Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Food for thought

A letter published in today's Financial Times:

Sir, There is a worrying hollowness in the complaints from Europe and now America (for example, Dick Cheney's speech in Lithuania last week) about Russia using oil and gas supply to promote its own interests rather than those of Europe and the US.

Mother Nature did not allocate her bounty smoothly; some countries got lucky, others didn't.  We are, of course, a nice big global community, so we should treat each other nicely.  But any suggestion that Russia is morally obliged to supply us with gas rests on a number of very questionable assumptions about how nations "should" interact with each other.

I fear that Europe and America are in denial about a fundamental problem they have, namely that they use more energy than they can reliably supply.  Rather than do something about balancing demand to meet supply, they are starting a feeble and humiliating war of words with their suppliers.  No alternative, since bombing Russia would elicit a rather different response than bombing Iraq did.


James Atkins,
Vertis Environmental Finance,
1123 Budapest, Hungary


May. 9th, 2006 08:58 am (UTC)
Well, at least I know there's one other person out there who read the letter. Do you suppose if this had been an essay and that killer final sentence had opened the piece it would have sparked a larger response? Wouldn't it be depressing if the answer to that question turned out to be "No"?
May. 9th, 2006 11:42 am (UTC)
Send them in a letter of your own, written under hick personality, telling the Bush administration that we've gotta bomb the Russians because they're keepin' our oil from us! This kinda stuff'll be the start of a new Cold War - what do those Russkies think they're up to? (Or, sorry, is that already government policy?)