Energy and Finance Highlight Europe’s Divisions

-

GasPipeline.jpg
(Photo credit: G.hostbuster’s photostream)
Following the Russia-Ukraine gas disagreement last December, European leaders promised to diversify their natural gas supply away from Russia in order to prevent politically motivated shortages in the future.
German President Angela Merkel said that Russia’s actions would have consequences and European Commission Chief Jose Manuel Barroso called the crisis “unacceptable.”
Recent events, however, suggest that Russia will continue to divide and conquer European gas markets in a way similar to how toxic financial products continue to threaten Europe’s financial markets in the absence of a coordinated policy response.
The centerpiece of Europe’s diversification strategy is the proposed Nabucco pipeline. Nearly everyone (except Russia) supports the project in principle, but the details are proving difficult to sort out.
According to Flynt Leverett, Director of the New America Foundation/Geopolitics of Energy Initiative, “All of the structural obstacles that made Nabucco difficult before the Russia-Ukraine dispute remain.”
As I explained in my last post on this subject, the first problem with Nabucco is the question of how to fill the pipeline. While Azerbaijan claims that it can fill the pipeline itself, the country produced a total of 23bn cubic meters of gas last year, and Nabucco needs 31bn cubic meters to operate at full capacity. Turkmenistan remains under long-term contracts with Russia, and Iranian gas remains subject to American and European sanctions.
But the bigger structural issue at play is that the wealthy, western European countries are in a better position and therefore have different interests than their eastern European counterparts. This is analogous to the western Europeans’ refusal to bail out eastern European banks.
Countries like Italy, France and especially Germany possess the diplomatic and economic weight to play geopolitical hardball with the Russians. Therefore, these “old European” countries are more concerned with their reliance on transit countries like Ukraine and the Baltic states than they are with their dependence on Russian gas.
That partially explains why these countries oppose EU financing for Nabucco and are pursuing Nord Stream and South Stream, both of which would bring Russian gas to western Europe while bypassing the former Soviet states.
Similarly, Turkey’s objective with regard to Nabucco is to become an energy hub that brings gas westward to Europe. It makes little difference to Turkey where the gas comes from. In fact, Turkish officials recently suggested that Nabucco should be filled by pumping Russian gas into the Turkish section of the pipeline!
Clearly, this is not what the project’s architects had in mind.
It appears that the energy security game – like economic recovery – is mostly every country for itself. And unless that changes, Russia will continue to play European countries off of each other to maximize its strategic benefits.
— Ben Katcher

Comments

4 comments on “Energy and Finance Highlight Europe’s Divisions

  1. Finance Entry says:

    What’s The Property Financing?
    Property investment is a term that most people are familiar with. People usually invest money when they have a surplus or when they are planning for the future. The very careful ones opt for government securities and the adventurous ones go for stock markets. Where does the property investment stand on this line between the secure and the risky?
    If anybody is thinking long term then property has no parallel as it has been seen that in a larger time frame land never betrays. Property can be used to get rental income or can be used to secure a loan for any business venture alongside the property. Property investment also requires detailed research before the deal is drawn. Bear in mind that if the property is upon a disputed land then there are risks of recurring loss. On the other hand, if the property is situated at a location where many facilities are accessible then the prices will appreciate significantly over time. Any kind of Property Investment has been and shall always be one of the best kinds of solid investment opportunities.

    Reply

  2. Philippe says:

    This is not only hapening in gas look at nuclear power. Russia is far from stupid and it seems that it is every country for itself in energy :
    Germans dependance on the russian gas might have led to the Siemens Rossatom deal. After (or caused ?) the ditching of Areva Siemens partnership. Advantage for Russia it is using a vaning (though very slowly)position in fossil fuel. To gain another position in nuclear fuel. Advantage for Siemens better terms than with the french.
    Problem for Europe.

    Reply

  3. ... says:

    i think you’re correct that energy and finances highlight some important differences within the greater european community.. there are probably some other issues that do this too, like nato and what has been the usa’s overall agenda for the region as well… this is where the attitudes expressed towards iran get interesting to watch… iran is a major player on the energy front, but are being shut out internationally.. what is the long game plan for the big players – usa/china/russia on that one?
    “Russia will continue to play European countries off of each other to maximize its strategic benefits.” hasn’t that been what any other major player has done, serving it’s own self interests???
    isn’t that what this is a result of? “Iranian gas remains subject to American and European sanctions.”
    all the work in Ukraine with the orange revolution seems to have been so unproductive for the cia/usa…
    europe has had difficulty with the euro- who to include and how to proceed.. i don’t know if western europe attitude towards eastern europe is much different then the usas attitude towards latin and south america… it mostly boils down to “how can we use them” without having to offer much of anything… that is how i see it anyway..

    Reply

  4. JohnH says:

    And, of course, the United States, which has no dog in this hunt, has to insert itself any way it can, to maintain its global relevance and hegemony. Which most likely explains why Obama chose Turkey as his first overseas visit as President. You would think Obama would recognize that he has enough problems at home without sticking his nose into other people’s business.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *