Russia's Invasion of Ukraine (Official Thread)

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
Bushed
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
310,140
Reputation
-34,198
Daps
620,142
Reppin
The Deep State

Russia exploits billion-dollar oil cap loophole​

Inflated shipping costs offer opportunity to bring in more cash​

44 minutes ago
 A tanker off the coast of Morocco
The price cap imposed by the G7 is intended to keep Russian oil flowing while squeezing revenues that could be used to fund the war in Ukraine © FT montage/Getty Images
Inflated shipping costs are enabling Russian companies to earn far more from crude oil sales to India than previously recognised, according to a Financial Times analysis which suggests that the charges may have raised more than $1bn in a single quarter.

Russia has, until recently, appeared to comply on this route with western measures designed to curb its revenues which were introduced after its full-scale invasion of Ukraine last year. Its oil producers have been selling crude to India for below the $60-per-barrel price cap.

But when freight costs are included, they and the traders with whom they work have charged much higher sums.

An FT analysis of ships running directly from Russia’s Baltic ports to India suggests that this overcharging, combined with fees earned from shipping the oil on Russia-linked vessels, may have been worth $1.2bn in the three months to July.

Benjamin Hilgenstock, an academic at the Kyiv School of Economics, which has been studying evasion of the price cap, said: “Inflated shipping costs are a major concern as they effectively create a leak in the price cap regime through which someone, somewhere can siphon off billions of dollars.”

James Cleverly, the UK’s foreign secretary, said: “It comes as no surprise that Putin is becoming increasingly desperate and dishonest in his attempts to mitigate the price cap’s impact — something that has been severely restricting Russian revenues since its introduction. Those aiding Russia’s attempts to fund this illegal war should know, the UK will continue to act alongside our partners to enforce this measure.”

The price cap imposed by the G7 is intended to keep Russian oil flowing while squeezing revenues that could be used to fund the war. But the cap — which places requirements on buyers, shipowners and insurers from participating countries — does not impose any limit on freight costs.

Customs records issued in Russia from December until the end of June indicate that the average price of crude oil shipped to India was around $50 per barrel in Russia’s Baltic ports. This kept the sales in line with the cap, which applies to the so-called “free on board” (FOB) price, or the cost of the oil at the port of loading.

But Indian customs data shows that the prices actually being paid in India after delivery — the so-called “cost, insurance and freight” (CIF) price — over the same period had amounted to $68. This was a marked discount on world oil prices, which averaged around $79 per barrel over the period, but implies an $18 per barrel rise in prices between the Baltic and India.

Figures from Argus, a pricing agency, also point to a large spread. Argus estimates that the average price of Urals crude has been $14.90 per barrel higher in India than in the Baltic since data started to be collected in February. This is in excess of Argus’s estimates of the actual price of shipping, which has averaged around $9 per barrel.

An official at an Indian state-owned oil company which bought some of this oil told the FT that Indian buyers were buying inclusive of shipping costs. The official said that no negotiation was allowed over freight arrangements or costs.

The excess charges are therefore likely to have been captured by the sellers of the oil. According to Kpler, the data analytics company, the oil producers Lukoil and Rosneft have made direct sales to Indian refineries. In other cases, the sale is managed by trading companies that have emerged in the past year with close links to several Russian oil companies.

Kpler estimates that Russia shipped 108mn barrels from the Baltic to India from May to July in 134 vessels, a time when the spread between Argus prices averaged $17 per barrel, after taking account of the lag between departure and delivery. At that time, Argus estimates that commercial shipping rates averaged $9 per barrel, suggesting that the overcharging may be worth around $800mn.

Hilgenstock said: “If Russian oil companies and traders agree to these kind of contractual conditions, we have to assume that a portion of the spread is being captured by Russia — whether or not Russia owns the tankers moving the oil.”

Russia does have a hand in the tanker fleet. Of the 134 vessels identified by Kpler as moving Russian oil to India from May to July, the FT has been able to directly link 23 of them to Russian entities via insurance, ownership or management documentation.

Most of these are run by Sun Ship Management, which has been placed under sanctions by the UK and EU for being connected to Sovcomflot, the giant Russian state tanker fleet.

The FT has identified a further 26 “ghost” vessels which were bought by their current owners since the start of the war. Their owners are secret, hidden via shell companies largely in the Marshall Islands and Liberia, but all have dramatically diverted on to the Russian oil routes since being bought — and some have previously been linked to Russia.

In the three months to July, around 40 per cent of the oil shipped from the Baltic was carried by the Russia-connected fleet. The freight cost estimates calculated by Argus imply that this fleet may have earned more than $350mn in revenue on the route over the quarter.

Adding the $800mn by which fees were inflated, this means that Russian entities may have covertly made a billion dollars more in revenue over that period than previously recognised.

India now accounts for around a quarter of Russia’s crude and refined oil exports. Russia’s global oil exports amounted to $39bn in total over these three months, according to the International Energy Agency.

Keeping the price in its Baltic ports below the price cap had allowed Russia to also use ships with western insurance. More than half of the vessels on the route during that quarter were G7-insured, with 46 of them run by Greek ship managers.

