For once, let's leave aside the often dramatic developments in the news that change every day, and let's take into consideration the elements that constitute the basis of these endless events.
Zero risk. The risk of the use of nuclear weapons is zero on the part of the countries that have them when the countries are operational and safe - the US, Russia, France, and the UK. These countries only have one hope: for everyone together to be free of their nuclear weapons as quickly as possible. The risk resides, rather, in the countries that that have nuclear weapons (or pretend they have them) but for whom the atomic bomb represents an instrument of blackmail. The threat is all the more present when religious fanaticism plays a predominant role in their political attitudes.
EU and Russia are cooperating. Differences in opinion between the European Union and Russia exist but both of them carefully avoid compromising their reciprocal cooperation, which is working and of which there is a great deal. France continues the development of maritime instruments that Moscow asks of it - instruments for which military use is planned; Belgium is anxious to avoid the sale of Russian diamonds in Antwerp being compromised; London continues to manage carefully the finances of the Russian millionaires who live in the UK and have obtained a UK passport; industrial cooperation continues to be developed, especially on the part of heavy German industry and several Italian companies.
Cooperation continued. EU-Russia trade relations come under the WTO - of which both the EU and Russia are members. Russia is still a relatively new member of the WTO and its membership was welcomed enthusiastically by the EU, which requests that Russia respect the free-trade rules, and protests each time that Moscow distances itself from such respect. It would be embarrassing for the EU to be proved wrong in this area.
Crucial for Kiev. The framework for energy products is governed by the specific agreements between the EU, Russia and Ukraine. In fact, the EU initiatives to address the possible interruption of gas supply which transits through Ukraine have a theoretical and very flexible nature which leaves people perplexed (see EUROPE 11067). The authorities in Kiev are calling for the EU itself to replace, with its own production, the supplies of gas that Ukraine needs - having it transit through Slovakia. However, Slovakia, although willing, has said that an agreement between Bratislava and Moscow would be needed!
This issue is vaguely understandable. An ad hoc meeting at the political level is trying to obtain a clearer picture. We have the impression of a purely theoretical attempt to prove that Russian gas is not crucial. However, the internal arrangements within the EU could only have a short-term duration as it is a question of using European reserves, that are of course limited, to replace the halt in Russian supplies.
Precautions. EUROPE's readers know that Gazprom (Russia) and OMV (Austria) have subscribed to a memorandum of understanding to construct the Austrian section of the South Stream gas pipeline (see EUROPE 11070). This gas pipeline will link Russia and Bulgaria under the Black Sea, and it will serve both Austria and Italy, bypassing Ukraine - which is currently the main transit country for Russian gas to the EU.
Irreplaceable cooperation. The EU is generally trying to reduce its dependence on Russia for the oil and gas it needs. The EU's initiatives to diversify its sources are positive and cooperation with other suppliers must be developed further. In Moscow, it must not be forgotten that the demand to cooperate is reciprocal - while the EU needs Russian oil and gas, Russia equally needs to sell to the EU. And Moscow's hopes are much bigger still - they aim at an overall cooperation, particularly involving access to the finance of European banks, and a wider and more simplified entry for Russian nationals to European territory. Several other requirements are regularly brought up by Moscow during EU-Russia summits. There is still so much progress to be made for EU-Russia cooperation to reach the desired levels!
Possible developments? Despite the difficulties and complications, the idea of breaking off EU-Russia cooperation is not taken into consideration at all at high level - on either side. The exaggerated tone of some disputes has sometimes something artificial or superficial about it - to the extent that a few well-known figures are wondering whether part of the current difficulties could not be overcome by re-establishing the unity of the part of the Russian population that is currently scattered in different states (in so far as the interested parties explicitly want this, of course). The EU would thus have, for the main part, a single interlocutor on the Russian side. Is this dreaming or reality? It's a difficult one to answer.
(FR)