Since March 15th, more than
6,200 people including hundreds of children have died. About 69,000 detained
with signs of torture and more than 19,000 Syrians have fled to Turkey; More
than 7,600 of them live in Turkish government-sponsored camps since the brutal crackdown
on an anti-government revolt.
The criminal Bashar and his
Shabeha “Thugs” are continuing the genocide against civilians by using live
bullets and heavy guns from land and sea while the world is watching! The
criminal brutal Syrian regime is not killing the civilian protesters alone but
Iran and Hezbollah are participating direclt by soldiers and weapons sales
while Russia and China are participating indirectly by their vietos in UN
Security Council against a real resolution to secure civilians. Also, the
International Community is sharing part of the Syrian innocent blood of
martyrs.
The criminal Syrian regime is
also backed and supported by Hezbollah in Bahrain (Alwefaq), Shias in Iraq and
all followers and believers of Wilayat Alfaqih “The Supreme Leader”
Khomeini.
On October 4th, Russia
and China blocked efforts of other major powers to pass a U.N. Security Council
resolution on Syria, with a dramatic dual veto thwarting a call for an
immediate halt to the crackdown in Syria against opponents of President Bashar
al-Assad. Nine of the 15-member council countries, including the United States,
voted in favor of adopting the resolution. CNN reported
For Russia and China, threatening
sanctions is too confrontational. Russian Ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin
said: “We believe it unacceptable the threat of sanctions against the Syrian
authorities. It’s against the principle of a peaceful settlement on the basis
of a full Syrian national dialogue.” Euronews reported
The vote triggered an angry
reaction from Susan E. Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, who
walked out of the Security Council meeting in protest during the Syrian envoy’s
statement, in which he accused the United States of being a “party to genocide”
through its support of Israel on the council. The British envoy, Mark Lyall
Grant, walked out some time after Rice.
“The United States is outraged
that this council has utterly failed to address an urgent moral challenge and a
growing threat to regional peace and security,” Rice said, with unusual
emotion. “Several members have sought for weeks to weaken and strip bare any
text that would have defended the lives of innocent civilians from Assad’s
brutality.” The Washington Post reported
The conflict between the United
States and Russia is not only political or for the sake of civilians being
killed daily in Syria or Libya before. It’s the conflict on resources and gas
specifically for the coming 20 years at least.
To understand the international
delayed military action to save civilians in Syria, I will put the spotlight on
the GEOPOLITICAL conflict between the US, EU, and Russia on gas pipelines!
Russia under Putin is attempting
to rediscover its former status as a great power equal in status to the US and
now also China. At the same time, Putin is pursuing a second goal: the
integration of Russia into the global economy. Moscow believes the rising
geopolitical and economic importance of oil and gas can reverse Russia’s old
dependency on the West.
Russia is the world´s largest
exporter of gas (share of almost 20% in global gas exports) for four reasons.
First, the country has the world’s largest proven gas reserves, equal to nearly
one-quarter of global reserves. Second, Russia has the world’s highest gas
production, accounting for one-fifth of global production. Third, domestic
demand leaves room for gas exports, with Russia’s home market absorbing around
70% of the national gas production. Fourth, Russia’s pipeline network enables
it to re-export imported gas from Central Asia.
The implementation of Russia’s
gas strategy in the EU is largely the responsibility of Gazprom, the country’s
major gas company. The state acquired a controlling 51% stake in Gazprom in
2000 and installed a new board comprising allies of Putin in 2001. On its home
market, Gazprom dominates gas exploitation and sales, while it manages the gas
transmission networks
Gazprom concluded contracts with
a duration of up to 30 years with major EU gas companies in 2006. The company
prefers long-term contracts as they provide security of demand.
Russia has two gas projects:
First: The Nord Stream pipeline
The Nord Stream project fits neatly within Russia’s strategy to consolidate its
position in the EU. In 2005, Gazprom signed an ‘in-principle’ agreement to
develop the Nord Stream pipeline. The other signatories were the two German
companies Wintershall and EON Ruhrgas, later joined by the Dutch gas company
Gasunie.
