Russia is waging war not only against Ukraine, but also against the entire Western world — Danish MP

Ukraine is the external border of Europe, protecting it from Russia. The next targets could be the Baltic states, Poland, and Moldova. If Ukraine does not withstand the pressure, Europe will have to compromise on the existing world order, which is based on international law and rules — something that must not be allowed.

Russia’s war economy can function only with the support of its partners, especially China. Therefore, the EU must apply economic pressure to address this issue with China — for example, by restricting China’s access to EU markets if it continues to purchase cheap Russian oil.

This was stated in a major interview with the information agency Guildhall by Danish Member of Parliament and member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Sasha Faxe.

Miss Faxe, there is currently a major debate about whether it is worth at least partially accepting Russia’s terms for ending the war. The discussion revolves around the idea that Ukraine might have to change its position aimed at defending its sovereignty and make concessions. But that is illogical, because the aggressor is not Ukraine — it is Russia, the Putin regime. Shouldn’t it be the Russian Federation that changes its aggressive behavior?

— Yes, absolutely right. Considering that Russia and Putin launched the aggression against Ukraine, I believe that it is Ukraine that should determine the terms on which it wants to move forward. And I don’t think anyone else has the right to define those terms. We support the course that Ukraine wishes to pursue.

Miss Faxe, in discussions within the EU, it is often said that there are threats coming from Russia not only toward Ukraine but also toward Europe. Do you share this concern? And if so, what exactly are the threats to Europe?

— At the moment, it can be said that Ukraine is the external border of Europe, protecting us from Russia. There are also countries on the EU border that are, to some extent, subordinated to Russia — for example, Belarus — and it is Ukraine that is fighting to protect the borders of democratic Europe. If we submit to aggression as a way of governing the world, I don’t see how we could ever put an end to it. Someone else will then become the next target. It is important that we, as Europeans, understand this.

I sincerely sympathize with what is happening in Ukraine, but this war is also of a more global nature — it is a war of principles and about how we want to exist in this world. Do we want to yield to a new world order in which oligarchies and theocracies rule the world and use force as a way to subjugate others? In this sense, Ukraine has found itself at the forefront and has become the country that had to take on the losses of this war. And that is precisely why we in Denmark, and all our political parties, support Ukraine and provide it with significant assistance. Because we see what is happening.

A few days ago, we heard direct threats against Denmark from another oligarch named Trump. So I think that today, many people in Denmark sympathize with Ukraine even more than before. Throughout this entire time, I have often heard that Ukraine has always evoked great sympathy and compassion among Danes. And we see that the next targets could be the Baltic states, Poland, Moldova, and of course, Georgia. Unfortunately, there are many paths along which things could unfold, and therefore we must not yield to violence and aggressive force — otherwise, we will have to compromise on the existing world order, which is based on international law and rules.

Thank you for your position. I would like to return to the discussion about how, instead of pushing Ukraine toward compromise, perhaps the Western countries have some effective tools that could exert the necessary pressure on the Putin regime and stop the war? Previously, sanctions were declared the main tool for this purpose. Military aid to Ukraine was announced as a defensive component aimed at achieving this goal. But this is not enough. Are there any other levers the Western world could use against the Russian Federation that have not yet been applied?

— In the past, much more could have been done, but perhaps now it is already too late. Support for Ukraine should have been provided much faster and on a much larger scale. We should have delivered full-scale military assistance to Ukraine, because that could have changed the situation on the battlefield. But we no longer have that lever.

What other tools do we have? At the moment, we do have some sanctions, but they are insufficient because there are too many exemptions. For example, much of what is related to the oil industry and the large volumes of very cheap oil to which Russia has access. This oil is used in various ways. The Russian Federation uses it in the production of fertilizers, which are not subject to sanctions, and for which a huge amount of fossil fuels is required. And the easiest way for them is to dump the prices of fertilizers. In this way, they are capturing the European fertilizer market, because they can sell at prices that no one in Western Europe can compete with. And this is one of the issues I want to highlight. These cannot be called real sanctions if there are exemptions for such things. Moreover, it creates a side effect — damage is being done and domestic fertilizer production in the EU is being destroyed, because we cannot keep up with their prices.

