The West has run up vast sovereign debt that can be neither repaid nor rolled over endlessly. And the Deep State was counting on stealing Ukraine's mineral wealth as a means of putting off the inevitable bankruptcy. Russia is not allowing that to happen and the Elites have no backup plan. This means that the wheels start coming off next year no matter who is elected in November. The likely outcome of this dilemma is they will first try to force a war in the Middle East via an attack on Iran. If that fails, they will try to force a direct war between NATO and Russia in Ukraine. If that fails, they will try to force civil wars in Western countries using the imported invaders and use the resulting turmoil and violence to transition these governments into techno-tyrannies. Bumpy road ahead.
"Recently, Ukraine began auctioning exploration permits for lithium, copper, cobalt and nickel, offering lucrative investment opportunities in refining critical raw materials. These investments can drive Europe’s green transition and support Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction and reintegration."
That last sentence is purely delusional but about what you'd expect from the WEF. Also the choice of the word 'refining' seems out of place. First you have to find the minerals in economic concentrations, then you have to build the mine to extract them, and only then can you talk about 'refining' them, so what are they trying to say here?
As as stock investor of 20 years, about half of that time focused on mineral exploration, I don't recall ever reading in the professional journals and online forums anything about mineral exploration in Ukraine. I think the reason is fairly clear. Political risk is at the top of every mining investor's check list. Long before you turn a drill you have to look at how stable the political environment is, which includes potential changes of government, institutional corruption and interference, ecological constraints, indigenous rights, and of course insurgency and war.
Auctioning exploration permits to me sounds like an act of desperation to raise funds for the war effort (not to mention filling the already bulging pockets of the people in charge). The thing to understand here is that in mineral exploration there's no guarantee of finding anything worth digging up, and even if you do, you still have to find a buyer for the project which, as a junior explorer, you are typically typically in a weak position with regard to the other two players in that equation - the international mining corporations, and the government on whose territory the discovery is located.
For example, out of some 20 odd exploration projects we had exactly two that paid off. The rest were dead losses that either folded, or were bought out at below our investment cost. This is typical for someone who knows what they're doing, and in fact the returns from those two more than made up for the losses and represent about what you can expect as an exploration investor, i.e. 10 to 1 odds. That's if you know what you're doing and understand the risks. Most speculators don't and simply lose money until they give up in disgust because it's a really dirty game.
All this goes to say, that if someone approached me with the idea of exploring for anything in Ukraine, I would either snort in derision or laugh out loud. Lending credence to my contempt is the fact that even though I'm out of the game, I'm still on multiple mailing lists that promote exploration plays, and like I said, I haven't seen a single project in Ukraine. Not one.
Mining is something that most people, including those in charge of permitting and regulating the process, simply do not understand. It is unlike any other economic venture in that it is extremely capital intensive with lead times that can run to decades, and is completely dependent on commodity prices which are impossible to project over such long time frames. In the end, you're sitting on a depleting resource which you have to eventually replace to stay in the game, which has serious implications for profitability over the long term. Only oil and gas exploration has such serious risks attached with the difference that oil and gas will always have a market, whereas substitution and obsolescence is also a major concern for mining. For example, consider the impact cellular networks have had on copper demand, which is no longer needed for telephone lines. Composite carbon materials are another risk if aluminum is your game. Then there's water pipes which used to consume a lot of steel, now mostly plastic. I could go on.
As always, the devil is in the details, and that is particularly true for mining. I honestly can't see anyone stepping up to buy these leases since the risk of losing your entire investment is staring you in the face, and there's nothing being done on Ukraine's part to mitigate any of that. On the contrary, they're adding to it daily. Same goes for the big agro corps like Monsanto and Cargill. Those guys are frantic because they're about to lose their shirts big time. All I can say is they aren't nearly as sophisticated as their counterparts in mining, who know better than to step into that (literal) minefield.
I imagine Putin and Medvedev are having a good chuckle over that. I increasingly expect Russia not to stop before they reach the Polish and Moldovan (or maybe Romanian) borders. Amusing to see Germany and Poland in each other's faces over the Nordstream sabotage. The Germans realize the Poles were in on it and are no longer amused, as the economic chickens come home to roost--Thyssen-Krup, Bayer, VW, etc.
