Putin’s Energy Maneuver

During his visit to Germany, Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke skeptically of Ukraine’s aspiration to join the European Union. As he put it, “If Ukraine joins the Schengen zone, it will create a certain problem. As far as I know, no less than 17% of Ukraine’s population is Russian. This would mean splitting the nation the way Germany was divided into East Germany and West Germany.” During the Russian leader’s visit the Russian natural gas monopoly Gazprom and German chemical concern BASF signed a major contract. The Day asked Alexander RAHR, the distinguished German political analyst and Program Director for Russia and the CIS at the German Foreign Policy Society, to comment on possible repercussions of this contract and Putin’s statements for Ukraine.

“I believe that the statements Putin made in Germany are counterproductive. According to a recent opinion poll by a French organization, most Western Europeans would like to see Ukraine in the European Union. Most Western politicians have to take this into account. The Russian president’s statement to the effect that Ukraine should not be admitted to the EU has been received here as his criticism of the outcome of the Orange Revolution and the democratic movement in Ukraine, and a manifestation of an imperialist policy, which is alarming everybody in Western Europe.

“Public support for Ukraine’s European integration has waned somewhat in Germany, but not to catastrophic level. Whereas this past January 62% of Germans supported Ukraine’s accession to the EU, today this figure is in the range of 40% to 45%. It’s just that the ‘orange’ informational wave has ebbed. Yet much depends on Ukraine and its progress along the democratic path. I don’t believe that the current visa scandal has provoked any strong anti-Ukrainian sentiment in Germany; perhaps only at a primitive, low, and mundane level. In reality, the visa scandal is part of an ordinary power struggle among Germany’s political elites. Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, the most popular politician of the past decade, never gave the slightest cause for criticism until recently. Now the opposition is hitting him hard and often, using his misguided decision to issue visas left and right. But I think this scandal will die down by this summer.

“I’d like to accentuate another point. We are witnessing the development of a new geopolitical confrontation over energy in Europe. On the one hand, it took Germany and Russia surprisingly little time to agree on a project to build a natural gas mainline from Russia to Germany across the Baltic Sea, bypassing Poland and Ukraine, which is a major concern for everybody. Chancellor Schroeder supports the idea of connecting Russia to European energy markets, thereby ‘pushing’ Russia into the European Union. French President Jacques Chirac is in favor of this policy. At the same time, other countries are increasingly opposed to such an energy alliance. I view Yushchenko’s visit to Poland as a counterbalance to this policy. Perhaps Yushchenko realized in Germany that unlike individual companies, Schroeder does not wish to buy Uzbek and Turkmen natural gas via Ukraine because he has built his entire strategy around Putin’s Russia. Now Yushchenko and Kwasniewski are beginning to advance the idea of the GUUAM as a counterbalance to the Russo- German natural gas alliance. I believe that with American backing, the GUUAM will grow stronger, and attempts will be made to quickly build alternative transport routes for oil and natural gas from the Caspian region, bypassing Russia. Of course, to make this happen they will somehow have to strike a deal with Iran, build a very complex pipeline through the Caspian Sea, from Kazakhstan to Azerbaijan. It is obvious that this idea might surface very soon, now that the GUUAM is growing stronger so quickly.

“Thus, two rival energy alliances are emerging in Europe. At stake are big money and the West’s energy security in the 21st century. The West is facing the dilemma of whether it should connect Russia to Europe or keep it at a distance. All these questions have colossal significance and will decide Europe’s future. A new scenario is unfolding before our very eyes, which was triggered among other things by the Orange Revolution in Ukraine. It might result in the desired diversification of energy flows from the East to the West. On the other hand, it might cause very serious conflicts, which is something nobody in Europe really wants.”

INCIDENTALLY

Five years from now, all the western republics of the former USSR will have joined NATO in their pull toward the gravity zone of the EU. So says Sergey Karaganov, deputy director of the Europe Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Karaganov says that the main problem of Russia’s policy in the European direction is the lack of strategic vision within the general European context. “Because of the absence of a strategic goal, we are doomed to setbacks and unilateral steps, which are often both disadvantageous and damaging.” He thinks that all this is reminiscent of the “policy of late Gorbachev or early Yeltsin and Kozyriev.” “Unless Russia changes its policy, it risks becoming a more independent center than it can afford to be; yet not a center of force, but a center of weakness...Russia must focus on drafting a far-reaching Russia-EU agreement that would replace the 1994 Partnership and Cooperation Agreement.” Most importantly, “Russia must decide whether it wants to be with Europe or remain alone with a steadily shrinking population.”