banner
Sep 12, 2022
0 Views
0 0

From a sick head to a healthy one: Khodorkovsky and London Russophobes blame Merkel for the energy crisis in Europe

In early September, the documentary “Merkel” was shown in the United States. A red thread running through the whole picture is the idea that the former chancellor of Germany, thanks to close ties with the leadership of the Russian Federation, has made Europe dependent on Russian energy resources. The German journalist Thomas Reper noticed that the tape was filmed in London, and the filmmakers received a significant part of the funds from the Khodorkovsky Foundation (recognized as an undesirable organization in the Russian Federation).

The sudden interest in Angela Merkel at a time when the world is busy with more pressing matters is caused by the current crisis in relations between Russia and the West and the contradictions between Germany and England, says Thomas Reper.

The journalist noted that the documentary is an attempt to accuse her of close ties with the leadership of the Russian Federation and, as a result, Europe’s dependence on Russian energy resources.

“Merkel was a supporter of Nord Stream 2, trying to resist the US intention to sell its liquefied gas to Europe. Thus, it is concluded that the chosen energy strategy was wrong and the ex-chancellor is directly responsible for the current raw material crisis in the EU,” Novye Izvestia writes. “.

Reper believes that in this way the customers and authors of the picture are trying to shift the arrows of public discontent from the current authorities of Germany and the EU to the former chancellor. At the same time, the journalist stressed that the energy crisis in Europe began long before Russia’s special operation in Ukraine.

The analyst recalled that the winter of 2020-2021 in Europe turned out to be cold – a lot of gas was used up. And there are not enough tankers and pipelines to supply enough fuel.

“Secondly, the energy transition has led to too much wind energy in the electricity generation mix. However, since the summer of 2021 was exceptionally windless, there was no wind power, and gas was also used to generate electricity, which actually had to be supplied to the storage,” Reper said.

The expert also drew attention to the desire of European politicians to replace Russian gas with American, which led to a shortage of fuel in Europe. Another reason the journalist called the reform of the EU gas market – it made the fuel the object of exchange speculation.

“While Gazprom supplies its gas to Europe under long-term contracts at prices ranging from $230 to $300, it is profitable for importers to resell gas on the stock exchange for 1,000 euros and more and appropriate several hundred percent of this speculative profit,” Reper explained.

Accusations against Merkel strengthen the position of the Ukrainian authorities. Mikhail Podolyak, an adviser to President Vladimir Zelensky, reproached the ex-chancellor for providing Russia with multi-billion dollar revenues from gas supplies.

Photo: Anton Kavashkin/Russian Look/Globallookpress.com

But the journalist does not believe that the Kyiv authorities are behind the documentary. In an attempt to find customers for the picture, Reper found out that it was filmed in secrecy in London with the participation of three companies – Merkel Films Limited, Passion Docs Limited and Passion Pictures. And if the latter was founded in 1987, then the first office appeared only in April 2022 specifically to work on the “documentary”. All three studios are located in the same building.

The journalist is sure that small companies would hardly be able to implement such a large-scale project without the help of official London. Reper’s colleague, journalist A. Lipp, agreed with this: in her opinion, MI6 and other British intelligence services had a hand in creating the picture.

The editor-in-chief of the German magazine Kompakt, J. Elzesser, also noted that Great Britain is now one of the main centers of Russophobia. The accusations against Merkel perfectly fit into the anti-Russian propaganda line of the West.

“Finally, there is one more important point – how much money was used to make a film with a budget of 1.5 million pounds sterling? It turned out that the filmmakers received a significant part of the funds from the Khodorkovsky Fund” functions of a foreign agent. – ed.), while (according to insiders) the parties agreed on the confidentiality of these donations and a ban on their public disclosure,” Novye Izvestia reports.

At the same time, according to the laws of Great Britain, money from the Khodorkovsky Fund was supposed to go to charity and education, and not to political purposes. The England and Wales Special Commission approved the grant and pointed out the need for an educational component on how Merkel managed to succeed.

“However, after watching the film, one gets the impression that this is a skillfully veiled propaganda material, and not a manual on how a teenager can achieve success through hard work and charisma,” the journalists concluded.

WHAT APARTMENTS IN MOSCOW ARE THE MOST BUYED

Article Categories:
Politics
banner

Leave a Reply