15 March 2022 09:47
The Mediterranean Voyager is an oil tanker flying the flag of the Bahamas. On 11 March the ship left the Russian port of Novorossijsk carrying a cargo of one hundred thousand tons of crude oil, worth 57 million euros.
The financier of the transport is the American Chevron, while the destination of the cargo is Europe and more precisely Rotterdam, the large Dutch port where the ship is expected to arrive on March 29th. Currently, as of March 15, the Mediterranean Voyager is awaiting its turn in the Black Sea to pass into the Mediterranean. It is possible to follow their journey in real time on commercial navigation sites.
At the height of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, while Europe is mobilizing to support the attacked country and the United States has imposed an oil and gas embargo on Russia, Mediterranean Voyager is the symbol of Western contradictions.
An inexcusable flaw
A US oil company, European customers and millions of dollars arriving in Russia’s coffers: a clear flaw in the harsh sanctions adopted against Moscow and of which the European Commission announced a fourth series on March 14.
This flaw is explainable, but not justifiable. On March 14, European Commissioner Thierry Breton told France Inter public radio microphones that the Versailles European Summit had mandated the Commission to prepare a plan to reduce European dependence on Russian oil and gas by two thirds by the end of the year. . “It’s a huge gesture,” Breton stressed.
When the question of energy prices and possible supply interruptions is put on the scale, things change immediately
The problem is that this impressive figure does not figure in the conclusions of the summit, even though it has been mentioned several times previously by the President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen. The Versailles text is content to state the following: “We have agreed to gradually free ourselves from our dependence on Russian gas, oil and coal imports.” Obviously it is a much less precise commitment.
Therefore, it will be necessary to understand whether within the fifteen-day deadline set by Breton the two-thirds threshold will be approved by the next European Council of Heads of State and Government, or whether the hesitations that have already emerged among the 27 will cancel this ambitious goal.
In Versailles, some countries such as the Baltic states and Poland, more exposed to the war in Ukraine and the Russian threat and supported by the head of European diplomacy Josep Borrell, demanded an immediate embargo, but faced opposition from Germany and Italy , not at all ready for such a step.
It is the limit of European commitments. Despite the legitimate emotion aroused by the increasingly terrifying images of Ukrainian cities and the arrival of refugees, when the question of prices and possible supply interruptions is put on the scale, things change immediately.
The affair feeds the frustration of Ukrainian leaders, who would like more effective support. Will it take a siege of Kiev or even the fall of the Ukrainian capital before the 27 decide to act properly? “There are no taboos,” French President Emmanuel Macron said on 11 March at the end of the Versailles summit. So why wait?
(Translation by Andrea Sparacino)