Pending Lisbon Treaty. To what extent does the “energy” aspect lie at the basis of the upheavals and conflicts that are shaking up the Caucasus when it comes to determining Russia's strategy, the EU and US attitude and the initiatives of Turkey? I believe the historic, geographical and ethnic factors play an essential role in themselves. But oil and gas explain certain positions and certain alliances and, above all, will determine what happens next when we come to the phase of agreements and cooperation between the EU and Russia. It is imperative that the EU make progress in defining common positions. Unfortunately, it will not immediately have at its disposal the appropriate legal instrument set out in the Lisbon Treaty, as difficulties are piling up over the date when the Treaty will come into force.
So let's not speak of common energy policy for now. We can, however, say there should be greater coordination of member states' positions so that one is no longer faced with the current gloomy scene of: relentless defence of national interests, initiatives that are sometimes contradictory taken without any coordination, and criticism and attacks by one side against the other. In this field, a global free market is a snare. Energy involves foreign and security policies. Everywhere in the world, essential decisions are taken at the highest political level. There must be free competition within the European market in order to improve the conditions of production and distribution - but at international level, the policy must remain European. An external energy policy at the level of each member state makes no sense. We must not go back to the polemic that reigned in the years 2005-2006 - the EU must negotiate as a single entity.
Basic data. A reminder of a few essential data. Russia's trade balance in 2007 was $100 billion in assets thanks to the $240 billion from oil and gas exports. Receipts continued to grow that year further to the surge in oil prices, and monetary reserves now stand at $600 billion. At present, the drop in oil prices is considerably slowing down oil proceeds. At the same time, events in Georgia and other incidents have caused a drain on foreign capital and a fall at the Moscow Stock Exchange. The Russian economy needs to restore investor confidence to modernise its gas and oil production and transport installations. Everyone knows that the strategy and activity of Gazprom and the other oil giants depend on decisions taken at the very highest level - hence the need for clear, stable political guarantees. Relations with Europe and the conclusion of the partnership agreement with the EU represent the essential element of trust to which Moscow aspires.
Essential for the EU. The EU must speak with a single voice in order to have a strong negotiating position. There is nothing mysterious about the conditions needed for this: Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs recalled them just ten days ago (see our bulletin No 9735). Without overlooking the two internal requirements - energy saving and the development of renewable energy - Mr Piebalgs underlined the need for diversification of supply sources and supply routes, explicitly citing the repercussions of the Russian-Georgian conflict. He called for increased European political commitment to eliminate the obstacles that hamper the Nabucco project which, as everyone knows, must supply Europe in gas from Asia by going round Russian territory - one of its branches beginning at the Turkish-Georgian border. This will be in addition to the BTC (Baku-Tbilissi-Ceyhan) gas pipeline which already carries gas from Azerbaijan to the Mediterranean by passing through Georgia and Turkey.
A few days ago, Mr Putin said that oil had nothing to do with the conflict in Georgia, stressing that “no gas pipelines had been touched”, an obvious reference to the BTC. But one must at the same time remember to what extent Russian diplomats and Mr Putin himself have worked on reactivating the alternative project to Nabucco, a project aimed at carrying gas and oil from Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan to the EU via Russia, and how the governments and oil companies of EU member states have individually allowed themselves to be bewitched by Moscow's charms.
It is essential that there should be coordination between the different member state positions in order to negotiate effectively with Russia. Even Nobuo Tanaka, Executive Director of the IEA (International Energy Agency) has said that EU countries “prefer to discuss bilaterally with producer countries” instead of speaking with a single voice. Thanks to a few thousand Irish, we won't have a common EU energy policy in a hurry - but cohesion and coordinated positions are to say the least essential.
(F.R./transl.jl)