The EU wants to ban fish supplies from Russia
Category
Economics
Publication date

The EU wants to ban fish supplies from Russia

Industrial fishing in the Russian Federation
Source:  Welt

The new package of EU sanctions may include a ban on fish imports from Russia.

Points of attention

  • EU is considering banning fish imports from Russia as part of new sanctions, potentially impacting the European fishing market.
  • Germany and other EU countries heavily rely on Russian fish supplies, particularly pollock, with no adequate replacement options at the moment.
  • Sanctions against Russian fish could lead to significant disruptions in the European fish processing industry.
  • The US, as the second largest supplier of the same type of fish to Europe, has also banned Russian Alaskan pollock imports, adding to the challenges faced by EU countries.
  • The EU's move to ban Russian fish imports highlights the growing economic consequences of political conflicts on global trade relationships.

What is known about the EU's alleged refusal to import Russian fish

According to the publication's journalists, back in 2022, after Russia began a large-scale criminal war against Ukraine, EU countries stopped importing crustaceans and Russian caviar as part of the eighth package of sanctions.

However, these restrictions did not affect the supply of Russian fish to EU countries.

Currently, the EU leadership is discussing the introduction of stricter restrictions on Russian imports, which may affect the import of fresh fish.

In particular, this decision is supported by the Baltic countries.

Thus, the Lithuanian government complains that Russian vessels are engaged in fishing in the waters of their country and demand a response to such actions.

The EU wants to ban the import of Russian fish
Commercial fishing in Russia

Analysts expect that the European Commission will start considering this issue from the end of summer.

According to the European Fisheries Industry Association AIPCE, more than 70% of pollock deliveries to EU countries were made by Russia.

Who in the EU remains dependent on fish supplies from Russia

Up to 85% of the Alaska pollock consumed in Germany currently comes from Russia.

It is noted that Germany remains import-dependent in the field of fish processing, as it has only 6 deep-sea trawlers and does not engage in deep-sea fishing.

If supplies from Russian pollock fishing in Alaska were to stop completely due to sanctions, there would be no replacement for them at the moment, - explains the managing director of the Federal Association of the German Fishing Industry and Fish Wholesalers, Stefan Mayer.

According to him, only supplies of fish from the USA cannot compensate for the volume of imports from Russia.

At the moment, there is no other fishery in the world that would offer the necessary volumes, as well as the stamp of sustainability, - said Mayer.

The United States is the second largest supplier of this type of fish to Europe after Russia.

The US has banned the import of Russian Alaskan pollock.

Category
Politics
Publication date

Victory or Survival. What's Wrong with Biden's Ukraine Plan?

What Biden's plan really was
Source:  TIME

According to TIME senior correspondent Simon Schuster, Ukraine really had a chance to defeat the Russian army in the first years of the war, but, they say, the plan of American leader Joe Biden never envisaged Ukraine's victory, but only its salvation from total defeat.

Points of attention

  • The main goal was to ensure Ukraine's survival as a sovereign state and its aspiration for integration with the West.
  • Biden also sought to maintain US unity with allies and avoid direct conflict between NATO and Russia.
  • Only Biden's latest decisions have become the most painful for Russia.

What Biden's plan really was

According to Simon Schuster, after the Russian Federation's full-scale invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2024, Biden set three goals for his country.

However, what is important to understand is that there was no clause about Ukraine's victory among them.

The journalist drew attention to the fact that the traditional formulation of the Biden team, namely to support Ukraine "as long as necessary" was intentionally vague, without any specifics.

According to Eric Green, who worked on Biden's National Security Council, the White House "deliberately avoided" discussing territorial issues.

"In the White House's view, this would be beyond Ukraine's ability, even with significant Western assistance. It would not be a victory story. The more important goal was the survival of Ukraine as a sovereign democratic state, free to seek integration with the West," Shuster emphasized.

According to him, one of Biden's goals is precisely Ukraine's survival, not its victory.

What else did Biden aspire to?

Shuster also emphasized that the head of the White House tried to preserve the unity of the United States and other Western allies.

Another goal is to avoid direct conflict between NATO and Russia.

Despite Joe Biden achieving each of these goals, the "success" leaves little room for complacency.

There is too much suffering for Ukraine and too much uncertainty about what this will ultimately lead to.

The expert draws attention to the fact that only in the last months of his tenure did Joe Biden approve several decisions that became truly painful.

This is not only about permission to use American missiles to strike Russian territory, but also about tough sanctions against the Russian energy sector.

By staying online, you consent to the use of cookies files, which help us make your stay here even better 

Based on your browser and language settings, you might prefer the English version of our website. Would you like to switch?