I'd love to be taking your course.

One nitpick: It also allowed a couple of remarks about the predatory nature of Gazprom ...

While not wrong, any more than it was to speak of Saddam as bloodthirsty, etc, it is one-sided, and one-sided in a highly charged and dangerous climate, possibly leading to war, just as were the Saddam charges if taken in isolation. I won't recount the history of US and Western actions against Russia since the fall of the SU, nor the actions and posture of the US when it was the energy superpower during WW2 vis-a-vis competing imperial (Axis) powers.

I'm not advocating all or any of this be covered. I'm simply objecting to the gratuitous potshot without proper context.

I will try and clarify why I think the way I do in my next post, but I have written about this in the past where among other things I noted

Time was, when suppliers got a little uppity that armies would march – Persians, Turks, Russians, Chinese – even the odd gunboat has been known to show up. That is unlikely to happen in this particular case, changes are likely to occur more behind closed doors.

Looks as though I was a little optimistic.