5/24/2010

IT'S THE END OF THE WEST, AS WE KNOW IT (AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO FEEL)

A major reason for the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was the building of a pipeline through the country that would take natural gas from Turkmenistan to India and Pakistan. Canada and the other 44 Western countries occupying Afghanistan are supporting this U.S. objective by bolstering Washington’s military position in the country.

Turkmenistan, which borders Afghanistan, contains the fourth largest reserves of natural gas in the world. The U.S. has been trying to set up the pipeline for a decade, having first negotiated the venture with the ousted Taliban government. Two months after these negotiations broke down, Washington overthrew the Taliban in October 2001 when it invaded Afghanistan.

Since then, the U.S. has persuaded India, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, and Afghanistan to sign an agreement aimed at constructing the pipeline, but the war in Afghanistan and the U.S.’s failure to defeat the Taliban stalled actual work on this project. Washington’s occupation of Afghanistan and pipeline plans are part of its strategy to gain control of Central Asia’s and the Caspian Sea area’s energy riches and divert them away from Russia, China, and Iran.

As Richard Boucher, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, stated in September 2007: “One of our goals is to stabilize Afghanistan so it can become a conduit and hub between South and Central Asia so that energy can flow to the south… and so that the countries of Central Asia are no longer bottled up between the two enormous powers of China and Russia, but rather that they have outlets to the south as well as to the north and the east and the west.”

However, as the Indian diplomat M.K. Bhadrakumar put it in an article for Asia Times, “The United States' pipeline diplomacy in the Caspian, which strove to bypass Russia, elbow out China and isolate Iran, has foundered.”
Recently, the U.S.’s Turkmen-Afghan pipeline plans have suffered what appears to be a fatal blow. On January 6, Turkmenistan committed its entire gas exports to China, Russia, and Iran with the inauguration of the Dauletabad-Sarakhs-Khangiran (DSK) pipeline which connects Iran's northern Caspian area with Turkmenistan.

As Bhadrakumar explains, Turkmenistan “has no urgent need of the pipelines that the United States and the European Union have been advancing.” The operation of the DSK pipeline, along with the launching of another one between China and Turkmenistan in December 2009, has “virtually redrawn the energy map of Eurasia and the Caspian,” he maintains. “We are witnessing a new pattern of energy cooperation at the regional level that dispenses with Big Oil [private Western multinational oil companies]. Russia traditionally takes the lead. China and Iran follow the example. Russia, Iran, and Turkmenistan hold, respectively, the world's largest, second-largest, and fourth-largest gas reserves. And China will be consumer par excellence in this century. The matter is of profound consequence to U.S. global strategy.”

Bhadrakumar has served in diplomatic posts for India in the Soviet Union, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.

Russia and Turkmenistan have also agreed to build an east-west pipeline connecting all of the latter’s gas fields to one network so that the pipelines going to Russia, Iran, and China can take gas from any of the fields. (See the accompanying map for the routes of these new and proposed pipelines.)

Three weeks before the opening of the DSK pipeline, China and Turkmenistan inaugurated a major natural gas pipeline between the two countries. The presidents of China, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan attended the opening ceremony of the 1,833-kilometre pipeline on December 14, 2009. The pipeline will transport natural gas from the Saman-Depe field in eastern Turkmenistan through Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan to China’s Xinjiang province, from where it will go to 14 Chinese provinces and cities. By 2012, the pipeline will deliver 40 billion cubic metres of gas per year, which is more than half of China’s present gas consumption.

Chinese President Hu Jintao described the pipeline as “another platform for collaboration and cooperation” between China and Central Asia. In return for access to Central Asian gas, China is building infrastructure and giving cheap loans to the area’s republics. According to John Chan, writing on the World Socialist Website: “Beijing’s broader aim is to bring the region within its own political and strategic orbit.”

Turkmenistan President Berdymukhamedov declared that the pipeline has “not only commercial and economic value. It is also political,” and will become “a major contributing factor to security in Asia”.

