• Saleh@feddit.org
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    The sanctions lower for the first time the price cap on Russian oil exports. The cap permits the provision of Western transport, trade and insurance services for Russian exports only if the purchase price is below the cap. The new cap will be $47.60 per barrel, down from $60 and will be revised every three months to stay 15% below the market price for Russian exports. Russian crude oil was selling at $59.42 per barrel on Thursday according to Argus, a price-reporting agency.

    So in other words, the EU doesn’t want to end Russia’s money stream, if they can strike a good deal out of it…

    The bloc will sanction 105 more vessels considered to be part of Russia’s shadow oil fleet and some of the people and companies which operate them, and ban petroleum products based on Russian crude exports. EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said those sanctions will hit Russian oil giant Rosneft’s biggest refinery in India.

    Good

    • CAVOK@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      3 days ago

      So in other words, the EU doesn’t want to end Russia’s money stream, if they can strike a good deal out of it…

      Not quite. They realise that the world is dependant on oil and cutting it out completely world cause a massive recession, so the next best thing is to make sure Russia makes next to no money on the oil that the world needs.

      I do wish we could just stop using oil, but I also like to eat.

      • Saleh@feddit.org
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        In this case it is not about just permitting it to pass, but about Western companies to be involved in keeping the logistics of it up.

        I understand this to be about making money with helping Russia sell that oil, not just permitting Russia to sell it elsewhere.

          • Saleh@feddit.org
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            This is the same argument like “if we dont sell them weapons, someone else will.”

            If Russia had the capabilities to do so, they wouldnt rely on Western companies to do it for them. But even if they did, not making ourselves dirty with complicity should be a good enough goal in itself.

            Unfortunately it seems that we are morally this bankrupt that instead of saying “nope” we rather say “this will cost extra, but sure lets do it”

            • CAVOK@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 days ago

              Not really. The world needs the oil unfortunately, so someone needs to transport it. Who should do it? The option “nobody” isn’t really realistic.

              Do I wish we didn’t need oil at all? Very much so.

              Do I wish we could just say no to all Russian oil? Absolutely.

              Sadly reality gets in the way.

    • A_norny_mousse@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      I’m pretty sure without some EU member states the compromise reached would have been less … compromisy.