On 9 January, 2019, I wrote that,
"One can now safely say that Angela Merkel, together with the German business community is, and always has been, covering Putin's economic back, irrespective of Gazprom being a critical factor in Putin's war with Ukraine!
The completion of the Nord Stream2 project is now more critical for Putin as the US House of Congress begins to block Trump's attempt to remove US sanctions against Putin and his 'siloviki' clique." (cf. also Alan Rappeport above)
How long, now, will Merkel be able to continue with her pretense that Nord Stream2 is a purely economic relationship between herself and Putin? (Blog Entry 9 January, 2019)
Recent events in the banking world of Germany further underscores the degree and extent to which Putinversteher Angela Merkel will go to cover Putin's, and his Kremlin 'siloviki's', economic back.
I refer, of course, to the current scrabble by Merkel to save Deutsche Bank, the favoured German bank of Trump, Putin, and the Kremlin 'siloviki'
As reported by Matthew Lynn (left),
"Over the last few years, the Germans, the European Central Bank, and the EU itself, have been adamant that banks shouldn’t be bailed out inside the eurozone. Along the way, Greek, Cypriot, Italian and Irish banks have all been allowed to go to the wall or squeezed to extinction.
...
But hold on. There seems to be an exception to that austere financial regime. Big German banks. With the once mighty Deutsche Bank in serious trouble, it turns out there is nothing wrong with the [German] government orchestrating what amounts to a rescue after all." (The Spectator : 19 March, 2019) (my emphasis)
Matthew Lynn goes on to state that,
" ... That lays bare a stark truth about the eurozone, and indeed the EU. There is one rule for Germany, and another for everyone else." (ibid Matthew Lynn)
Arthur Sullivan perhaps best sums up WHY Merkel believes there is one rule for Germany, and another for everyone else. He reports that,
"Deutsche Bank's problems have been even more pronounced. On top of its dire financial performance — it made a net loss of €6 billion between 2011 and 2018 — it has been bogged down with several major scandals, including the Libor scandal, where fraudulent manipulation of interest rates took place for years, and the ongoing money laundering probe into Danske Bank." (DW : 10 March, 2019) (my emphasis)
This "one rule for Germany, and another for everyone else", is also true in the case of Nord Stream 2, Putin's desperate attempt to ensure its completion so that he will not have to pay into Ukraine's coffers for sending gas to the EU through Ukraine's gas pipelines.
Recall that in February of this year,
"Under a deal agreed earlier in February, the [Nord Stream 2] pipeline must meet four EU rules, including a telecoms-style unbundling requirement whereby other suppliers be allowed access to the pipeline.
However, Germany will be the ultimate arbiter of how the regulations are applied. " (Adam Vaughan:The Guardian : 25 February, 2019) (my emphasis)
Recent revelations in the US have, however, opened up a can of worms for Germany's Deutsche Bank.
The intimate links between Deutsche Bank and Putin and Trump is now revealing just how Trump was (and still is) possibly on Putin's payroll.
As reported by Chris Matthews (right),
"The House Intelligence Committee is now seeking to determine whether President Trump is currently under the influence of the Kremlin. .... the president may be compromised by his possible financial entanglements with Russia ..." (MSNBC : 19 March, 2019) (my emphasis)
David Enrich further reveals just how Deutsche Bank poured money into the Trump coffers whilst knowing that NO US bank would loan Trump any money.
Is this how Putin siphoned money into the Trump coffers and ensnared him?
More importantly, we have to ask the question,
"In having to now bail out Deutsche Bank, contrary to EU banking regulations, just how far will Merkel go to cover Putin's economic back, and at the expense of Ukraine?"
Without Deutsche Bank, what would happen to the already parlous state of the Russian economy?
Would Putin be able to continue pouring money into Ukraine's Crimea whilst the Russian people have to endure rising economic hardships?