Uzbekistan President Islam Karimov added: “China, through its wise and farsighted policy, has become one of the key guarantors of global security.”

As Chan puts it, “The opening of a major Chinese pipeline from Turkmenistan alters the Central Asian energy equation. The Financial Times commented last week that the pipeline “deals a blow to the European Union’s plans to win Turkmen supplies for the planned Nabucco pipeline.”
This pipeline is the U.S.’s and E.U.’s attempt at breaking Russia’s dominant role as the leading energy supplier to Europe. Nabucco depends mainly on getting gas from Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan. However, Russia now wants to double its consumption of Azerbaijani gas, and Iran is also becoming a consumer of this gas, further reducing supplies for Nabucco.
In December 2009, Azerbaijan signed an agreement to deliver gas to Iran through the 1,400km Kazi-Magomed-Astara pipeline. Russia's South Stream and North Stream pipelines (the latter’s construction starts in Spring 2010), will supply gas to northern and southern Europe, ensuring Moscow’s continued dominance of energy supplies to Europe.
As Bhadrakumar points out, the DSK pipeline shows that U.S. efforts to demonize, isolate, and terrorize Iran have failed miserably. In open defiance of U.S. policy, President Berdymukhammedov of Turkmenistan is busy creating “a new economic axis” with Iranian president Mahmud Ahmadinejad, whom he considers a valuable partner.

Washington’s and the West’s show of force in Afghanistan has also failed to impress Berdymukhammedov, who is giving all of his country’s natural gas to Russia, China, and Iran. These countries are not currently engaged in imperialist military occupation of another nation. All they had to do to get Turkmenistan’s gas was to offer it a decent economic deal. So, while the West kills thousands of civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan and ravages both countries, Russia, China and Iran are acquiring the crucial energy riches of Central Asia and the Caspian area without firing a shot.

Russian dominance of Central Asia was further cemented by the recent overthrow of the pro-U.S. government in Kyrgyzstan and its replacement by a pro-Moscow regime. The new government has told Washington that it can no longer use the Manas airbase, which is the main transshipment point for American supplies to Afghanistan.

In light of such major Western energy-related defeats, the continuing occupation of Afghanistan by 46 Western nations must have some other purpose. If their military venture were mainly economic — if they simply wanted greater access to Central Asia’s resources — why did they not offer the region’s countries acceptable prices for them, just as Russia, China, and Iran are doing?

The answer perhaps lies in a memorable remark by the great Palestinian intellectual Edward Said: “At the heart of the Western Idea is imperialism.”

The West did not become rich by offering resource-endowed countries fair and mutually beneficial economic deals. It became rich by subjecting countries in the Global South to 500 years of genocide and plunder through colonialism, neocolonialism, and the endless wars these aggressive actions entail.

The U.S. and its allies do not seem to realize that the dark age of “might-is-right” imperialism is coming to an end. Russia, China, India, and Iran are not countries that can be subdued by displays of military aggression in neighbouring nations. The continuing futile occupation of Afghanistan reflects the failure of the West’s political and military strategists to face this new geopolitical reality.

What possible threat could a financially and politically crippled West — a coalition that can’t even defeat the Taliban after nine years — pose to nuclear-armed Russia, China, and India? Countries like these are busy creating a post-imperial age in which aggression and occupation are not required to secure needed resources.

They are leaving the decadent West in the dust of history.
(RawaNews)

5/11/2010

THE THIRD ELEMENT. (Il terzo elemento)

The White Stream Pipeline Company is considering plans to build a gas pipeline linking Azerbaijan and Georgia.

According to British White Stream Pipeline Company Chairman Roberto Pirani, the proposed pipeline would transport gas from the Sangachal terminal near Baku in Azerbaijan to the Georgian port of Supsa.

The Sangachal–Supsa pipeline would provide an extension to the White Stream Pipeline currently in planning, which will transport natural gas from the Caspian Region to markets in Central and Eastern Europe.

