© AP Photo/Evan Vucci/TASS

Top stories from the Russian press on Wednesday, October 26th, prepared by TASS

Vedomosti: Biden White House rejects Democratic bid for talks with Russia

A group of 30 Progressive Democrats from the House of Representatives called on the Biden administration to start negotiations with Russia to end the conflict in Ukraine. The White House rejected the bid, using the usual set of arguments. A day after the letter was sent, its authors announced they were withdrawing the appeal. Rep. Pramila Jayapal later explained that the letter was penned back in the summer and it was sent due to a misunderstanding. According to experts interviewed by Vedomosti, the letter is a political move by the Democrats, an attempt to use the moment before elections.

The letter calls for a change in Ukraine policy, direct negotiations with Russia, lifting some sanctions, and promoting a ceasefire. The legislative representatives said that the decision on Ukraine’s fate is impossible without its participation, but believe in the need for direct US talks with Russia on the issue.

"It is unlikely that congresspeople are seriously interested in negotiations with Russia. The Democrats have developed a very hardline stance towards Moscow, and any peace initiatives they can offer would not suit the Russian leadership," Head of the Center for North American Studies at IMEMO RAS Victoria Zhuravleva said.

Fyodor Voitolovsky, director of the IMEMO RAS, believes that the Democrats are trying to distance themselves from Biden's position and seize the initiative from the Republicans on some issues.

So far, there is no further development of the September successes of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and there is a risk that the mobilization in Russia may lead to a new offensive by Moscow, expert at the Russian International Affairs Council Ivan Timofeev believes. Congress might want to negotiate now, while nothing has changed. The Ukrainian successes have not yet been forgotten in the media, and Ukraine has not yet become a military-financial black hole for the US budget, as Iraq and Afghanistan used to be, admits Timofeev.

Izvestia: Will Israel’s Ukraine policy change?

Israel has been refusing to supply arms to Kiev since February 2022, despite pressure from the US and repeated appeals from the leadership in Kiev. However, on the eve of the November 1 legislative elections, Israeli politicians said they might reconsider their weapons policy. Experts interviewed by Izvestia, however, believe that Israel still will not change its balanced position between Moscow and Kiev, since this would spell a break with Russia in cooperation in Syria.

The New York Times claims Israel might change its position. The Jewish state provides Kiev with intelligence to combat Iranian drones, which Tehran allegedly sends to Russia, the newspaper writes. According to its sources, the reasons why Israel is hesitant to send weapons to Ukraine are related to the Russian military presence and its S-400 air defense systems in Syria, as well as Khmeimim air base and the Tartus naval base. Israel does not want to lose its communication channels between Russian and Israeli military personnel.

According to Israeli political scientist Ze’ev Khanin, radical changes in Israel's policy towards Russia or Ukraine after the November 1 elections "are not expected". The conflict in Ukraine is one of the factors of the election campaign, but not the main one, he noted.

Sergey Melkonyan from the Israel Studies Department of the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences believes that Israel is guided by pragmatic considerations and therefore won’t take hostile steps towards Russia, although it has voted for resolutions condemning Moscow's actions at the UN General Assembly. "Israel did not join the sanctions, did not supply Ukraine with weapons, even defensive ones. Russia continues to play a pivotal role in the Syrian conflict, which is sensitive to Israel," he told Izvestia.

Izvestia: Norway powerless as far as saving EU from energy crisis goes

Norway cannot resolve the energy crisis in Europe, the Russian Embassy in Oslo told Izvestia, noting that a serious broadening of Norwegian exports is impossible due to limited reserves. That said, as far as replacing Russian gas goes, the EU views the Nordic nation as a hopeful substitute. According to the Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy, in 2022 it is planned to increase the supply of natural gas by 8% to 122 bln cubic meters. Meanwhile, Oslo does not support the EU’s bid to place a cap on the price of natural gas, the ministry noted. According to experts interviewed by Izvestia, this could overshadow Norway's cooperation with Europe.

