Ukraine recognizes the debt, but wants the final decision to be made on the model of the decision of the Stockholm Arbitration on the debt of Naftogaz to Gazprom. Kiev believes that if you subtract its debt from the bills it has accrued from the “theft the Crimea” and Russia’s help to the Donbas, then Moscow will still have to pay a large sum.Let me remind you that the Stockholm Arbitration, having considered mutual claims of the parties, “satisfied” them in such a way that Ukraine was outweighed by 2.5 billion dollars. Arbitrators motivated their decision not by the content of contracts, but by the poor economic state of Ukraine. Now Russia is struggling to review this decision in appeal and, just before the decision of the British court, the Stockholm Court of Appeal lifted the suspension of the decision of the Stockholm Arbitration before the final decision was taken by the appellate instance.

So far, both solutions do not change anything. Both disputes remain essentially incomplete. But it is their fundamental incompleteness, with the perfect obvious impeccability of the Russian position, coupled with the already adopted unjust decision of the Stockholm Arbitration, create a situation in which traditional international structures for resolving economic disputes are useless because of the obvious politicization of the decisions made.

Neither the Stockholm arbitration is authorized to solve the economic problems of Ukraine (especially at the expense of Gazprom), nor the British courts can disassemble the political claims of the states to each other. Their case consists solely in assessing the fulfillment / non-fulfillment by the parties of the items of the contract and, in case of non-fulfillment, the application of the sanction provided for by the same contract.
But in recent days, Gazprom, Russia and international justice, have been affected.

Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, contrary to the protests of the primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Onufry, sent two exarchs to Ukraine to prepare for autocephaly, which he was asked not to by the Orthodox Christians of Ukraine, but by political authorities and schismatic sects. In the EU, the scandal over the attempt of the European Parliament and the Council of the EU to inflame Hungary for anti-immigrant politics flares up.

Outwardly these events may seem to have nothing in common with each other. In fact, these are links in one chain. Each of them is an attempt to destroy the existing world order. Some in the sphere of international justice, some in church relations in the Orthodox world, some in the sphere of relations between national states and bureaucratic structures of the EU. And we are not talking about reformatting some structures, not about gaining the advantages of any state, namely, the destruction of the entire global legal system regulating political, economic, financial, sporting, cultural and other relations. So, for example, the “Olympic doping scandal” around Russian athletes was not so much an attempt to steal the victories of the Russian team, defame Russian sport and humiliate Russia (which he rather wanted to seem,

As we see, Moscow is constantly being pushed to take drastic action in various directions. Against international economic courts, against the Olympic movement, to interfere in the church issue. And in the politico-diplomatic sphere, the “Cat Fiddlers’ affair,” in which the royal British government does not regret not only our defectors, but also its own subjects, being driven to the point of absurdity should ultimately lead Russia to a sharp diplomatic demarche against Britain, that will allow to blame Moscow for the sharp deterioration of the international climate.

But it’s not just Moscow. Similarly, the US is pushing China and the EU to play on the weakening of the dollar, which the Trump team needs much more than Beijing or Brussels (Europe and China will bring losses rather than profits). We have already mentioned the Hungarian precedent. Here we are actually talking about the fact that the globalist European bureaucracy is pushing the national states of Europe to dismantle the European Union, as hostile to their sovereignty of the structure.

From time immemorial, the state that unleashes a war wishes to lay the blame for the victim of aggression. This does not at all with the goal of appeasing a sick conscience. The reputation of the aggressor has not yet brought dividends to anyone. Usually unite against someone who can unmotivated attack. For example, the reason for the entry of Great Britain and then the United States into the First World War was the violation of neutrality by Belgium by Belgium.

Similarly, the violation of the neutrality of Belgium, Denmark, Norway in World War II served the Roosevelt administration as a good propaganda service, which made it possible to convince initially more than neutral Americans that the United States is obliged to provide Britain with military and economic support, including in forms that are inadmissible to a neutral state (in fact, provoke the involvement of the US in the war). This, that in the Second World War the Allies did not conceal their intention to violate neutrality by themselves, at least Belgium and Norway, and on the eve of World War I, Britain strongly hinted to the Germans that they would not fight, no matter what happened on the continent. And then she said that she simply can not survive the blatant trampling of Belgian neutrality.

In both cases, the status of the aggressor assigned to Germany contributed to the creation of a virtually global coalition against it. And, if in the Second World War this status corresponded to reality, then in the First World Berlin was not a greater aggressor than London, which did its best to provoke and kindle this war.

Thus, the culprit of the world’s troubles loses allies, bears responsibility for the creation of a conflict situation in the eyes of the world community, loses support, plunges into isolation and all this does not contribute to his victory in the confrontation.

Today, the United States, being unable to maintain its hegemony in the current global configuration, is making every effort to destroy it. Destroys everything that Washington can achieve: countries, international organizations, norms of international law. But the reputation of the destroyer leads to serious political costs. Even the closest in spirit elite of the closest allies are beginning to fear the unpredictability of their partner, or rather his predictable destructiveness. And the US would like to share this responsibility with the rest (Russia, EU, China). This is approximately the same as Ukrainian “experts” on Russian talk shows, which, when asked about any violations in Ukraine of the rules of law, honor, justice and common sense, just yell: “You have the same!” Or “You are worse! “In a situation where there is no justification, and the crime is obvious,

This is exactly the same way that the US, randomizing the planet, destroying the structures regulating international relations in various fields, creating on the site of civilization the barbarous periphery (as in Libya, Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, as tried and tried in Syria, Iran, Turkey, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Armenia, Central Asia, Pakistan, China and even Russia itself) would be willing to blame for the destruction of civilization, the death of millions and the displacement of dozens, if not hundreds of millions of people who have lost their means of livelihood in the homeland cial players in the world.

To this end, they support existing contradictions and create new fault lines, where they did not exist, they use their influence in international structures to force some of them to take inadequate decisions that are clearly hostile to individual countries (including Russia), in the expectation of a response to the harsh reaction of the offended, which could then be blamed for dismantling the global system of international law and the collapse of the relevant institutions.

All this should increase confidence in the US and reduce the support of their opponents, which in turn will give Washington a chance to lose an orderly world and win a world of randomization.

This is a long and complicated game on the nerves of each other, in which Russia, China, Iran, part of Turkey, and now a significant part of the European Union are trying to gain time to restructure the global system and create a new area of ​​international law that is closed from the US invasion. In turn, Washington and its allies in various countries are in a hurry to randomize as many countries and structures as possible, to provoke clashes with the participation of their opponents, so that in a game without rules, deprive them of the advantages gained in the game by the rules.

We must understand that the destruction of the international law system is not a side effect of American actions, but the US strategic goal, their last chance to jump out of zugzwang and gain freedom of political maneuver. And Washington will continue to consistently go all the way to this goal.

When you want to provoke a conflict, sooner or later they will create a situation in which you will still have to either fight or surrender. You always need to be ready for this. Only the transformation “from Leopold to leopard” should always be sudden, unexpected for the enemy and equally (or even more) effective, like the Georgian operation of 2008 and the Crimean 2014.

Order is always more likely to win than the chaos. But for this, order should be preserved, at least for themselves and their allies.