite a challenging transformation but countries like Japan have done it before in 1970s in reaction to the oil price shock.

2. Germany goes back to the mutually beneficial relationship that it had with Russia using the Nordstrom pipelines and continues it's strong heavy manufacturing/engineering focus. Of course Ukraine will be thrown under the bus in this path.

It's bad time to be a democratic politician in Germany & the rest of Europe. Boris is out, Macron scraped through his election and lost his absolute majority in Parliament (first since 1997), Draghi's resignation, Scholz approval ratings are dismal etc. Not all of it can be attributed to Ukraine of course .

[goacom]

Originally Posted by thanixravindran

This is in line with what I read online. Couple of more questions

1. I read USA is the largest producer of natural gas. Their current supply to Germany is quite less I guess as Germany imports 60% of gas from Russia. So can USA increase their production to that much level to cater to German demand. Is it possible?

2. Will the economics work for long distance LNG from Australia or USA? Will it not increase the domestic cost for residential and business purposes? Will still Germany will be able to compete with china with increased energy cost? I believe there is a reason German Russian relationship is formed on the practical economic sense than the democratic angle as evident by the Nord stream 1 and 2 pipelines. I guess it took decades to build it. Down the line, is there any possibility Germany abandon the European unity for its energy security?

US exports of LNG are limited more by export capacity than anything else. It just does not have the LNG conversion capacity that is needed to transport the gas to replace the lost Russian gas. The same is true with other exporters like Qatar. It will take time - as much as 3-5 years.

The German strategy with Russia has been to buy time. If Russia cuts off gas to Europe, Germany will have a difficult winter this year, but I would think that the situation will stabilize by Spring 2023.

Importing LNG is a lot more expensive than piping gas from Russia, so yes, there will be consequences for German industry.. see below.

Originally Posted by vishnurp99

Now I am also really curious about the dynamics for the German economy. I feel that there are two options for Germany.

1. German economy reorients from it's heavy manufacturing/engineering focus (essentially energy intensive industries) to a more Intellectual property driven model which focuses on light engineering, consumer electronics, computers/software etc. This is quite a challenging transformation but countries like Japan have done it before in 1970s in reaction to the oil price shock.

2. Germany goes back to the mutually beneficial relationship that it had with Russia using the Nordstrom pipelines and continues it's strong heavy manufacturing/engineering focus. Of course Ukraine will be thrown under the bus in this path.

Yes, these are the two options. I highly doubt that Germany will choose Option 2. Their attempts at establishing strong commercial relations with Russia is what got them into this mess in the first place. In fact, this same re-evaluation will also take place in their over dependence on the Chinese market.

However, one should add that low prices of its products have not been the primary driver of its exports. Much of the high end engineering products it makes and exports are less price sensitive. However as China moves up the value chain, Chinese products will start competing with German engineered products, with China's move up being powered by German made industrial equipment and processes. Furthermore, while Germany has been relying on cheap Russia gas, it's overall energy costs are still very high due to its early (pre-mature?) attempts to transition to wind and solar. However, Germany industry adapted to this high cost via greater efficiency. The bottom line is not Russia, but China that will determine Germany's competitive situation. The same may also apply to China's relationship with Russia. Russia will effectively become a client state of China.

In the short term this is going to be very hard for Germany to deal with as exports to China + imports of cheap energy from Russia has been the lynchpin of its economy. Unlike the US, the Germany is no longer a leader in the various emerging technologies (Germany was the center of cutting edge science until the 1930s, but the great depression and the rise of the Nazis destroyed that). However, German heavy industry has historically been pretty quick in applying these emerging technologies to its specific applications and it is possible that they may continue that into the future.

These are of course take on the situation and I could be very wrong here. The future is hard to predict.

[shashanka]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

India's foreign policy should be, and in fact is, that as the 2nd most populous country, the 5th or 6th largest economy, the 3rd largest in purchasing power parity terms, the 3rd or 4th largest military, and the fastest growing large economy we don't need to be in anyone's corner of the global boxing ring. We are in our own corner based on our priorities and interests. The forces that enable India to demand its own corner and hold firm have been brewing up for several years. The Ukraine war, the USA-China rift, Europe's energy confusion all provided the spark that enabled this to happen. And we have the ideal External Affairs Minister in the saddle to pull it all together.

Any crises in international relations creates a vacuum - big or small, regional or global, economic or military etc. Geo-political power moves to fill the vacuum and drive change simultaneously. With the Ukraine war our moving swiftly and boldly despite pressure, innuendoes and threats has finally created for us our own corner in world politics. It has shaken a 200-year old colonial mindset that a developing nation's foreign policy needs to be on one or the other side of a Euro-centric or West-centric point of view. This has been followed up with amazing speed with the UAE-USA-Israel-India I2U2 Quad* to hopefully bring stability to the volatile Middle East and give us a bigger say in our neighbourhood.