I had the same thoughts myself. Putting myself in NATO's shoes, what is their plan B now that plan A has obviously failed? This assumes rational actors, which Andrei Martyanov might disagree with, but lets assume it's true.
Someone put Ukraine up to their Kursk operation which on its face seems designed to fail. It drew forces away from the southern front and trapped what remains of their best forces in a cauldron where they're being systematically depleted. The incursion angered Russians who are now demanding a quick end to the conflict, but how does that work without occupying the entire country?
From NATO's point of view, that would put a strain on Russian resources - it's a big country - and give them an excuse to set up a new Iron Curtain with all that implies in terms of arms sales to their hapless satraps. Not the best outcome, but something they can live with I suppose, as it creates a permanent state of hostilities thus mooting any chance of reconciliation between Russia and the EU.
Of course there are corporate interests who imagine they have title to Ukrainian land and resources, so there's bound to be opposition from that quarter, but my guess is they'll be tossed under the bus as the larger game, i.e. MIC profits is a bigger pie which has an actual chance of success, while Cargill and Monsanto et al. will just have to eat their losses. That's my take at least, based on the limited information I have.
my business background is in mineral exploration. This map is nothing more than intel porn. Ukraine does not have unique mineral resources that are worth fighting about. Its primary mineral resource is coal (which is located in the Donbas.) According to one survey, coal accounts for about 70% of all mineral resource value in Ukraine. However, coal production has declined from about 190 million MT in late Soviet period (c1990) to about 60 million tonnes in 2014 due to poor economics. Nor is it consistent with US climate policy, such as it is, to go to war in Ukraine over coal reserves, when US is shutting down coal capacity in the US.
There is nothing in this map that passes any sort of smell test for anyone knowledgeable about mineral resources and reserves.
This map, and Johnson's article, aren't the only sources for these claims and estimates: Lindsey! has also made the claim about trillions in resources. I can only go with those:
Sources are all garbage. Titanium is a common element. There's lots of ilmenite and rutile. There's nothing remarkable about Ukraine's resources. Nothing that would justify a war. Even if there wasn't a war, nobody would be rushing in to build large mines in Ukraine. It's far from clear that any of these paper "resources" are economically feasible.
The motivation for the war is ideological. IMO the ideologues promote this sort of intel porn on economics to try to add support for the war.
What then, grain? It just doesn't make sense (even given Mackinder theory) to expend the Dollars and Euros on a piece of territory without the possibility of excellent return on investment eventually, and it seems to be some expect that return to be in rather short order.
I agree that the ideology is at the origins of the war, but I do believe that Ukraine is also regarded as the gateway to the destruction of Russia as it has existed for centuries. Behind that lies the undoubted resource riches of Russia itself. I think the aftermath of the Cold War, the looting of Russia, shows that resources are a major part of this.
The value assigned to various areas and especially in the Donbass reveals the truth of what is going on and why the USoA has been smearing Russia and it's leader, Putin for such an extended period of time and the forever wars in mineral rich areas while cordoning off the resources we have as untouchable under federal laws. It's long been an economic concept the notion of the "Scramble for Scarce Resources" and in the current geopolitical situation of the 21st. century the consistent drum beat of scarcity has the global elite in the West attempting to "corner the market" of the critical resources that fuel the modern world. This scramble is not for the benefit of the citizens of the west, but rather for the continued accumulation of wealth of the West's oligarch's who prefer they control who gets what and at what price. The next article by Mark with reference to the "lost" trillions of dollars is shocking, but not unexpected. How often have we heard about missing millions, billions and now trillions of dollars. Where did it go and why is something the people of this country should b demanding to know.
Billions? Trillions now. The link here is for an article (two-part essay) and is part two of this extensive article on the -Deep State and our Oligarch;'s who oppress us with no remorse, shame or guilt, I'd say with glee. It covers a lot of what Austin-Fitts refers to. Have you ever read "A Lily Bit?"
The West has run up vast sovereign debt that can be neither repaid nor rolled over endlessly. And the Deep State was counting on stealing Ukraine's mineral wealth as a means of putting off the inevitable bankruptcy. Russia is not allowing that to happen and the Elites have no backup plan. This means that the wheels start coming off next year no matter who is elected in November. The likely outcome of this dilemma is they will first try to force a war in the Middle East via an attack on Iran. If that fails, they will try to force a direct war between NATO and Russia in Ukraine. If that fails, they will try to force civil wars in Western countries using the imported invaders and use the resulting turmoil and violence to transition these governments into techno-tyrannies. Bumpy road ahead.