The Nord Stream twin pipeline
system through the Baltic Sea runs from Vyborg, Russia to Lubmin near
Greifswald, Germany. The pipelines are built and operated by Nord Stream AG.
The Nord Stream route crosses the
Exclusive Economic Zones of Russia, Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Germany, as
well as the territorial waters of Russia, Denmark, and Germany.
The two 1,224-kilometre offshore pipelines are the most
direct connection between the vast gas reserves in Russia and energy markets in
the European Union. When fully operational in the last quarter of 2012, the twin
pipelines will have the capacity to transport a combined total of 55 billion
cubic metres (bcm) of gas a year to businesses and households in the EU for at
least 50 years. As the project strengthens the EU energy market and reinforces
security of supply, the project has been designated as being of "European
interest" by the European Parliament and Council.
Construction of Line 1 of the
twin pipeline system began in April 2010, and was completed in June 2011.
Transportation of gas through Line 1 began in mid-November 2011. Construction
of Line 2, which runs parallel to Line 1, began in May 2011. The second line is
planned to come on stream in the last quarter of 2012. Each line has a
transport capacity of roughly 27.5 bcm of natural gas per annum.
From a political point view, the
Nord Stream gas pipeline would make gas flows a more effective tool for Russia
to influence the political process in EU countries in Eastern Europe.
Second: The South Stream pipeline
The South Stream project
is aimed at strengthening the European energy security.
It is another real step toward executing the Gazprom strategy
to diversify the Russian natural gas supply routes.
The project provides for the
offshore South Stream pipeline to run under the Black Sea from the
Russkaya compressor station on the Russian coast to the Bulgarian
coast.
The project began in November
2006 when Gazprom and Eni entered into the Strategic Partnership Agreement
providing Gazprom with the opportunity to directly supply Russian gas
to the Italian market starting from 2007. Under the Agreement the existing
contracts for Russian gas supplies to Italy were extended till 2035.
On January 18, 2008 a
special purpose entity, South Stream AG, was incorporated in Switzerland
by Gazprom and Eni on a parity basis to build the offshore
pipeline section.
During 2008–2010
intergovernmental agreements on the project implementation were signed
with Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Hungary, Serbia and Slovenia.
Gazprom has signed bilateral
agreements on cooperation in the field of project implementation
with the authorized national companies: Serbian state-owned company Srbijagas,
Hungarian Development Bank (MFB), Bulgarian Energy Holding EAD, Greek gas
transmission system operator DESFA, Austrian OMV.
On June 19, 2010 Gazprom, Eni and
French energy company EDF entered into a trilateral memorandum for EDF
to join South Stream AG as a new shareholder by the
end of 2010 through a reduction of Eni’s share in the joint
project company. Meanwhile, the share of EDF will be not less than
10 per cent.
On October 1, 2010 Marcel Kramer
was appointed Chairman of the Board and CEO of South Stream AG.
A brief analysis of both pipeline
projects makes clear that Russia likely has political and strategic reasons for
building the new pipelines.
Many analysts, claim that South
Stream is a deliberate attempt of Russia to prevent the building of the Nabucco
pipeline. The South Stream project seems poised to have a negative impact on
the Nabucco project as it aggravates the latter’s most serious problem: the
supply of sufficient gas to transport through the pipeline.
The Nabucco pipleline is the
American gas project to save the remaining available share of gas in the global
market before full Russian – Iranian control!
Russia, Iran and Qatar together
already hold 56% of world’s reserves (according to BP estimates); with
Venezuela, Algeria and Libya joining the group would have about 2/3 of world
reserves in their control.
The Nabucco project:
Nabucco is the new gas bridge
from Asia to Europe and the flagship project in the Southern Corridor. It will
be a pipeline to connect the world’s richest gas regions - the Caspian region
and Middle East - to the European consumer markets.