"Norway is unable to resolve the ongoing energy crisis, since a serious expansion of its exports is impossible due to limited reserves," the Russian Embassy in Norway told Izvestia.

The notion that Norway would be the EU’s savior in the absence of Russian gas was actively promoted by Warsaw. However, according to experts interviewed by Izvestia, Baltic Pipe with a capacity of 10 bln cubic meters of gas per year is not a competitor to Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 with a total capacity of 110 bln cubic meters.

"It is important to understand that having started deliveries via Baltic Pipe, Oslo does not provide any additional gas. It’s just that before it went to Germany, and now it will go to Poland," leading analyst at the National Energy Security Fund Igor Yushkov believes.

In addition, the viewpoints of the EU and Norway on the gas price cap differ. The Norwegian Ministry of Energy told Izvestia that they oppose the measure because it could exacerbate the gas problem for Europe.

Senior Researcher at IMEMO RAS Alexander Kamkin believes that a price ceiling would challenge European unity. "Norway, as a gas producer, relies on maximizing profit. And the [proposed] measure only plays into the hands of the consumer. So, Oslo will resist it to the very end," the expert told Izvestia.

Nezavisimaya Gazeta: Central Asian countries may shift focus away from Russia

On November 11, Samarkand will host a summit of heads of state of the Organization of Turkic States (OTS). One of the issues will be transitioning to a single alphabet by all countries participating in the association. Turkey plays a key role in this process, creating a "Turkic world" as opposed to a "Russian world", Nezavisimaya Gazeta writes, which means not so much the desire of these countries to act in spite of Russia, but rather to distance themselves from its policy, and strengthen their ethnic and confessional unity. At the same time, the countries are willing to maintain friendly and mutually beneficial relations with Moscow, the newspaper writes.

"The political interaction of the Turkic countries has intensified due to the conflict in Ukraine. The OTS nations have a different position from Moscow on the issue of recognizing new Russian territories. There are also concerns in terms of hypothetical security, in particular in Kazakhstan," Director of the Risk Assessment Group Dosym Satpayev believes. He asserts that a single alphabet could be one of the convergence points that could help develop stronger economic, political, and informational relationships in the future.

If Erdogan has plans for Central Asia, they will take time, the newspaper writes, adding that the only thing he can use to dominate the region is the religious factor.

Chief Researcher at the Center for Situational Analysis at IMEMO RAS Alexey Malashenko believes that if Turkey proposes using a single alphabet, the Turkish language will be also gradually introduced. In a generation, young people will not learn Russian, but Turkish. "As a result, Central Asia will shift its focus from Moscow to Ankara and joint integration associations with Turkey," he told the newspaper.

Kommersant: European Commission wants to cut renewable energy and nuclear power plant revenues

Given the rising gas price crisis, which is worsening the situation with conventional energy, the European Commission intends to start regulating green generation revenue. New renewable energy sources and nuclear power plants will not be allowed on the market and will be forced to work under long-term contracts with a price ceiling. For older plants, regulators can set an artificial price cap of 180 euro per MWh. However, experts polled by Kommersant believe that the construction of renewable energy sources will continue anyway.

According to S&P Global, the European Commission suggests obliging all new nuclear power plants and renewable energy sources to sell electricity under long-term contracts for a difference in prices - Contracts for Difference (CfD). The (contract price) strike price would be determined through tenders, taking into account the actual production costs for station construction.

The idea, which distorts export-import commerce between EU countries, may have detrimental effects on the growth of the common EU energy market, the integration process with institutions and regulations that have been evolving for decades, Sergey Rozhenko from Kept warns. However, in his opinion, even with a price cap of 180 euro per 1 MWh, the issue of excess revenues will still remain a problem, since it is still 4-5 times higher than the cost of building renewable energy facilities.

The European Commission’s proposal seems to be a pressing price containment measure, according to Maxim Dyakin from Vygon Consulting. The planned price cap for renewable energy should be 20-30% higher than pre-crisis levels in order to compensate for the increase in CAPEX and OPEX that has been observed since 2021, he notes. In this case, negative consequences for the renewable energy sector’s development can be avoided.