A recent WEF article on the subject.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2024/07/the-future-of-critical-raw-materials-how-ukraine-plays-a-strategic-role-in-global-supply-chains/
This part, right at the end, caught my attention:
"Recently, Ukraine began auctioning exploration permits for lithium, copper, cobalt and nickel, offering lucrative investment opportunities in refining critical raw materials. These investments can drive Europe’s green transition and support Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction and reintegration."
That last sentence is purely delusional but about what you'd expect from the WEF. Also the choice of the word 'refining' seems out of place. First you have to find the minerals in economic concentrations, then you have to build the mine to extract them, and only then can you talk about 'refining' them, so what are they trying to say here?
As as stock investor of 20 years, about half of that time focused on mineral exploration, I don't recall ever reading in the professional journals and online forums anything about mineral exploration in Ukraine. I think the reason is fairly clear. Political risk is at the top of every mining investor's check list. Long before you turn a drill you have to look at how stable the political environment is, which includes potential changes of government, institutional corruption and interference, ecological constraints, indigenous rights, and of course insurgency and war.
Auctioning exploration permits to me sounds like an act of desperation to raise funds for the war effort (not to mention filling the already bulging pockets of the people in charge). The thing to understand here is that in mineral exploration there's no guarantee of finding anything worth digging up, and even if you do, you still have to find a buyer for the project which, as a junior explorer, you are typically typically in a weak position with regard to the other two players in that equation - the international mining corporations, and the government on whose territory the discovery is located.
For example, out of some 20 odd exploration projects we had exactly two that paid off. The rest were dead losses that either folded, or were bought out at below our investment cost. This is typical for someone who knows what they're doing, and in fact the returns from those two more than made up for the losses and represent about what you can expect as an exploration investor, i.e. 10 to 1 odds. That's if you know what you're doing and understand the risks. Most speculators don't and simply lose money until they give up in disgust because it's a really dirty game.
All this goes to say, that if someone approached me with the idea of exploring for anything in Ukraine, I would either snort in derision or laugh out loud. Lending credence to my contempt is the fact that even though I'm out of the game, I'm still on multiple mailing lists that promote exploration plays, and like I said, I haven't seen a single project in Ukraine. Not one.
Mining is something that most people, including those in charge of permitting and regulating the process, simply do not understand. It is unlike any other economic venture in that it is extremely capital intensive with lead times that can run to decades, and is completely dependent on commodity prices which are impossible to project over such long time frames. In the end, you're sitting on a depleting resource which you have to eventually replace to stay in the game, which has serious implications for profitability over the long term. Only oil and gas exploration has such serious risks attached with the difference that oil and gas will always have a market, whereas substitution and obsolescence is also a major concern for mining. For example, consider the impact cellular networks have had on copper demand, which is no longer needed for telephone lines. Composite carbon materials are another risk if aluminum is your game. Then there's water pipes which used to consume a lot of steel, now mostly plastic. I could go on.
As always, the devil is in the details, and that is particularly true for mining. I honestly can't see anyone stepping up to buy these leases since the risk of losing your entire investment is staring you in the face, and there's nothing being done on Ukraine's part to mitigate any of that. On the contrary, they're adding to it daily. Same goes for the big agro corps like Monsanto and Cargill. Those guys are frantic because they're about to lose their shirts big time. All I can say is they aren't nearly as sophisticated as their counterparts in mining, who know better than to step into that (literal) minefield.
I imagine Putin and Medvedev are having a good chuckle over that. I increasingly expect Russia not to stop before they reach the Polish and Moldovan (or maybe Romanian) borders. Amusing to see Germany and Poland in each other's faces over the Nordstream sabotage. The Germans realize the Poles were in on it and are no longer amused, as the economic chickens come home to roost--Thyssen-Krup, Bayer, VW, etc.
I had the same thoughts myself. Putting myself in NATO's shoes, what is their plan B now that plan A has obviously failed? This assumes rational actors, which Andrei Martyanov might disagree with, but lets assume it's true.
Someone put Ukraine up to their Kursk operation which on its face seems designed to fail. It drew forces away from the southern front and trapped what remains of their best forces in a cauldron where they're being systematically depleted. The incursion angered Russians who are now demanding a quick end to the conflict, but how does that work without occupying the entire country?
From NATO's point of view, that would put a strain on Russian resources - it's a big country - and give them an excuse to set up a new Iron Curtain with all that implies in terms of arms sales to their hapless satraps. Not the best outcome, but something they can live with I suppose, as it creates a permanent state of hostilities thus mooting any chance of reconciliation between Russia and the EU.
Of course there are corporate interests who imagine they have title to Ukrainian land and resources, so there's bound to be opposition from that quarter, but my guess is they'll be tossed under the bus as the larger game, i.e. MIC profits is a bigger pie which has an actual chance of success, while Cargill and Monsanto et al. will just have to eat their losses. That's my take at least, based on the limited information I have.
From Larry Johnson's archives:
https://sonar21.com/why-the-west-lusts-after-ukraine/
my business background is in mineral exploration. This map is nothing more than intel porn. Ukraine does not have unique mineral resources that are worth fighting about. Its primary mineral resource is coal (which is located in the Donbas.) According to one survey, coal accounts for about 70% of all mineral resource value in Ukraine. However, coal production has declined from about 190 million MT in late Soviet period (c1990) to about 60 million tonnes in 2014 due to poor economics. Nor is it consistent with US climate policy, such as it is, to go to war in Ukraine over coal reserves, when US is shutting down coal capacity in the US.
There is nothing in this map that passes any sort of smell test for anyone knowledgeable about mineral resources and reserves.
This map, and Johnson's article, aren't the only sources for these claims and estimates: Lindsey! has also made the claim about trillions in resources. I can only go with those:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=ukraine+titanium+deposits&ia=web
Sources are all garbage. Titanium is a common element. There's lots of ilmenite and rutile. There's nothing remarkable about Ukraine's resources. Nothing that would justify a war. Even if there wasn't a war, nobody would be rushing in to build large mines in Ukraine. It's far from clear that any of these paper "resources" are economically feasible.
The motivation for the war is ideological. IMO the ideologues promote this sort of intel porn on economics to try to add support for the war.
What then, grain? It just doesn't make sense (even given Mackinder theory) to expend the Dollars and Euros on a piece of territory without the possibility of excellent return on investment eventually, and it seems to be some expect that return to be in rather short order.
I agree that the ideology is at the origins of the war, but I do believe that Ukraine is also regarded as the gateway to the destruction of Russia as it has existed for centuries. Behind that lies the undoubted resource riches of Russia itself. I think the aftermath of the Cold War, the looting of Russia, shows that resources are a major part of this.
This map, plus your information about fortification of lines since 2014, is a jaw-dropper.
I had read that eastern Ukraine was mineral-rich, but had no idea about the immense values.
Thank you very much. I am on to sharing your post with others.
Yes this is a shocker. Makes me think of Paul Harvey: "And now you know the rest of the story."
The value assigned to various areas and especially in the Donbass reveals the truth of what is going on and why the USoA has been smearing Russia and it's leader, Putin for such an extended period of time and the forever wars in mineral rich areas while cordoning off the resources we have as untouchable under federal laws. It's long been an economic concept the notion of the "Scramble for Scarce Resources" and in the current geopolitical situation of the 21st. century the consistent drum beat of scarcity has the global elite in the West attempting to "corner the market" of the critical resources that fuel the modern world. This scramble is not for the benefit of the citizens of the west, but rather for the continued accumulation of wealth of the West's oligarch's who prefer they control who gets what and at what price. The next article by Mark with reference to the "lost" trillions of dollars is shocking, but not unexpected. How often have we heard about missing millions, billions and now trillions of dollars. Where did it go and why is something the people of this country should b demanding to know.
Spot on.
“Follow the money” always works.
Fighting to save democracy, huh?
Start with the meaning of the word "is" and work from there.
Yes. And I'm gonna tell you that the "military aid"--all those billions--is just the tip of the iceberg.
Billions? Trillions now. The link here is for an article (two-part essay) and is part two of this extensive article on the -Deep State and our Oligarch;'s who oppress us with no remorse, shame or guilt, I'd say with glee. It covers a lot of what Austin-Fitts refers to. Have you ever read "A Lily Bit?"
https://www.alilybit.com/p/the-shadow-syndicate-that-runs-america