Conceived in 2005, the White Stream project is intended to develop the Southern energy corridor, transporting gas from countries in the Caspian Region via Georgia directly to countries on the Western side of the Black Sea, such as Romania and Ukraine. The pipelines will cross the Black Sea in water depths in excess of 2,000 m.

Under the new plans, the project will also be linked in to gas supplies in Azerbaijan. The Sangachal terminal is currently supplied with gas from the Azerbaijani offshore field of Shah Deniz.

The White Stream project will be developed in stages and it is anticipated that at full completion will have two branches, one connecting Georgia to Romania through two parallel subsea pipelines, with an offshore length of approximately 1,100 km and the other connecting Georgia to the Ukrainian gas network also with two parallel pipelines an offshore length of 620 km.
The first White Stream Pipeline, expected to commence construction in 2012, will have a capacity of approximately 8 Bcm/a and is due for completion in 2015. During the subsequent years the other three subsea pipelines will be constructed and will take the overall capacity of the system to approximately 32 Bcm/a. A 430 km subsea connection between Crimea and Romania is also being considered.

The Southern energy corridor also includes [1) ndr] the Nabucco Turkey –Greece–Italy (TGI) Pipeline and [2) ndr] the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP).
(Pipelines International)

5/06/2010

10 ME, 10 YOU (10 io, 10 te)

Russian and Italy will each give a 10% stake in the South Stream pipeline to France's EDF , Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said today.

"We will do it concurrently - us and the Italians, 10% each," Putin told reporters on a visit to Ukraine which followed a meeting with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in Italy.

EDF is set to get a 20% stake in the South Stream gas pipeline designed to bring Russian gas to Europe, with work on the project due to start in the first half of 2012, Putin and Berlusconi said today.

Separately, Putin said Russia's budget will lose $3 billion this year and $4 billion in 2011 as a result of agreeing last week to a 30% cut in the price of its gas supplies to Ukraine.

"In essence it will mean an increase in the budget deficit for us," he said. "These are serious parameters, but we will manage."

Russia had expected a deficit of 3 trillion roubles ($103 billion), or 6.8% of gross domestic product this year, Reuters reported today.
(UpStreamOnline.com)

4/23/2010

SEVASTOPOL PAID IN GAS? (Sevastopoli pagata in metano?)

The presidents of Ukraine and Russia agreed Wednesday to extend the stay of Russia's Black Sea Fleet in the Ukrainian port of Sevastopol after the lease expires in 2017.

The move is among the strongest signs since Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych took power in February that he will steer away from his pro-Western predecessor's drive to shed Russia's influence.

It also is likely to boost Yanukovych's standing at home by taking some pressure off Ukraine's beleaguered economy. The agreement includes Russia giving Ukraine steep discounts for the natural gas on which its industries depend.

Ukraine has been hit harder by the global downturn than many other European countries, and it has been eager to get discounts for Russian gas.

For years, Ukraine bought Russian gas at well below market prices, but after Yushchenko took office and pledged to bring the country into NATO and the European Union, Russia repeatedly raised prices. Price disputes led to Russian gas cutoffs; the most severe, in early 2009, lasted two weeks and severely curtailed Russia's gas exports to Western Europe, most of which transit Ukraine.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said the base's lease would receive a 25-year extension. Russia pays $90 million per year for the base. There was no word on any change under the new deal.

Ukrainian opposition figures quickly criticized the deal, saying the lease extension violated the constitution.

Ukraine's previous president, Viktor Yushchenko, had fought to kick the fleet out when its lease expired, calling it a hostile presence in Ukraine.
(Dallas News)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The smiles on the two president’s faces belied the hard work that had gone into making the deal happen. According to the Kommersant daily the negotiating teams, headed by Prime Ministers Vladimir Putin and Nikolai Azarov, and including on the Russian side Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov, had been up all night finalizing the details of the agreement. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich were just going through the formalities.