As Paul Goble (left) writes,
"The USSR fell apart as a result of a whole list of problems. Crimea too can become precisely that point of no return” about which future historians will speak. And they will view the annexation of Crimea not as a victory to be celebrated but as a curse that should have been avoided." (Window on Eurasia : 18 March, 2019) (my emphasis)
(to be continued)
"One can now safely say that Angela Merkel, together with the German business community is, and always has been, covering Putin's economic back, irrespective of Gazprom being a critical factor in Putin's war with Ukraine!The completion of the Nord Stream2 project is now more critical for Putin as the US House of Congress begins to block Trump's attempt to remove US sanctions against Putin and his 'siloviki' clique." (cf. also Alan Rappeport above)
How long, now, will Merkel be able to continue with her pretense that Nord Stream2 is a purely economic relationship between herself and Putin? (Blog Entry 9 January, 2019)
Recent events in the banking world of Germany further underscores the degree and extent to which Putinversteher Angela Merkel will go to cover Putin's, and his Kremlin 'siloviki's', economic back.
I refer, of course, to the current scrabble by Merkel to save Deutsche Bank, the favoured German bank of Trump, Putin, and the Kremlin 'siloviki'
As reported by Matthew Lynn (left),
"Over the last few years, the Germans, the European Central Bank, and the EU itself, have been adamant that banks shouldn’t be bailed out inside the eurozone. Along the way, Greek, Cypriot, Italian and Irish banks have all been allowed to go to the wall or squeezed to extinction....
But hold on. There seems to be an exception to that austere financial regime. Big German banks. With the once mighty Deutsche Bank in serious trouble, it turns out there is nothing wrong with the [German] government orchestrating what amounts to a rescue after all." (The Spectator : 19 March, 2019) (my emphasis)
Matthew Lynn goes on to state that,
" ... That lays bare a stark truth about the eurozone, and indeed the EU. There is one rule for Germany, and another for everyone else." (ibid Matthew Lynn)
Arthur Sullivan perhaps best sums up WHY Merkel believes there is one rule for Germany, and another for everyone else. He reports that,
"Deutsche Bank's problems have been even more pronounced. On top of its dire financial performance — it made a net loss of €6 billion between 2011 and 2018 — it has been bogged down with several major scandals, including the Libor scandal, where fraudulent manipulation of interest rates took place for years, and the ongoing money laundering probe into Danske Bank." (DW : 10 March, 2019) (my emphasis)
This "one rule for Germany, and another for everyone else", is also true in the case of Nord Stream 2, Putin's desperate attempt to ensure its completion so that he will not have to pay into Ukraine's coffers for sending gas to the EU through Ukraine's gas pipelines.
Recall that in February of this year,
"Under a deal agreed earlier in February, the [Nord Stream 2] pipeline must meet four EU rules, including a telecoms-style unbundling requirement whereby other suppliers be allowed access to the pipeline.
However, Germany will be the ultimate arbiter of how the regulations are applied. " (Adam Vaughan:The Guardian : 25 February, 2019) (my emphasis)
Recent revelations in the US have, however, opened up a can of worms for Germany's Deutsche Bank.
The intimate links between Deutsche Bank and Putin and Trump is now revealing just how Trump was (and still is) possibly on Putin's payroll.
As reported by Chris Matthews (right),"The House Intelligence Committee is now seeking to determine whether President Trump is currently under the influence of the Kremlin. .... the president may be compromised by his possible financial entanglements with Russia ..." (MSNBC : 19 March, 2019) (my emphasis)
David Enrich further reveals just how Deutsche Bank poured money into the Trump coffers whilst knowing that NO US bank would loan Trump any money.
Is this how Putin siphoned money into the Trump coffers and ensnared him?
More importantly, we have to ask the question,
"In having to now bail out Deutsche Bank, contrary to EU banking regulations, just how far will Merkel go to cover Putin's economic back, and at the expense of Ukraine?"
Without Deutsche Bank, what would happen to the already parlous state of the Russian economy?
Would Putin be able to continue pouring money into Ukraine's Crimea whilst the Russian people have to endure rising economic hardships?
As Paul Goble (left) writes,
"The USSR fell apart as a result of a whole list of problems. Crimea too can become precisely that point of no return” about which future historians will speak. And they will view the annexation of Crimea not as a victory to be celebrated but as a curse that should have been avoided." (Window on Eurasia : 18 March, 2019) (my emphasis)
No comments:
Post a Comment