Did American lobbyists help Vladimir Putin get a win in Congress? You'll never know.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/02/nord-stream-russia-germany-ukraine-lobbyists-fara/
As Vladimir Putin threatens Ukraine, the fate of a 764-mile pipeline under the Baltic Sea has become a top US foreign policy concernand one of Washingtons most heavily lobbied issues. Last month, backers of the pipeline, which would allow Russia to sell natural gas directly to Germany, got a win when the Senate failed to pass a bill that would have imposed sanctions intended to block it. But the public may never know details of how that legislative victory came about, because advocates for the pipeline are sidestepping foreign lobbying disclosure laws.
President Joe Biden declared last week that the not yet operational pipeline, called Nord Stream 2, will not move forward if Russia invades Ukraine. Congress had previously instituted an earlier round sanctions aimed at stopping the project. Biden last year lifted those sanctions under pressure from Germany, which is eager for the cheap gas Nord Stream will provide. In January, a bill offered by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) that would have imposed new sanctions fell short of 60 votes it needed. At the urging of the White House, most Democrats opposed that measure.
All these political machinations reflect an American consensus that the pipelinewhich is owned Gazprom, a Russian state-controlled companywill benefit Russia by allowing it to more effectively leverage its energy supplies to influence western European states. But the DC lobbyists who have spent the last few years fighting to block sanctions on Nord Stream contend that they do not work for Russia, but rather for private commercial companies. And they are using that claim to keep key aspects of their advocacy work under wraps.
Legally, this is a complicated issue, but the upshot is pretty simple. Lobbyists working in Washington to advance a Russian foreign policy priority, which is closely tied to Russias threat to invade Ukraine, are operating in relative secrecy, despite US laws intended to make such foreign advocacy is transparentbecause those laws remain weak and easily evaded.
*snip*