Following
President Putin's trip to Turkey and a sequence of publicity stunts, some of
them jointly with President Erdogan, it has become clear that the Russian
leader is engaging in
another game of poker politics in a desperate attempt to make headlines, impress the international audience and sell more gas to
Europe, bypassing EU directives and concurrently Ukraine. Although most of his plan is a deja vu, the decision to proceed with the
intergovernmental agreement on Turkish stream and start maneuvers on the gas
front from Istanbul contains a piece of novelty.
Most of
the background remains the same - intentions, plans for the future, verbal
rather than real streams - but the new moments are worth noting. Russia has
changed several key elements in its approach to the 'streams' issue.
Firstly,
Gazprom shifts its partnership priority from Greece to Turkey, with the gas hub
being relocated from Greek to Turkish territory. Moscow’s new focus is on
Turkey as its strategic gas ally trading Russian gas at trade platforms on
Turkish territory. Putin seems to have heavily leaned towards Turkey -
something he has been reluctant to do until recently - yet most of what he has
said or done qualifies as more than lip service and mere intention.
News
agencies report that the two presidents have decided on establishing an
addition of an Investment Fund in order to pool resources and finance energy
projects, which might be needed to complete the whole picture.
In spite
of the generous offer President Erdogan extended during his summer visit to St.
Petersburg, i.e. that Turkey is ready to co-finance the subsea part of Turkish
Stream, things ultimately returned to standard format - Gazprom will be in
charge of the offshore segment, while the onshore infrastructure will be funded
and built by Turkish companies.
Vladimir
Putin seized the opportunity to pull Turkey on his side in the energy turf wars
with the EU and the US, including by allowing Turkish companies to sell Russian
gas from Turkish territory to EU companies. In other words, the Russian
President opted to grant Erdogan carte blanche to use Russian gas in promoting
Turkey as a gas hub and a key gas market consolidator to Brussels.
This is
hardly breaking news, but nuances matter.
The
Kremlin has been using Berlin in a similar pattern for years, as European
traders sell Russian gas from German territory to adjacent markets and
beyond. Thus a gas poor Germany managed to turn into a net gas exporter,
exceeding 30 BCM in exports in 2015, most of them ending in Eastern Europe at
prices well below those achieved in direct sales by Gazprom.
At first
glance, the logic is gone - Gazprom loses substantial income. Yet, the Kremlin
believes its overriding key strategic objective has been accomplished - transit
through Ukraine has been significantly reduced and discord has been sown
between Germany and Eastern Europe. Sustainable price differentials have been
established between gas markets in Western and Eastern Europe, undermining the
EC's attempts to integrate and consolidate the already fragmented EU gas
market.
A largely
identical scheme is currently being tested in Turkey, which could stir trouble
and tension between Turkey and its key partners along the Southern Gas Corridor
- from the Caspian and the Middle East to the end consumer countries in Europe.
In spite
of all the hype, the gas poker moves of Putin and Erdogan remain mostly a
virtual threat, largely because of the missing third important link in the
Moscow-Ankara-Brussels triangle. The EU’s response remains of unknown value
when considered at the level of the European consumers, traders, the TSOs’
reactions, the investors in the interconnecting infrastructure and, above all,
the European Commission. What has repeatedly frustrated all the "streams''
projects in the Kremlin's file in the past might happen again.
All along
his 16 years in office, Putin has persistently aimed to block alternative gas
flows to Europe in Turkey by flooding the Turkish market with Russian gas in
large volumes at cheap prices, which could easily crowd out competing gas
supplies. Worth mentioning is that Gazprom continues to face a yawning gap
between its production potential and its sales - estimated at well above 100
billion cubic meters on an annual basis. Using classic dumping techniques it can afford to
ward off competition selling limited volumes for a limited period of time in
limited markets well below
costs.
Given
recent negative experience, for Gazprom Asia and the global LNG markets are no cure, at least not in the
short term — hence the focus on Europe as the last and the only market in which
it could balance its gas export equation.
Including
a potential third phase involving production
from new gas fields in the Caspian Sea, such as Absheron, the maximum estimate
of gas supplies from Shah Deniz-2 that could pass through Turkey does
not exceed 30 billion cubic meters - a challenge Gazprom could easily
meet.
The
energy flirt between the Turkish and Russian presidents accommodates multiple
non-energy factors, including the situation in Syria and the new assertive
aggressiveness of Moscow, which hopes to capitalize on the intermezzo in the
power transfer at the White House, the discords within the European Union and
the cold spell in Erdogan's relations with NATO and the EU.
President
Putin considers this unique window of opportunity as possibly one of the last
chances he will have to reverse the loss of control at home by militarizing
public debate and artificial “success” media stories about outwitting the West
– such as the one in Turkey.
The
attempt to accede TANAP and mostly TAP is something relatively new at the
Kremlin. Gazprom has largely failed to deliver on the MoU signed with Edison
and DEPA to guarantee itself independent access to TAP and the EU markets.
Until recently, Moscow sought to sell its gas using its own "stream"
pipelines.
Russia is
making a dream come true for Turkish gas moguls and for neo-Ottoman rulers -
becoming a key gas trader and exporter to the EU without
being a major gas producer - and is adding one more
level of geopolitical gravitas in a sensitive area for the European
Union.
