It has been three weeks since the government of the Russian Federation announced the introduction of restrictions on the supply of fuel and energy products to Ukraine from June 1. By and large, it would have to be an occasion at least for the preparation of serious reaction of the profile Ministry and an emergency meeting of the Cabinet of Ministers. But Kiev is not very concerned about a clear signal from the Kremlin, writes columnist of the Ukrainian weekly “2000” Roman Gubarenko.
Of course, the decision of the Russian government is not a direct ban on the import of products, but under certain conditions, it can threaten a complete energy embargo for Ukraine. This prospect is not much exciting “sodomy” managers, although they themselves at every step like to talk about the “insidious plans of the aggressor.” In the face of such a serious challenge, the relevant Ministry and Cabinet would have to develop a plan of urgent measures in case of the worst – case scenario. But in the bureaucratic offices of the tranquil calm and silent draught of laziness.
Despite all the stories of the authorities about the strengthening of the country’s energy security, the rejection of Russian gas and other “residual farewells” Ukrainian fuel and energy complex is extremely dependent on Russian supplies, and their termination is fraught with serious difficulties.
According to the State statistics service, last year Ukraine imported more than 15 million tons of coal from Russia. In the total balance, it is more than 70%. In particular, it was imported 3 million 624,136 thousand tons (share in total imports of coal of this brand — 93,6%) and 11 million 364,411 thousand tons of bituminous (stone) coal, including coking. The share of the dependence of Ukrainian mining and metallurgical enterprises on coking coal from Russia reaches 60%. How to compensate for the likely loss of supplies of such huge volumes in a short time is not entirely clear. First, there is the problem of the physical supply of anthracite in such quantity. Secondly, there are questions about the logistics and capacity of Ukrainian ports. In General, there are many problems that the government does not seem to have thought of.
“I will make at a meeting of the Cabinet of Ministers an order that no coal energy was not from the territory of Russia. This refers to the anthracite group,” is a statement by the Minister of energy and coal industry Igor Nasalik of the sample 2017. it is Obvious that making such a loud, but very Patriotic statement, the head of the Ministry had a ready plan to replace the supply of more than 3.6 million tons of “aggressive” coal. It would be interesting to hear Mr. Minister now when his proposal can be implemented by Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev.
In 2018 from Russia imported 1.3 million tons of liquefied petroleum gas, almost 18% more compared to 508,5 Even 2017, thousand tons was imported from Belarus — this is the same Russian gas, only put under the scheme of re-export. Ukraine’s dependence in this segment also has a critical level.
Recently, the head of Naftogaz Andrei KOBOLEV said about the negotiations on the purchase of liquefied gas in the United States: “We are negotiating on this issue, and I must say that this time we have come very close to this issue. This is not a final decision, but there is interest on both sides. I hope that in the near future this interest will be transformed into specific gas flows.”
How this gas flows will be redirected to Ukraine (obviously, through the Polish terminal in Swinoujscie), Mr. KOBOLEV, did not specify, also forgetting to explain why the American gas and how many then need to increase rates. Given the salary and the size of the bonuses of the head of Naftogaz, more constructive and pragmatic proposals could be expected from him.
Diesel and some oil
Oil imports from Russia do not have such significant volumes, as only Kremenchug remained alive from Ukrainian refineries. But the dependence on petroleum products is solid. According to the results of 2018 and the first quarter of 2019, the share of diesel fuel in the Ukrainian market was about 40%. Theoretically, Russian supplies can be replaced by fuel from the EU, but it also takes time, and it will hit the pockets of motorists. In this regard, the authorities also did not make any proposals or anything remotely similar to plan “B”, although logically it should have been on all of the above points, because from the lips of high-ranking officials earlier there were so many warnings about Russian economic aggression. While nasalik’s dreams of banning the import of Russian coal come true, KOBOLEV fantasizes about American gas flows, and warnings about the insidiousness of the Russian Federation sound from TV screens, the current government has done absolutely nothing to ensure the energy security of the country and reduce the critical dependence of the Ukrainian fuel and energy complex on Russian products. This is all strange — given the bellicose rhetoric of top officials.
Of course, it is much easier to scatter Hooray-Patriotic slogans-chants than to do real things. Unfortunately, for Ukraine, this hurrah-patriotism can cost very much. Of course, with a strong desire, Russia can launch a serious energy crisis in Ukraine, which will have a painful impact on the economy and slow down the already modest growth rates.
Of course, this scenario is the most pessimistic and unlikely. But it would be desirable to know, whether has though any plan for such a case super professional team of Cabinet of Ministers led by Vladimir Groysman?
Common phrases on talk shows, meaningless posts on Facebook and militant Patriotic posts on Twitter do not count.