MOSCOW, March 5 (RIA Novosti) Iran playing on disagreements between global powers / Bans cannot stop nuclear proliferation / Georgia will not regain territorial integrity if it joins NATO / Total ready for further "adventures" in Russia / Russia may profit from European energy security risks / Government lists media and Internet providers among strategic sectors
Vremya Novostei, Kommersant
Iran playing on disagreements between global powers
Hardly had the UN Security Council adopted the March 3 resolution on Iran, when the document sparked new controversy among the world's leading powers.
A high-profile diplomatic scandal which simultaneously erupted in Vienna and New York, was however triggered by Russia rather than Iran. Moscow was outraged by the Western powers' new attempt to make important decisions without it. Minutes before the Security Council meeting, Russian representatives found out that Britain, France and Germany, who had been drafting the resolution, had also drafted another one, for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which said international experts had been unable to confirm that Tehran had no secret nuclear-weapons program.
The Russian delegation also discovered that the British, French and German representatives had deliberately kept them in the dark. A Western diplomat admitted that the authors of the resolution had planned to show it to the Russians only after the Security Council voted for tougher sanctions. The scheme planned behind Russia's back didn't work out, however, due to an unexpected information leak. Now Iran has seized another chance to use the disagreements within the international community to its own benefit.
The new sanctions will take effect unless Iran halts uranium enrichment within 90 days. But Tehran will probably ignore the new requirements just like it did all the previous resolutions.
"Iran won't make concessions because it does not think the UN Security Council has authority over its nuclear programs," said Alexander Pikayev, from the Institute of Global Economy and International Relations think tank. "Iran said it would only deal with the IAEA. In addition, Tehran demands specific commitments from the United States, but Washington refuses to provide any."
As for the IAEA, Pikayev added that organization was not responsible for the U.S.' actions and therefore could not guarantee Iran's requirements.
The Security Council will have to discuss the sanctions against Iran on more than one more occasion. But a scenario involving the use of force looks highly unlikely now. Russia's UN envoy Vitaly Churkin said Tuesday the Security Council had no desire to do so.
"Military strikes could entail multiple casualties among Iran's civilian population," said Pikayev. "This is something Americans do not need, and even less so another subsequent rise in oil prices, which will be unavoidable during a military operation against a major oil producer like Iran."
Vedomosti
Bans cannot stop nuclear proliferation
Indonesia was the only country on the UN Security Council to vote against tougher sanctions against Iran, a country with an unpredictable regime whose nuclear and missile experiments worry experts. Sanctions only expose the weakness of the international nuclear technology system of supervision.
The examples of Iran, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Libya show that bans stipulated in the Non-Proliferation Treaty have not solved the problem. The treaty allows signatory countries to develop nuclear technology and power generation for peaceful purposes only.
The global demand for this technology is growing, and many countries would like to build nuclear power plants to diversify their energy sources. It is also a matter of prestige and proof that the host countries have the technology and personnel capable of using complicated equipment.
How then to prevent unpredictable regimes and terrorist networks from using peaceful nuclear technology to build nuclear weapons?
Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has proposed setting up an international fuel reserve fund, to be controlled by the IAEA.
It is not clear, though, how much low-enriched uranium should be accumulated in the fund and in which country (or countries) it should be established. What criteria should be used to allocate requisite amounts of fuel to some countries and deny them to others?
Officials in control of fuel distribution will also have a chance to play on the global nuclear market, where prices are now extremely high. One batch of fuel (82 tons of low-enriched uranium) for a modern nuclear reactor, sufficient for 18 months of operation, now costs $150 million.
Experts say producer countries and the UN Security Council should control the distribution of nuclear fuel to ensure objectivity.
Kommersant
Georgia will not regain territorial integrity if it joins NATO
Georgia's refusal to involve itself in the work of the Joint Control Commission for the settlement of the Georgian-Ossetian conflict has disrupted the short-lived idyll in its relations with Moscow, writes a political analyst.
