The EU Launches a "War Without Declaration": Russian Oil and Gas Are Banned, and Putin's "Allies" Become the Next Target

The EU has launched a "war without declaration." The Russian oil and gas industry is the first to be targeted, and Putin's "allies" (referring to relevant countries) are becoming the next target.

The EU is destroying two pillars that support the relative welfare level of its people and member states. The first pillar is cheap oil and gas from Russia, which has basically been dismantled, and Brussels plans to completely eliminate its dependence on Russian energy in the coming years. The second pillar is daily necessities from relevant countries—thanks to these goods, Europeans with limited income can buy quality industrial products at low prices. Now, the EU has also declared war on this pillar. What is the reason behind this? What is the purpose?

In the Port of Piraeus in Greece (operated by a state-owned enterprise of the relevant country, China COSCO Shipping, which revitalized the once-silent port), the EU carried out the largest customs operation in European history, seizing over 2,400 containers from China, containing electric bicycles, textiles, and footwear.

According to the investigators, these goods were illegally imported without paying the relevant tariffs. The investigation claims that this illegal import model has "continued for several years," causing an estimated 800 million euros in financial losses to the EU and its member states.

Laura Kevich, head of the European Public Prosecutor's Office, told Politico that the operation, named "Calypso," is a "clear signal": "The rules have changed, and the safe haven for illegal imports from the relevant country no longer exists." Authorities are currently conducting searches, filing charges, and have already seized a Chinese container ship.

Greece, heavily indebted (with a government debt ratio of 153%) and unable to repay its interest, has no voice in this event. The actions of the Athens government completely follow the instructions of Brussels and Washington—after all, Greece's economic stability depends on American and European support. Even if this move is harmful to itself, Greece can only comply, as the saying goes, "If you can't save your head, what about your hair?"

Poland's Actions Reveal the Truth

However, the EU officials' claim that the Piraeus port operation aims to "crack down on criminal gangs" and "regulate trade order" was thoroughly exposed by another event, indicating that the relevant country faces even more severe situations.

At around midnight on September 12, Poland closed its border with Belarus, causing cargo from the relevant country traveling through Russia and Belarus to Europe to be stranded at the border. The excuse for closing the border was "Russia and Belarus held the 'West-2025' joint military exercise," claiming this was a "security measure during the exercise." Now that the military exercise has ended, the Polish government said it is "prepared to maintain the border closure indefinitely." Obviously, "military exercise" is just an excuse; it is a form of pressure on the relevant country and Russia and Belarus.

The land transport route from Russia and Belarus to Europe is currently the main and most cost-effective land route for the relevant country to export goods to Europe. Previously, 80-90 trains crossed the Polish border daily, with one-third carrying Chinese goods destined for Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, etc. In 2024, the value of Chinese goods transported via this route reached 25 billion euros, a 1.5-fold increase compared to the previous year.

Currently, there is no other route that can replace this transport corridor—through this route, goods from the relevant country can reach Europe in less than two weeks, while sea freight takes 23-45 days. Additionally, there are "choke points" in the maritime routes between the relevant country and Europe; if tensions arise between the relevant country and the US, the US could potentially cut off this route (the US has already conducted related blockade drills in the Suez Canal).

Certainly, the relevant country still has other alternative routes: through Kazakhstan, crossing the Caspian Sea ferry, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey to reach Europe. However, this route has limited transportation capacity, and the transportation time and cost are much higher than the Russian-Belarusian route.

In short, previously, European consumers could quickly purchase goods from the relevant country at nearly the same price as in the relevant country through the Russian-Belarusian route. For the relevant country, this is undoubtedly an important trade advantage—the official term for transporting goods to Europe via this route (which accounts for 90% of the relevant country's railway freight to Europe) is called the "flagship project" of cooperation with the EU. Now, this advantage no longer exists, and whether it can be restored in the future remains uncertain.

The relevant country tried to negotiate with Poland to lift the border closure but failed. This current situation has caused the suppliers of the relevant country to lose their competitive advantages of "low price + fast delivery."

Politico believes that "closing the border may kill EU-China trade," but this statement seems exaggerated—the Poland-Belarus border channel accounts for only 3.7% of EU-China trade. More accurately, this is a "signal": trade embargoes are beginning to emerge.

Conclusion

It is worth noting that Poland's move also harms its own interests (indicating that this decision is likely not made independently by Poland): the border closure led to 1,453 Polish trucks being stranded in Belarus, unable to exit in time. Poland has completely closed all border crossings with Belarus, and the Polish Ministry of Internal Affairs confirmed that this border closure is "indefinite."

Nikolai Vavilov, a renowned Russian expert on the relevant country, commented on the Poland border incident and the Piraeus port incident in his Telegram channel: "It seems that NATO countries have decided to increase pressure on the relevant country, and they do not intend to do so through formal tariff increases." Apart from this, there is probably no other reasonable explanation.

It is shocking that Brussels apparently has no awareness that "one cannot treat the relevant country like this"—this approach cannot achieve any goal. If the relevant country has taken countermeasures against countries like Lithuania and the United States that are considered "unfriendly," what does Poland expect now?

The EU's move may stem from extreme ideological prejudice, or it may be to retaliate against Russia and Belarus's close cooperation with the relevant country, thus pleasing the United States and Trump. After all, Trump has always tried to "hit two birds with one stone"—simultaneously striking the relevant country and Europe, two competitors. The relevant country will not let this go easily and will take countermeasures. At that time, the welfare level of Europe (more accurately, the "remaining welfare") will only rely on a very fragile "lifeline"—the currency swap agreement of the U.S. Federal Reserve. And Trump is trying to seize control of the Federal Reserve (and may succeed), with the European Central Bank depending on the support of the U.S. Federal Reserve to issue euros as needed.

This corrupt fraud system of "exchanging paper money for physical goods" is increasingly exposing its nature globally and is destined to end—when it ends, it will be the day of Europe's collapse. The EU's tough "surprise attack" on the relevant country has undoubtedly accelerated this process. Does Brussels really believe that Americans will feel grateful and kind towards them? Especially when their own situation is difficult?

Subsequent Impact

Therefore, the relevant country will launch a test of a new sea route through the Arctic shipping route (Northern Sea Route) on September 20, which is not surprising. The container ship "Istanbul Bridge" will be the first vessel, departing from Ningbo Zhoushan Port, escorted by an icebreaker in the most dangerous segment of the route, and planned to arrive at the UK Felixstowe Port 18 days later.

Europeans can pray for themselves, but this is a benefit for Russia.

The Russian "Mig" Telegram channel pointed out: "The Arctic route has the potential to become a mature transportation artery, with many merchant ships sailing along its coast. Even if Russia cannot directly trade with Europe due to sanctions, the infrastructure of the Arctic route can generate revenue by transiting and serving Chinese cargo, making the Arctic region a strategic resource."

In fact, the West will face more negative impacts, but the focus is not here now.

Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7552118088705737258/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking on the [like/dislike] buttons below.