This
might explain the sudden and growing interest of major Turkish gas traders in
recent months in booking capacities in transport infrastructure on EU
territory, including the TAP and the interconnector Greece-Bulgaria.
After
unsuccessful attempts to bypass EU law in Bulgaria with South Stream and
Greece, with the new streams in the TAP version Gazprom now seems to believe it
has a winner. As the saying goes - if you can't beat them, join them - and
Gazprom seeks to engage using its Turkish partners to utilize free capacities
in Turkish transit infrastructure that have been purposefully developed with
the support of the EU to mitigate the risk of overdependence on Russian gas. The Kremlin has so far successfully managed to
thwart the Nabucco project and all other attempts to deliver alternative gas to
Eastern Europe via the Southern Gas Corridor.
2016 has
turned the stakes around with reverse flows, virtual trade, interconnectors and
capacity release on existing infrastructure making possible substantial gas
flows to CEE from the Southern Corridor, which Moscow now perceives is an
imminent and mortal threat.
In the
Turkish charming offensive Gazprom uses an upgraded version of its Nord Stream
strategy.
Worth
noting is the fact, that eight CEE countries that are EU members addressed a
letter of protest to the president of the EC, Jean Claude Juncker, warning him
that the Nord Stream will have a "potentially destabilizing geopolitical
consequences", eroding energy security in Central and Eastern Europe,
while harming Ukraine. In the very last moment PM Borissov withdrew Bulgaria's
signature, which spoke volumes of the special bond between him and the Kremlin.
At the
moment, Sofia is the target of a similar bypass strategy and it can only hope
to get the support and the sympathies of the same CEE capitals.
As noted
above, Putin's game with the Turkish Stream might work, at least in part. But
the devil, as always, hides in the details.
Firstly,
the import of significant flows of Russian gas into Turkey, allowing for
indigenously sourced excess gas to enter TANAP and TAP using free capacities,
could in time easily crowd out Caspian, Middle East and East Med gas - in fact
any other non-Russian gas that is produced or imported into the country. This
will further destroy the economics of projects aimed to diversify gas supplies
and bring new sources to the EU market.
The
recent gas interplay between Moscow and Ankara will undoubtedly raise eyebrows
and concerns in the Euro-Atlantic community, as well as among shareholders in
the key projects along the Southern Gas Corridor. They already face mounting
problems with securing the necessary commercial financing, which has forced
them to turn to the international financial institutions. Fresh uncertainties
might further dissuade investments in new gas field developments in Turkey, in
the East Med, Iraq, Iran and across the region.
Over the
last decade, gas consumption in the EU, instead of growing as predicted, has
dropped from 450 BCM in 2005 to 350 BCM in 2015. Judged against the multitude
of new discoveries and plans to deliver more gas to the already congested EU
market, a gas glut and fiercer competition for clients and markets seems
inevitable. If infrastructure that enjoys exemption status from the Third
Directive is indirectly or directly used to transit gas of the dominant
producer, the whole logic in the EU plans to deal once and for all with
Russia's gas monopoly will be put to a test.
Secondly,
against the background of falling gas prices and shifts from long term oil
indexed to short term and spot traded gas, which undermine the economics of new
projects both up and midstream, investors are likely to pull out of new
infrastructure projects. Investments in developing and bringing gas from the
Shah Deniz-2 to the EU border so far exceed $45 billion, while sale revenues
forecast get gloomier by the day. Although SOCAR, BP and other shareholders
control the bulk of the transit capacities in TANAP and TAP, in order to
guarantee themselves shipments of their own gas, they must tolerate competition
from Turkish companies that "own" Russian gas.
The new
Turkish minister of energy and natural resources, Berat Albayrak, seems adamant
that Turkey will enjoy a twofold increase in gas demand over the next 10 years.
This might sound great to a politician's ear, but it is worth little as a
substitute to guaranteed long term market shares and income.
The
threat to traditional market players from Turkish gas companies that represent
a virtually endless pool of Russian gas reserves seems credible as long as they
are able to to sell at lower prices in larger volumes, enjoying Turkish
government support and using existing and future transit routes to
Europe.
Ankara is
walking on thin ice accepting the role of mediator of Russian gas trade with
Europe. Whereas Germany is not only a member but a key decision maker in the EU
- with the Nord Stream-2 far from certain - Turkey is not only out, but is
totally incapable of bridging the gap in the energy dialogue between Gazprom
and the European Commission.
On the
other side, it is just a matter of time, before the US and the EU harden their
tone towards Erdogan after the new US President takes office. With an increasingly disillusioned West, a return to tough talk on human rights and freedoms will
inevitably be at the top of the EU-Turkey dialogue.
Europe
can hardly return to business as usual with Erdogan's Turkey and can ill afford
to cast a blind eye on his gas games with Russia. Turning Turkey into the EU's
preferred gas hub is not a foregone conclusion; if things turn awry the EC
could speed up plans for LNG terminals in Greece and Croatia and deny Turkish
gas traders access to the EU market.
Although
President Putin does not have too many options in the field of gasplomacy, too
much trust in Erdogan might ultimately backfire, leaving him without gas
revenues (comfortable price levels and volumes) and without levers.
This will
be nothing new for the Kremlin, which often experiences the effects of the law
of unintended consequences with results diametrically opposed to
intentions.
Няма коментари:
Публикуване на коментар