Fyodor Lukyanov, chief editor of the Russia in Global Affairs magazine, told the business daily Kommersant that Georgia's decision had been provoked by the intention of the State Duma (the lower house of Russia's parliament) to discuss on March 13 the possible recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia's independence following the self-proclaimed independence of Kosovo on February 17.
Abkhazia and South Ossetia are de facto independent breakaway Georgian republics.
Russia and Georgia can improve their practical interaction. They can agree to lift the transport blockade and the consumer embargo, coordinate accession to the World Trade Organization and facilitate the visa regime. But they are unlikely to come to terms on other issues, because all of them are tied to the issue of Georgia's territorial integrity, Lukyanov writes, adding that there is very little room for maneuver in that sphere.
The proclamation of Kosovo's independence has greatly worsened the situation for Tbilisi. Moscow does not intend to recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, but will most likely make up for its reserve (based on a level-headed analysis of the possible consequences) by extending ties with the self-proclaimed republics, the analyst writes.
In his opinion, the formula of "anything but not recognition" is a very likely scenario.
The situation has been further complicated by Georgia's desire to join NATO, which it views as the only guarantee of its security. But its membership in the bloc would put an end to hopes of restoring its territorial integrity, Lukyanov writes.
NATO officials refuse to say definitely if a country with unsettled territorial disputes can become a member of the bloc. In principle, this is impossible, they say, but add that Georgia must not be held hostage to its frozen conflicts.
In other words, Russia must not be allowed to prevent Georgia's accession to NATO by keeping "frozen" conflicts alive.
If Tbilisi gets a chance to join NATO, Moscow will view this as Georgia's intention to use NATO membership in order to solve the problem of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the analyst writes. In this case, Russia may consider the possibility of recognizing the breakaway republics as a guarantee of its security.
Lukyanov believes that Moscow's evasive stance on Transdnestr, a breakaway Moldovan republic, gives hope for optimism. But then, its relations with Moldova have never been as difficult as with Georgia, and Chisinau is ready to make concessions in order to preserve its territorial integrity.
Russia must decide which would suit it better - an exclave in Moldova dependent on Russia, or a loyal integral Moldova without bloc affiliations.
There is no such alternative in relations with Georgia, Lukyanov concludes.
Business & Financial Markets
Total ready for further "adventures" in Russia
"We shall do our best to continue this adventure together," said Christophe de Margerie, Total's CEO, referring to prospects for his company's cooperation with Russian gas giant Gazprom in developing the second and third phases of the Shtokman gas condensate deposit.
Analysts think that Gazprom is interested in French technology, but the decision to prolong Total's participation in the project will be taken at a political level.
Gazprom has permitted Total and Norway's StatoilHydro to participate only in the first phase of the project to develop the largest deposit on the Barents Sea shelf. In February 2008, they established a joint venture - Shtokman Development (SD) AG, which will design, build and use the first-phase facilities.
Within the first phase, it is planned to produce 23.7 billion cubic meters of gas a year. Half of this amount will be used to produce liquefied natural gas (LNG) and 50% will go to consumers via pipelines.
Gazprom reserves all rights to the hydrocarbons produced and the sale of products. It holds 51% of SD's authorized capital, with Total and StatoilHydro holding 25% and 24% of the joint venture's shares, respectively. Upon completion of the first phase of the project, foreign companies will cede their stakes in the joint venture to the Russian gas monopoly.
During the next phases of the project, Gazprom plans to boost annual gas production to 100 billion cubic meters. The deposit's reserves are estimated at 3.7 trillion cubic meters of gas, therefore the foreign companies are interested in staying in the project in its further stages, said Vitaly Kryukov, an analyst at the Kapital investment group.
"This will allow them to make large profits and put some reserves on their books through the purchase of a stake in Sevmorneftegaz, Gazprom's 100% subsidiary and the holder of the license for developing the deposit. Then they will have to shoulder some expenses and share their new technology with Gazprom," he said.
