Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
Please do!

We need some more gold up here in the north......
That would be fine if your Minister for Energy didn't say that Norway doesn't have the capacity for that several months ago.

Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
It is delusional to believe Russia can reshape the direction of its current fuel torrents overnight and redirect them eastwards in this very winter. I think it will need about five years (especially gas and oil supply as current facilities are inadequate) for Russia to supplant their Western export with the same amount of Eastern one. And that is given that Russia has money to spend on building pipelines through taiga and what not and Russia's money seems to be tight (especially this winter). And from what I heard China declined to subsidize the construction.
It works both ways. It would take a lot of time and a lot of effort for Europe to switch suppliers. Only significant producer of natural gas that is close enough is Iran. Even if Europe manages to find another supplier that can produce as much natural gas as Europe needs, it still needs infrastructure to get that gas transported to Europe, which means new pipelines. LNG also needs infrastructure and is much more expensive than pipeline natural gas. Russia will most certainly manage to finish Chinese pipeline before, and anyway, we're talking about 5-10 years in the future.
This was the course rebels themselves chose and shaped. They want to have as little to do with the junta as possible and cleave to Russia.
You're entitled to think that. It might even be true, but, even if it is true, the fact is that Kiev closed off all other options for them except direct military confrontation. They can't be wooed back now. Whether one supports Kiev or rebels, it would seem that the only way Kiev comes out on top is if it manages to defeat the rebels by military means, which I believe is impossible.

Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
AFAIK the infrastructure to make such a threat good on is not available, though Russia is trying to diversify the customer-base to SE Asia.

But let's say that a US-Azeri alliance deepens and pipelines through the Caspian via Azerbaijan and the Black Sea bring Central Asian oil to Europe, plus development of green energy/natural gas, while Russia focuses exports on Asia to replace Europe - where does that leave the world (in say 20 years)?

It could mean that Russia has greater motivation to attempt to further Finlandize, or outright absorb, the Central Asian states.

Most interestingly, the fates of China and Russia would collocate more strongly, since they would become more mutually-dependent. OTOH, China would probably feel this less than Russia.

In that light, it's possible to see the US strategy here as allowing Russian weakness to develop to its natural conclusion, i.e. the point where Russia overplays its hand and gets smacked down hard by the international community. In other words, a momentous confrontation between Russia and the US over the Ukraine question is against US interests, since the US position can improve whereas by all accounts the Russian position can only worsen.

In the end, yes, I suppose there is always the possibility that Russia will flip out and start WW3 as it loses the capacity to act in the world over the coming decades.
I'd say that Russia's on the rise, rather than decline, so waiting it out will fail. Even if you're right, that's several decades in the future. Nobody likes the idea of a frozen conflict for the next 25+ years.