In my 45 years of reading and avidly following foreign policy matters it has never been better for India and we have never ever had a more competent External Affairs Minister.


*https://www.business-standard.com/ar...1401466_1.html

Well said, Narayanji! S.Jaishanker is without question the best External Affairs Minister we have had so far. To the list of positives you have mentioned, I'd also add the rumblings one can hear about India's likely inclusion as a new member in the U.N. Security Council - after the media reports that India is likely to overtake China as the most populous country! Whether that's a good criteria or not is of course open to debate.

[Prowler]

Originally Posted by goacom

Unlike the US, the Germany is no longer a leader in the various emerging technologies (Germany was the center of cutting edge science until the 1930s, but the great depression and the rise of the Nazis destroyed that).

I beg to differ here. The Nazis under Hitler actually made Germany as one the top leaders in industrial production and Scientific achievements at that time. Remember the Father of Rockets 'Wernher von Braun' who was the chief architect of the US Apollo Saturn V rocket ? Hitler constructed the world's first express ways - Autobahn. If he had not fought the second World War, he would have been hailed as the greatest States man of the 20th century.

Germany still has edge in some areas of the high tech industries - automobile, precision engineering, optics and so on. Mercedes pioneered research into innovative automobile technologies.

[thanixravindran]

Originally Posted by Prowler

I beg to differ here. The Nazis under Hitler actually made Germany as one the top leaders in industrial production and Scientific achievements at that time. Remember the Father of Rockets 'Wernher von Braun' who was the chief architect of the US Apollo Saturn V rocket ? Hitler constructed the world's first express ways - Autobahn. If he had not fought the second World War, he would have been hailed as the greatest States man of the 20th century.

Germany still has edge in some areas of the high tech industries - automobile, precision engineering, optics and so on. Mercedes pioneered research into innovative automobile technologies.

I guess the OP referred to the various fundamental research and development happened in Germany during the early decades of 1900s that set the tone of future technological advances. It was truly a golden period for Physics and Chemistry research. And the brain drain after the Nazi rise cannot be forgotten. Post war, USA become the pioneer in the computing era which we are still living and don't think Germany or any other country is closer to it. Probably China may challenge in the future.

If you may allow, a small correction in your other statement - Hitler would have still been a great statesman not for the world war but for the holocaust. I am someone who always believe war is inevitable as long as human race is there but can never come to terms of monstrosity.

[goacom]

Originally Posted by Prowler

I beg to differ here. The Nazis under Hitler actually made Germany as one the top leaders in industrial production and Scientific achievements at that time. Remember the Father of Rockets 'Wernher von Braun' who was the chief architect of the US Apollo Saturn V rocket ? Hitler constructed the world's first express ways - Autobahn. If he had not fought the second World War, he would have been hailed as the greatest States man of the 20th century.

Germany still has edge in some areas of the high tech industries - automobile, precision engineering, optics and so on. Mercedes pioneered research into innovative automobile technologies.

Yes, Germany pioneered rocketry and jet engines (among many other things) in WW2. However, the seeds for most of those advances were laid in the 1920s and 30s. That era was truly a golden age for discovery. Quantum mechanics, Relativity and other breakthroughs have yet to be matched since.

Up to WW2, most scientific publications, specially in physics and chemistry were written in German. However, Germany began to lose its scientific talent (specially if they were Jewish) after the rise of the Nazis. Albert Einstein was just one example of many. The Manhattan project helped the US leapfrog Germany with the help of many German and European refugee scientists. Today Russia continues to hemorrhage its scientific talent to the US, Western Europe and Israel and is an echo of its earlier loss of talent in the 1990s when the Soviet Union imploded. Israel was expecting a flood of Ukranian refugees, but it has so far received far more Russians who are fleeing their own government. Dont expect the Russian sympathizers here to tell you that!

Germany is still a leader in many industrial sectors, but when it comes to bleeding edge research, it cant really compete with the US anymore. Most of its industrial giants are from its historical past. In contrast, some of America's largest companies today (Apple, Google etc) are relatively young companies.

As I have said, while Germany is no longer an innovator, it is an extremely fast follower. In the automotive sector, the German auto companies had been researching into Hydrogen metal hydride storage since the 1980s and in fuel cells since the 1990s. Tesla then came along and made all this irrelevant. To their credit, German industry has been the fastest to respond to the EV threat, but it remains to be seen whether they are successful. Yet here too, the real threat is not Tesla, but the Chinese.

In the mean time, the Russian auto industry is struggling to make vehicles that would not even be competitive 25 years ago! It just goes to show that with the exception of oil and gas, Russia has no relevance in the modern industry. Even their space program is heading to a dead end as they can no longer compete with companies like SpaceX.