MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Andrei Fedyashin) - On December 10-11 Brussels played host to this year's last summit of the European Union (EU).
The leaders of the 27 EU countries touched upon but did not resolve the virtually insoluble problems of world climate; they looked into the abyss of appalling Greek debt (Greece is actually on the brink of default), and finally discussed their energy problems, including Russian gas supply and its near unpredictable transit through Ukraine.
Russian gas was discussed at the summit mostly because of the European Parliament - its representatives also take part in the meetings. On the summit's sidelines European Parliament President Jerzy Buzek of Poland again urged the EU to map out a common energy program (the EU has been doing this as part of the preparations for a new common economic strategy until 2020), and most important to develop a process for consolidating Russian gas imports. Buzek believes that to achieve this, Brussels should negotiate all gas purchase terms with Russia and that individual EU countries should give up bilateral business contacts with Gazprom, and hence, not sign bilateral contacts. Buzek said this approach would provide a stronger bargaining position. Separate negotiations only lead to internal competition, he warned.
East European countries, the United States, and all proponents of the alternative Nabucco project have been advocating a switch to the proposed pipeline. But this system is based on politics rather than business. Washington wants to use it to "discharge Russia's gas weapon" and reduce the Old World's dependence on Russian gas. This dependence prevents Europe from pursuing a more independent policy and compels it to agree with Russia on many points, which the U.S. dislikes. This standard logic has not been given up even under Nobel Prize winner Barack Obama.
The EU's Eastern bloc countries are mortified that the construction of southern and northern gas pipelines will deprive them of any levers of influence on events in the EU. As long as gas pipelines pass through their territories they will have some transit-based leverage. They will have this influence until 2014 when the EU will convert to a new system of decision making. Under this new system, a decision will be adopted if it is supported by 55% of EU countries with a combined population of no less than 65% of EU total population. For the time being the EU operates on the basis of consensus, which allows small countries with a chronic dislike of Russia to block any decisions regarding it. They have been and continue doing this. A consolidated negotiating mechanism will give them the same right to veto albeit in a somewhat narrower format, gas.
A common, single EU negotiator would not suit either France or Germany. They have long been irritated by the right of the young EU members to block any decisions for strictly political considerations. Most probably, this will not happen, at least for the time being.
EU Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs assured EU leaders that gas supplies to Europe via Ukraine this winter will be problem-free although he admitted that some risk is inevitable. Summit participants did not attempt to conceal the EU's concern over the unpredictable turns in the election campaign in Ukraine and President Viktor Yushchenko's repeated threats to renounce recent gas agreements with Russia.
In discussing the climate (the summit's main topic), the EU failed to collect the promised 6 billion euros of annual aid to assist developing countries in reducing carbon dioxide emissions.
The climate issue cast a shadow on current and future gas relations between Russia and Europe. On the eve of the summit the International Energy Agency (IEA) published a forecast of potential changes in the structure and scale of Europe's gas consumption until 2020. This forecast is tied to the ongoing UN Copenhagen climate conference. IEA experts have established that if the post-Kyoto Protocol (a new document limiting emissions) is signed in Copenhagen, Russia will gradually have to turn down the gas taps, resulting in the new southern and northern pipelines having a less than bright future. IEA experts assume that with the new protocol, Russia will be able to supply Europe with 180 billion cubic meters of gas by 2020, and gas consumption will increase by 37%. If the new protocol is not signed, EU gas requirements will grow by 67%, and Russian gas supplies will climb to 240 billion cubic meters. The difference in scale is based on the premise that the new protocol would encourage Europe to transfer to energy-saving technology, making its energy industry more efficient, and to develop nuclear power industry.
Gazprom is planning to increase gas exports to Europe to 170 billion cubic meters by 2012. Next year it is planning to supply Europe with 160 billion cubic meters. By all appearances, Copenhagen is not likely to produce a new, binding post-Kyoto protocol, much to Gazprom's delight.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