There are six Nabucco
shareholders: Bulgarian Energy Holding (Bulgaria), Botas (Turkey), MOL
(Hungary), OMV (Austria), RWE (Germany), Transgaz (Romania)
The pipeline will link the
Eastern border of Turkey, to Baumgarten in Austria - one of the most important
gas turntables in Central Europe - via Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary.
The construction of the pipeline
is supported by the 2009 Intergovernmental Agreement signed in Ankara in July
2009, which harmonises the legal framework and grants stable and equal
transport conditions for all partners and customers.
The main pipeline will be built
in one phase. Construction will start in 2013, first gas will flow in 2017.
The long-term prospects of the
Nabucco project, and thus of the EU’s ambition to become less dependent on
Russia for its gas imports, were further clouded by Gazprom’s acquisition in
2008 of a 50% share in the large gas transmission centre at Baumgarten in
Austria.
the construction of Nabucco would
decrease—in some cases dramatically— the level of dependence on Russian
exports. While the overall upside potential of Nabucco is only 31 bcm per
year—a relatively small amount in a
pan-European context—it would be hugely important to countries such as
Bulgaria, Austria, and Romania, which could see their reliance on Russian supplies
cut in half.
Moreover, shipping gas via
Nabucco could be 30-40% cheaper than shipping it via South Stream. This would
mean Nabucco will have a downward influence on the price relative to what it
would be if only South Stream (and in general Russian) gas would be available
in Europe. In other words, with Nabucco, Gazprom will be forced to sell its gas
at Nabucco’s price. This would be clearly beneficial to European consumers,
while also denying Gazprom huge profit margins. In addition, the cheaper
transport provided by Nabucco would make it more lucrative for suppliers such as Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan to contribute
available volumes.
If Nabucco is in fact a ‘priority
project’, and if diversification is indeed Europe’s goal, then South Stream
makes no sense. It is a threat to both the European Union as a whole and to the
European countries involved in the project. Failure to construct Nabucco would
create the perception that the EU cannot succeed in its goals even on its own
territory. Countries such as Russia and Iran will conclude that the EU has no
solidarity; that it can be divided and conquered. Perhaps most importantly, the
realisation of South Stream would perpetuate and expand Russia’s political and
economic influence in Europe.
The Iranian Gas:
According to Iran Petroleum Ministry, Iran's
proved natural gas reserves are about 1,045.7 trillion cubic feet
(29.61 trillion cubic metres) or about 15.8% of world's total reserves, of
which 33% are as associated gas and 67% is in non-associated gas fields. It has
the world's second largest reserves after Russia.
On July 25th, Iran had signed a preliminary $10 billion
deal with Syria and Iraq to export its natural gas under the memorandum of
understanding signed Monday by the three countries' oil ministers, a 5,000
kilometre (3,100 mile) pipeline will be built to carry gas from the giant South
Pars field.
The gas would be moved through
Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and the Mediterranean, with Europe planned as the final
export destination. Deputy Oil Minister Javad Owji says the field has enough
reserves to feed exports for the next 80 years, at a rate of 250 million cubic
meters per day. The project is slated to take three to five years.
The deal would also supply gas to
Syria, which lacks the kind of oil and gas resources of Iran and Iraq two key
OPEC members.
The comprehensive energy
partnership agreement Gazprom and the Iranian state company NIOC reached on
July 13 is quite significant, given that Russia is supposed to be working with
the US and the EU to ensure that Iran has no room to maneuver on its ambition
to develop nuclear weapons. While Western firms, most recently Total, are being
pressured by their governments to leave Iran and its lucrative South Pars
field, Russia’s Gazprom may be positioning itself for a long-term strategic partnership
with Iran. In addition to assisting Iran with its much-needed energy
infrastructure development, Gazprom also seems interested in a possible gas
swap deal under which Iran would receive gas from Gazprom in return for
exporting the same amount of gas to Russian customers from the Persian Gulf.
The Russo-Iranian MoU additionally suggests that NIOC and Gazprom would
establish a joint company, which would undertake projects not only in Iran and
Russia, but in third countries, including South American and Asian states.