The number of western vessels is dropping, however — a consequence of international crude prices rallying 15 per cent in the past month to near $85 a barrel. This has dragged Russian prices higher and closer to the cap. Argus has assessed that average quoted prices in Primorsk, a major Baltic port, rose above $60 last month.

This makes it more difficult for western-linked companies to shift the oil while still obeying the cap. As a result, Greek-domiciled ship managers suddenly started to leave the Russian crude market in July.

The International Energy Agency said on Friday that Russia’s oil export revenues in July reached their highest level since the cap was introduced, even without including inflated freight costs.

The higher prices may also deter buyers, however. An Indian oil official told the FT that the discount was now just $2 to $10 a barrel.

“Indian imports may now decline, as the discounts aren’t as generous,” said Amrita Sen at Energy Aspects. “Their banks are also getting anxious now there are signs that most cargoes are trading above the price cap.”
 

ADevilYouKhow

Rhyme Reason
Joined
May 11, 2012
Messages
33,759
Reputation
1,406
Daps
61,765
Reppin
got a call for three nines


Russia really trying to catch more Ls
 

ADevilYouKhow

Rhyme Reason
Joined
May 11, 2012
Messages
33,759
Reputation
1,406
Daps
61,765
Reppin
got a call for three nines











Wild when things go according to plan
 
Last edited:

bnew

Veteran
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
57,368
Reputation
8,499
Daps
160,079

Russian ruble is now worth less than a penny, infuriating Vladimir Putin’s inner circle: ‘They’re laughing at us’​

BYCHRISTIAAN HETZNER
August 14, 2023 at 10:03 AM EDT

Russia's president Vladimir Putin

Could Russian President Vladimir Putin be describing the value of his ruble in this photo dated July 29? The Russian currency is worth a tiny fraction of the U.S. dollar now.
CONTRIBUTOR—GETTY IMAGES

Vladimir Putin’s luck may be running out now that the ruble plunged below one cent, the lowest level against the U.S. dollar since the early days of his war in Ukraine.


The Russian president, who briefly faced down a coup attempt in June, could long point to the resilience of his currency in the face of sanctions as a propaganda victory that proved just how impotent Western economic reprisals were.

More than 500 days since his army invaded Ukraine, it looks as if Moscow’s highly respected central bank governor can no longer perform miracles for her boss.

The ruble that Elvira Nabiullina manages crashed through the psychological support of 100 to the U.S. dollar and on Monday is now worth less than a penny, the first time since March 23 of last year.

“They’re laughing at us,” scathed Vladimir Solovyov, Russia’s most well-known state TV personality and a chief Putin ally, already last week.


The war hawk demanded Nabiullina explain herself to the population now that currency has lost roughly a quarter of its value against the dollar since the start of this year.

On Sunday, images were shared online of a small symbolic protest mounted in western Siberia: A building’s chyron kept repeating the message that “Putin is a dikkhead and a thief,” calling the ruble’s exchange rate “crazy.”


Her institution, meanwhile, has countered by arguing a softer ruble does not present risks to the country’s financial stability. Nonetheless, Russia’s central bank decided to freeze purchases of foreign currency on the domestic market through the remainder of this year to restore faith in the sliding ruble.

Russia’s currency strength handed Putin a PR victory​

Following a brief collapse in the initial aftermath of last year’s Feb. 24 invasion, which saw Russia’s fiat tender plunge to a record low of 120 to the dollar, the ruble rebounded to trade at one point at highs not seen since 2015, around 50 to the dollar.

This gave the Kremlin an important PR victory by suggesting Russia’s economy was strong enough to withstand anything the West threw at it.


This in turn prompted soul-searching among Ukraine’s Western backers while bolstering critics alarmed more at the cost of soaring food and energy prices than at Russia’s empire-building.

“It’s slightly more valuable than it was on the day that Russia invaded Ukraine. The economic situation in the United States by contrast is deteriorating fast,” then Fox News host Tucker Carlson, a chief critic of U.S. aid to Kyiv, said last April.


8FYHNK3.png

Nabiullina was celebrated for cleverly steering her financial system through the worst of the turmoil by placing a range of capital controls that quickly stabilized the currency and prevented mass outflows.

“They were a quick fix for the ruble in 2022, but are counterproductive in the long run,” wrote Janis Kluge, senior associate at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, last week.

The fresh signs of economic weakness come at an important juncture in the war. The Russian army is attempting to defend large swaths of territory seized in the early months of the invasion against a Kyiv counteroffensive boasting modern Western military equipment.

Any material losses on the battlefield could further undermine Putin’s authority, already weakened following the challenge made by Wagner mercenary boss Yevgeny Prigozhin in June.
 