So, in the long term, when the war ends — because I am a historian and I know that all wars eventually end — we will face an internal problem with fertilizer production. Ukraine will soon become a member of the EU, but all its production facilities have been bombed. And here in the EU, we have effectively destroyed and are holding back our own fertilizer production by purchasing cheap fertilizers from the Russian Federation. So by all standards, it is extremely unwise that we have not imposed sanctions on this.

There are also shadow channels for the import and export of goods, and these, too, should be addressed. Another important issue that I have repeatedly highlighted in Danish media is that the Russian war economy can only function with the support of its partners — especially China. I know there are other countries that are part of the economic alliance, but they are not sufficient to sustain the Russian Federation. And I do not believe that sanctions against those other countries can truly undermine the Russian war economy. It is China that has its hand on the pulse, and in return, they receive cheap oil — which sustains Russia’s economy. This has many side effects — not only prolonging the war by supporting Russia’s military economy and production — but also destabilizing the global order. Because in return for this support, China gains access to the Arctic Ocean from the Russian side and will be able to establish a presence there. In this sense, we see the emergence of a new player in the Arctic who could become part of a broader destabilization of the world, which would make it much harder to end the war and push Russia and other actors toward a ceasefire. The threat would be significantly amplified if China also became an active player in this, with Chinese troops appearing in the region.

All of this creates yet another side effect for the rest of the EU, which impacts both how effectively we can support Ukraine right now, and how we will be able to integrate Ukraine as an EU member if extremely cheap production in China continues to be sustained. In Western Europe, we are being flooded with very cheap and low-quality goods, which undermines our own industries — industries that should be part of the support structure for Ukraine. So this is another axis that isn’t discussed nearly enough, but in my view, it represents a major threat — both now and in the post-war context. That is why I propose the EU use economic pressure to address this issue with China and find a way to drive a wedge between the Chinese and Russian economies, so that China cannot use the European market as a platform for its own economic growth.

The EU is essentially one of the world’s largest markets. And if I understood you correctly, the American market and China’s dependence on it can also be used as leverage to weaken China’s support for the Russian war economy?

— Yes, this is a way to drive a wedge between these two countries. And this tool has actually become even more accessible, if you listen to what the new U.S. president — who took office on Monday (Donald Trump — ed.) — is saying. He is very likely to impose tariffs, and will probably start with China. That means it will be difficult for China to sell its goods there. As a result, we’ll see an even greater influx of products into the EU as China tries to support its own production. Because where else can they sell these goods at fair prices? So, if the U.S. imposes new customs rules on Chinese products, it would give us even more leverage. This could be another way to drive a wedge between Russia and China. It’s a very big step, but it’s also an escalation on the global trade front. We might see this happen soon, although many remain skeptical, because Europe is also dependent on China for certain technologies. That’s why we can’t simply say, «Let’s impose sanctions on China». That’s not quite what I’m suggesting. What I’m saying is — we should tell China: «If you want to trade with us, you need to reconsider your relationship with Russia». And I believe this could be a way to establish a more productive trade relationship between Europe and China. And as a byproduct of that, we could also say: «Guys, Russian oil? Stay away from it».

You are proposing a very practical tool to influence Russia and its economic capabilities. I hope European politicians will listen to you. I have one more practical question, which you partially touched on — the Russian «shadow fleet», which generates huge revenues from the sale of Russian oil. A couple of weeks ago, an agreement was signed in Tallinn between the countries of Northern Europe and the Baltics to insure these ships. This is a great solution, but it’s not the final point, right? What should be the ultimate goal of EU countries regarding the Russian «shadow fleet»? What other steps can be taken in this direction?

— I don’t think this will be easy. The most important thing is that the countries with access to the sea and the ability to obstruct Russia’s shadow fleet in various ways are also countries that rely on international logistics systems. For example, Denmark is a country of international transport, and the free movement of vessels is of enormous importance to our economy. And not only ours, but also to all other countries with access to the sea that depend on this financially. Therefore, it is necessary to find ways to solve this problem without causing an even greater catastrophe.

We saw how difficult it was to export wheat from Ukraine by sea. We saw that this led to hunger around the world because Ukraine is the largest wheat producer in the world. And many countries that do not grow wheat have created a food system over time in which they depend on it. Last year, I was in Morocco. And I was struck by how much wheat they add to their food, even though Morocco doesn’t have large wheat fields. However, they grow a lot of watermelons.