"Gazprom may be interested in Total's technology of deep-sea seismic research and exploration drilling, and also in algorithms of LNG production," said Dmitry Aleksandrov, an analyst with the Financial Bridge investment company.
"This technology is the key asset of the French-Belgian company in cooperation with Gazprom, along with Total's financial resources, especially at the first and the most risky phase of preparing the deposit for development and its further exploration in concrete mineral-bearing areas," he said.
Experts say that the importance of partnership for Gazprom will decline during the later stages of the project.
According to Vsevolod Kershenbaum, general director of the National Oil and Gas Institute: "The project's economic efficiency will no longer be a priority. The presence of certain companies in the project will be decided by politicians."
Gazeta.Ru
Russia may profit from European energy security risks
On Tuesday, energy giant Gazprom reduced gas supplies to Ukraine by a further 25% to half their normal level over Kiev's failure to pay off its gas debt. Ukraine's national oil and gas company Naftogaz said it could no longer guarantee sustained gas shipments to Europe.
Analysts who previously hoped that Gazprom would restore initial gas-delivery volumes so as not to jeopardize sustained gas supplies to Europe said Tuesday that Russia could profit from European energy security risks.
Gas deliveries to Ukraine have now been reduced by 50%, making it harder for Kiev to prove that it does not siphon off gas. Alexei Makarkin, deputy general director of the Moscow-based Center of Political Technologies, said the European Union would now see that Ukraine was an unreliable partner and would modify its position with regard to the projected North European Gas Pipeline aiming to diversify gas export risks.
"Opposition to the project will weaken," Makarkin told the paper.
Dmitry Abzalov, an expert with the Moscow-based Center for Current Politics, said Gazprom now planned to work out stringent gas-delivery regulations and to toughen its own stand. "This explains the gas giant's tough attitude toward Ukraine," Abzalov told the paper. He said the new approach would show that Russia was in no mood to make concessions and to bargain with Belarus and Central Asian republics.
"Russia's partners could resort to pressure tactics before presidential elections because Moscow had to make concessions for fear of aggravating the international situation. However, this scenario will not work today," Abzalov told the paper.
Vedomosti
Government lists media and Internet providers among strategic sectors
On Tuesday, a government source said publishing and printing companies and Internet providers could be added to the strategic sectors list that already included television and radio broadcasting.
The construction and land relations committee of the State Duma, the lower house of parliament, declined to comment on the issue, but said the bill's second version would be examined on March 19.
An official said Vladislav Surkov, deputy chief of staff of the Presidential Executive Office, had proposed listing Internet providers and publishing houses among strategic sectors, and that a conference chaired by Sergei Sobyanin, chief of staff of the Presidential Executive Office, had approved the new regulations last week. He also said that President Vladimir Putin did not object to the proposals.
The new regulations covering Internet providers without any reservations would affect publishing houses and printing companies only if the Federal Anti-Monopoly Service (FAS) recognizes their dominant positions on the market.
Under the bill, any foreign company wishing to buy a 50%-plus stake in a strategic company will have to contact an authorized agency; and a government commission, headed by the prime minister, will make the final decision in three to six months. A foreign state-controlled investor company must receive permission in order to acquire over 25% of shares. Although the bill does not apply to valid deals, any legal entity owning 5% plus stakes in a strategic company will have to notify the government of this.
Ilya Rachkov, a partner with the Moscow branch of Noerr Stiefenhofer Lutz, an international law firm, said the law would cover all media holdings with at least one "dominant" publication.
Ruslan Tagiyev, executive director of influential pollster TNS Gallup, said no Russian publication could be called dominant because their readership did not exceed 50%.
Viktor Shkulev, CEO of publishing house Hachette Filipacchi Shkulev, said foreign companies, primarily major entities, would find it hard to consolidate purchased assets in their financial records.
Alexander Malis, CEO of Corbina Telecom, said U.S. and EU legislation also limited the access of foreign companies to Internet providers, but that similar restrictions in Russia would reduce the capitalization of local providers.
RIA Novosti is not responsible for the content of outside sources.