☑︎#VoteDemocrat

The Original
Bushed
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
310,140
Reputation
-34,198
Daps
620,142
Reppin
The Deep State
weird argument to make on behalf of the French but I guess it makes a point about how to maintain peace and garner respect


Putin, de Gaulle and national greatness
Just as France in the 1960s quit Algeria, so Russia should end its disastrous colonial war in Ukraine

12 hours ago
Illustration of General Charles de Gaulle, depicted in black and white, standing by Vladimir Putin, depicted in colour with the tip of his head only showing from the collar of his shirt.
© James Ferguson
“France cannot be France without greatness,” wrote Charles de Gaulle in the opening of his memoirs. His nation, he insisted, must always be in “the first rank”.

Vladimir Putin feels the same way about Russia. Back when I was still able to visit that country, Fyodor Lukyanov — a foreign policy thinker close to Putin — told me that the Russian president was driven by the fear that his nation might permanently lose its status as a great power.

That fear and paranoia reached its tragic apogee with the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. But instead of restoring Russian national grandeur, Putin’s war has disgraced and isolated his nation.

Unlike Putin, de Gaulle’s belief in national greatness did not depend on the subordination of a neighbour. He ended France’s war in Algeria and accepted Algerian independence in 1962. By contrast, even after 30 years of Ukrainian independence, Putin could not accept Ukraine’s right to shape its own destiny.

The dilemmas faced by Putin and de Gaulle were similar in some ways. The French leader was intent on rebuilding national grandeur after the humiliation of defeat and occupation in the second world war. Putin regarded the break-up of the Soviet Union after 1991 as a humiliation for Russia and a “geopolitical tragedy”. Both leaders’ writings display a preoccupation with their nation’s history — and their own destiny in shaping it.

The difference lies in the way that de Gaulle and Putin defined “national greatness”. Unlike Putin, de Gaulle was a genuine war hero who was wounded several times fighting for his country. While Putin cowered at the end of a long desk to avoid Covid-19, de Gaulle walked through Paris under fire during the city’s liberation in 1944.

When he returned to power as president of France in 1958, many on the French reactionary right assumed and hoped that de Gaulle would redouble the fight to keep Algeria. Instead, he made peace and accepted independence. In doing so, he freed his fellow countrymen of the burden of a dishonourable war.

De Gaulle was wise enough to realise that fighting a losing colonial conflict would destroy French greatness rather than rebuild it. As the academic Frederick Starr has written: “De Gaulle succeeded because he envisioned a better future for France without Algeria than with it.”

Freed of its colonial burden in Algeria, France was able to forge a new future. Modern France is not a superpower, but it remains a leader in Europe. It is a global player in culture, diplomacy, business, sport and military affairs. France retains some of the badges of great-power status, such as nuclear weapons and a permanent seat on the UN security council. But its grandeur today rests on culture and the global respect it inspires, rather than on raw power or territory.

Putin, by contrast, was unable to imagine Russia as a post-imperial power. He still defines Russian greatness through his country’s ability to control territory and inspire fear. It was de Gaulle who was born in the 19th century, but it is Putin who clings to a 19th-century imperialistic view of national grandeur.

In the 21st century, however, the bloodbath that Putin has unleashed in Ukraine has inspired disgust rather than admiration in the rest of Europe, isolating Russia from its neighbours and reducing its influence in the wider world. Just 17 African leaders travelled to St Petersburg for the recent Russia-Africa summit, compared with 43 who attended the same event in 2019. Putin is unable to travel to this month’s Brics summit in South Africa for fear of arrest. So much for national greatness.

In the past, Russia and France fought for control of Europe — with French troops briefly occupying Moscow in 1812 and Russian troops entering Paris two years later.

That intertwined history still creates a kind of mutual regard. Much to the irritation of many in east and central Europe, modern France has always seen Russia as a great power that deserves respect and a vital place in the continental order. Successive French presidents — including de Gaulle and Emmanuel Macron — reached out to the Kremlin. It was de Gaulle who coined the phrase that Europe extended “from the Atlantic to the Urals”. Macron launched an ill-fated effort at rapprochement with Putin, shortly before the 2022 Ukraine invasion.

Yet, in the end, de Gaulle and his heirs have chosen profoundly different paths from Putin. Perhaps the greatest contrast is that de Gaulle understood that French grandeur was inseparable from the way it treated its own people and from political liberty.

While de Gaulle was often accused of being an instinctive authoritarian, he ran for power in genuine elections — and accepted the rules and culture of democracy. In 1968, France was shaken by street uprisings. (Some things never change.) A year later, de Gaulle lost a referendum, stepped down as president and retired.

By contrast, Putin has been unable to separate his vision of national grandeur from his personal power and wealth. He clings on in the Kremlin. Those who disagree with his policies are beaten up in the streets, imprisoned, driven into exile or die in suspicious circumstances. Russia needed its own de Gaulle. Instead, it has ended up with a pale imitation of Ivan the Terrible.

gideon.rachman@ft.com
 

bnew

Veteran
Joined
Nov 1, 2015
Messages
57,368
Reputation
8,499
Daps
160,079
Putin, by contrast, was unable to imagine Russia as a post-imperial power. He still defines Russian greatness through his country’s ability to control territory and inspire fear. It was de Gaulle who was born in the 19th century, but it is Putin who clings to a 19th-century imperialistic view of national grandeur.
bars
 
Top