But there is a good reason for the smiles and the attention to detail. The deal addresses three of the most sensitive issues in Russian-Ukrainian relations: the future of the Russian Baltic Fleet, gas supplies, and potential Ukrainian membership in NATO.

The Black Sea fleet will get to stay in Sevastopol, its historic and only really viable base, until 2042; that saves Russia money on building new naval facilities on its own Black Sea coast, but it also gives it a “political-strategic” victory, said Volodymyr Fesenko, the head of the Penta Center for Applied Political Studies in Kiev. “Russia not only preserves a military presence in the Black Sea basin and on Ukrainian territory, but also has a factor of influence on external security policy and internal affairs in Ukraine,” he said.

According to some commentators, including the Kommersant daily, the jewel in the crown of that influence is that since NATO membership rules forbid the presence of non-alliance military bases on members’ territory, the agreement effectively puts a 30-year freeze on Ukraine’s aspirations to join the North Atlantic Alliance. NATO membership was a key policy of Yanukovich’s predecessor, former President Vitor Yushchenko, and the source of much of the ill feeling between his administration and Moscow.

The quid-pro-quo is a 30 percent discount on Russian gas deliveries, which, according to the deal, Ukraine will count as additional rent payments on the Sevastopol port. For Ukraine, that basically means a saving of $100 per 1,000 cubic meters of gas (for the record, the discount will be $100 per 1,000 cubic meters when prices are over $330, and 30 percent for lower prices. Current prices are around $334. The discount will apply to 30 billion cubic meters in 2010, and 40 billion from 2011 onwards).

At yesterday’s press conference Yanukovich said that Ukraine would receive from Russia “a real investment of resources, specifically gas,” amounting to “around $40 billion dollars” over the next ten years. “And this bears the hallmarks of an economic victory for Ukraine,” said Fesenko.

It’s so far difficult to tell whether an economic win for Ukraine means a loss for Russia. In a note released Thursday morning Alfa Bank briefly pointed out that the gas discount would come at the expense of the Russian government, rather than Gazprom, but a spokesman for the bank refused to comment further, saying that the company’s Kiev and Moscow analysts were still working out the long-term implications.

Sergei Markov, a political scientist and State Duma Deputy for the United Russia faction, insisted the $40 billion cited by Yanukovich in yesterday’s press conference was an investment on which Russia expects a return. “Russia is likely to get a lot of profit from joint Russian-Ukrainian economic projects,” he said. “It’s a popular but crude mistake to suppose that Russia is paying for the Black Sea Fleet with gas.” (Markov also contests the widely held assumption that the deal will preclude NATO membership, pointing out that when the George W. Bush administration was cheerleading Yushchenko’s membership bid, U.S. officials had said the Russian base ought not to be a barrier).

According to Markov, the deal around the Black Sea Fleet is actually much simpler. “Russia saves hundreds of millions of dollars that it would otherwise have to spend building new naval bases in Novorossiysk and elsewhere,” he said. “The deal is, Ukraine lets us stay in Sevastopol, and we share the savings.”

Not everyone is so convinced by either the supposed Chinese wall between the two agreements, or the benefits of the deal. Russian opposition leader and one-time advisor to former Ukrainian president Yushchenko Boris Nemtsov told the Kommersant daily that “we could have demanded more for that money,” and warned darkly of the “Lukashenko factor,” – a reference to Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, who has gained a reputation for taking Russian aid without reciprocation. (Others have also raised the Lukashenko parallel, but not always negatively. Victor Ozerov, the chairman of the Federation Council’s defense committee, told Kommersant that though the price was high, it was no less than Russia grants Belarus, “and Lukashenko threatens worse relations.” And Markov even suggested that improved relations with Kiev might strengthen Moscow’s hand in its troubled relations with Minsk).