So, if we completely block something, if we start controlling the fleet too strictly, it could create problems in other areas and provoke a reaction elsewhere. It could lead to disasters on a scale we can’t even imagine. I mean hunger and new wars due to resource shortages. And we don’t need that. We know that a struggle for resources is very likely to happen soon, partly because of climate change. We must not escalate the situation. In my opinion, there is a fragile balance in this matter. And I think it’s important to take things step by step. It’s not because I’m afraid of taking serious actions. I just look at the situation from a broader perspective. I really want to protect the lives of Ukrainians. But this could cost millions of lives elsewhere.

Too rapid development of international transportation could lead to the collapse of laws governing international shipping, which is rarely used — we have very little protection concerning the fleet. Therefore, what we are trying to change in the Baltic right now is something new. We need to see how it works, how it fits with the laws of international trade, and so on, to understand whether we should take the next steps. We also need to consider other actions that could be taken, but not within the framework of this sanctions track. We need to have the ability to control our oceans more than we have done so far. So, in terms of increasing military presence in the Baltic and up to the North Sea, we’ll see how this can be implemented.

One of the ways to solve this problem might not be to ban the ‘shadow fleet,’ but rather to impose environmental requirements. Because the Russian and Chinese shadow fleets use very old ships. And this could be one way to address the issue. Environmental protection requirements could be put forward. If we go down this path, it could have roughly the same effect. But sometimes, within the framework of the WTO (World Trade Organization), they might still see this as a way to hinder trade. And our world depends on trade.

For us, this is a new step. And it is not something that is done very often compared to other types of sanctions, such as asset freezes and so on, which we have seen with Russia, Iran. These are standard tools. And we know how the markets react. We know how the international trade system responds to them. But right now, we don’t know what will happen when we impose sanctions at sea. I won’t be the first to say this, but I don’t think we will gain the greatest advantage in terms of risk here. That’s why I’m focusing more on how we can restrict oil transportation by tankers. Because transporting oil by tankers is not very practical. Perhaps it’s better to use pipelines, as close to home as possible?

That’s why I started in this order. We need to start with sanctions against what Russia can produce from its oil and make money off, such as fertilizers, the market for which is one of the largest industries dependent on oil. Then, we need to cut off Russian exports to China, which is a massive economic force. And only then could we look at banning maritime trade. But I think the first two points would be enough. Although this doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try, but these two points would be my main focus.

The Russian budget is 60% dependent on oil revenues. Therefore, it has been said many times that undermining Russia’s oil income is a way to end the war. Increasing oil production in the West, as Trump has repeatedly stated, could affect oil prices, and therefore 60% of the Russian budget. What do you think, should the West set a strategic goal to lower global oil prices? Both to protect itself and to reduce the funds Russia has for waging war.

— I understand where you’re coming from. But I’m not sure it’s possible. Today’s production looks very different from what it was 50 years ago. Back then, we didn’t have plastics, most clothing was made from natural fibers, and so on. Production is a huge part of all of this. Here are a few key areas that looked different then. First, there’s transportation, which requires a lot of fuel. Second, clothing — one of the most oil-dependent industries. I know that when you live in a country where there’s a war, it can be hard to understand, but the average Dane buys more than 60 new pieces of clothing every year. Third, there’s construction. Steel production requires a lot of oil. And we see that Europe is still building bridges, but not houses. However, we see that the Global South is also advancing in construction, consuming a lot of oil, which wasn’t the case in the 1970s. And lastly, agriculture, which today is highly dependent on fertilizers, something that wasn’t the case back then. All these industries require a lot of oil.

Therefore, in my opinion, the most important thing is to find ways of obtaining energy without using fossil fuels. And here’s where I get to the point. Instead of trying to take a step back and see how much more oil we can find, how else we can use it, I believe we should use this major global crisis, caused in part by this (the war of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, — ed.), to become better. Denmark has made progress in terms of wind energy. Solar panels are being installed on a massive scale. But I see many countries that have postponed or might even cancel the closure of their nuclear reactors.

You can see how China is building buildings that are very difficult to measure. And we in Europe can’t keep up with their speed. You can see the huge investments that have been made in green energy under the Biden administration. And I think this is much more important. We need to succeed in this (transition to green energy sources, — ed.) more than in trying to lower old prices (on oil, — ed.). Because if we need to lower old prices, we need to change the way society thinks, as we know it.

