Russia Beyond The Headlines: The Economist's failed assault on Gazprom

The article “Russia’s wounded giant” published on March 23rd bears the tagline “the world’s biggest gas-producer is ailing. It should be broken up” and is a fine work of anti-Russian propaganda. The authors of this despicable hatched job use all the methods from the “black propaganda” playbook, including quoting unnamed sources, accusations without factual backing and very sloppy fact checking. The bias of the authors is so evident, that it leaves only two possible explanations. Either they are utterly incompetent or their bias is willful.

In this text, an attempt to do an analysis of the arguments presented by The Economist will be made. It will be up to the reader to decide, whose point of view is closer to the truth. All political aspects, like the accusations of serving as “a wallet for the Russia’s rulers” and accusations of becoming “fat and lazy” will not be touched. Unlike The Economist, better named “The Politician”, I still believe that the economy is a science based on facts and not on political views.

The Economist’s argument: Gazprom’s “ageing gasfields are in decline”

The counter-argument: This is a typical instance of “lie by omission”. It is natural for an ageing gasfiled to provide lower yield but a 118% replacement ratio for 2012 shows that the overall “health” of the company’s assets is fine.  MORE