Meanwhile, in Ukraine, the deal is proving even more divisive. The presence of the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol is a subject that polarizes Ukrainian society, and it has unified the fractious opposition for the first time since the presidential elections, said Fesenko. “Two days ago Yushchenko, [former Prime Minister Yulia] Tymoshenko, [Arseniy] Yatsenyuk, [Vyacheslav] Kiriyenko, were all criticizing each other. Now they’re united in criticizing the agreement about the Black Sea Fleet,” he said. On Thursday afternoon it was reported that the Ukrainian Constitutional Court had approved the deal, but that doesn’t mean it will pass into law. “In the coming days we may see a parliamentary crisis as the opposition attempts to block ratification of the deal,” said Fesenko.
(Russia Profile)

4/12/2010

NORD STREAM TIME. (L'ora del Nord Stream)

Construction of the controversial Nord Stream pipeline from Russia to western Europe under the Baltic Sea has been officially launched.

Gazprom holds 51% of Nord Stream, which will run from the Russian port of Vyborg to Germany's Greifswald.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and German Chancellor Angela Merkel attended the ceremony near Vyborg.

The project was given the go-ahead only in February amid fears that the pipeline could damage the Baltic Sea.

President Medvedev said at the ceremony that the pipeline "for the first time - which may be one of its main achievements - will ensure direct supplies of Russian gas to western Europe, bypassing transit territories".

The existing pipelines run from Russia to EU countries via Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova.

Russia provides up to 30% of the gas consumed in Europe, and many European countries have been keen to secure alternative energy supplies.

Critics have argued that European countries do not need more gas from Russia and that the project is too expensive.

But Gazprom deputy chief executive Alexander Medvedev said there was plenty of demand for the gas.

"All the gas volumes have either been contracted, or have been formalized in binding obligations," he told journalists.

Gas supplies from Russia to Europe have been threatened or disrupted in the past due to political and financial disputes between Moscow and its neighbours.

But Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said at the ceremony: "This country [Russia] has been cooperating with European neighbours in the gas sector for over 40 years.

"This cooperation has stood the test of time to the full extent."

The ceremony was also attended by Nord Stream board chairman and former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende and European Commissioner for Energy
Russian gas monopoly Gazprom said on Wednesday that the first pipe had been laid under the sea.

The pipeline will be passing through Russian, Finnish, Swedish and German waters.

Last month, Nord Stream secured a 3.9bn-euro ($5.4bn; £3.5bn) fund to complete the first phase of the pipeline.

"Debt financing will cover 70% of the project costs while the remaining 30% will be provided by the project shareholders," said Paul Corcoran, financial director of Nord Stream AG.

German companies BASF-Wintershall and E.On Ruhrgas each own 20% of Nord Stream, while Gasunie of the Netherlands holds 9%.

Alexey Bulgakov from Troika Dialog investment bank pointed out that "Gazprom and its partners seem to have managed to raise funds at rather low interest rates."

The overall cost of the project, due for completion in 2012, is expected to reach 7.4bn euros.

Russia hopes to pump up to 55bn cubic metres of gas a year to EU countries through the pipeline.
Supporters of the project say that it will secure gas supplies from Russia to Europe.
But environmentalists argue that building the pipeline could lead to toxins lying on the sea bed being stirred up, as the Baltic sea is one of the most polluted in the world.

Finland had refused to give the green light to construct the pipeline, but finally agreed to it in February under the condition that ships laying the pipeline do not lay anchor in Finland's economic zone.

The final hurdle was overcome after Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin assured Baltic leaders that the project was safe, as extensive research had been carried out into any environmental impact of the pipeline construction.

Apart from the Nord Stream, Russia has been planning another pipeline, the South Stream, which will run from southern Russia to Bulgaria under the Black Sea.

Meanwhile, Turkey, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Austria last July signed an agreement to construct the long-planned 3,300km Nabucco natural gas pipeline.

It is expected to pump up to 31bn cubic metres of gas annually from the Caspian and the Middle East across Turkey and into Europe.
(BBC)