Thank you for your arguments. Regarding this topic, I would like to quote an article from The Guardian. It says that European imports of liquefied natural gas from Russia reached a record level. Last year, Europe bought a record amount of liquefied natural gas from Russia. Data shows that despite the EU’s efforts to move away from fossil fuels sourced from Putin’s war chest, vessels carrying 17.8 million tons of Russian LNG docked in European ports in 2024, setting an overall record for EU LNG imports from Russia. What do you think about this?

— If we are to lower prices, we need to look at the global energy structure, and it is very difficult to change. There have been people trying to make it more sustainable, but so far no one has succeeded. So, I don’t think this is a viable path. But liquefied gas is part of what has not been sufficiently sanctioned, in my opinion. I think this is often discussed. That’s why I didn’t prioritize it as one of the goods to sanction first, because there are other things we could do. In my view, fertilizers are overlooked in this issue because it’s easier to talk about liquefied gas, although I fully agree that stricter sanctions should be imposed on it.

Let’s consider another angle of sanctions. Sanctions against Russia and countries within the Eurasian Economic Union are not synchronized. As a result, the volumes of goods these countries purchased from the EU and sold to Russia are overwhelming. For example, Kyrgyzstan bought ten times more goods than before the war. Kazakhstan has become the largest partner for the Czech Republic in some areas, particularly in goods with dual-use purposes. These countries have a tax-free zone, so they can easily transport goods from Kyrgyzstan or Kazakhstan to Russia. What is your assessment of the situation?

— As a Dane, it’s easy for me to simply say ‘more sanctions’ and ‘more aid.’ Because, as far as I understand, we are in third place for total assistance to Ukraine and one of the toughest countries in terms of sanctions. To do what you’re talking about, the EU would need a common agreement. I think this might be difficult. I’m not against it, but, as far as I know, this issue has not been raised in negotiations (within the EU, — ed.).

I raise this point because it’s a huge support for Russia. Perhaps it’s worth considering how to deal with this?

— What needs to be done is to raise awareness among Europeans in general, especially politicians. Because the countries you refer to are, honestly speaking, a black hole on the map. I think for Europeans, this is one of the darkest holes on the world map. Because if you ask people where Venezuela is, they will tell you. But if you ask them where Turkmenistan is, they will say somewhere over there. And what kind of country is it, what language do they speak, who rules them — they don’t know. We don’t get news from there. We get more news from South America than from there. So, from my perspective, it’s important to raise awareness among Europeans about these countries. I’m glad you are doing just that.

Thank you very much, we are trying. In my opinion, without Russia’s military defeat on the battlefield in one way or another, real change in the aggressive behavior of Putin’s regime is impossible. But today, Ukraine is bleeding, and Russia has a serious advantage in manpower. I am grateful for every bullet that has been provided to us. I understand that without your help, there would be no Ukraine today. So, I am grateful to all the Danes, all our Western partners, but we must raise the issues that are on the agenda these days. And I understand that if the amount of military aid does not increase, in a year and a half or two years, we will find ourselves in a much more difficult situation than today. What could influence the change in the volume of military aid to Ukraine? And, by the way, we have an example from history, perhaps not the best, but relevant. We remember the Vietnam War, when the nuclear country USA supported Vietnam against another nuclear power, the USSR, by providing them with state-of-the-art planes, artillery, and everything else at the time. And this did not lead to a nuclear war. Why does the West help Ukraine so limitedly?

— In Vietnam, two superpowers faced each other, and this was part of maintaining the balance during the Cold War. Now, we find ourselves in a situation where the same interests are not only in Ukraine but also in Europe as a whole, but back then, they took a step back. In my opinion, the situation needs to change. Again, it is easy to talk about this because, if we look at the percentages, we are the country that gives the most. But we are a small country, and we have not much left that we can give. I believe it all revolves around awareness, because not all of Europe understands the real situation.

For example, I began by saying that Ukraine is the frontline of Europe on Russia’s path. The Germans, the French, and other large countries have more money compared to what we have. I mean, we have a very small economy, fewer than six million people. Yes, we are a wealthy country, but not that big. Therefore, we need the larger countries and all countries as a whole to understand that this war is not only the war of Ukrainians. It is a war for the peace as we know it. It is a war against views that see territorial conquest as a way to manage the world.

#EU #Russia #Sasha Faxe #shadow fleet #sunctions #Украине

Только главные новости в нашем Telegram, Facebook и GoogleNews!