сряда, 25 февруари 2015 г.

In Novinite.com - report on my intervention at the RT on the "rapprochement" between Russia and Turkey



EU Success 'Lies in Smaller Projects'

Iliyan Vasilev, a former Bulgarian Ambassador to the EU, was also skeptical of the likelihood for Ankara and Moscow to have a long-haul alliance.

He also pointed to the diverging interests of both countries in the energy sector:

"Blue Stream had the main idea to stop alternative supplies via Turkey by inundating it with Russian gas to the extent that Turkey needn't use any other gas." This is, in his opinion, also the driving force behind "Turkish Stream": "Putin has very weak cards in his hand... His entire idea is to stop again alternative supplies to Turkey. The big problem with Russia is that if Putin puts emphasis on geopolitical dividends, Turkey always relies on sound economic and financial logic."

"Turkey, on the other hand, is facing the problem that nobody could be a gas hub more than their transit capacity allows," he said.

The former ambassador predicted that Europe's position will shift the balance toward retaining the gas transit corridors via Ukraine, contrary to Moscow's plans that the completion of "Turkish Stream" should redirect gas flow to Europe: "You will see that the European Energy Union will very soon react with a more logical solution to buy gas at the Ukrainian border and to use gas depots in Ukraine. Because whatever politicians decide, gas flows where there is consumption."

The future development of the Ukraine crisis, however, could have a huge impact on the situation, Vasilev emphasized. On the one hand, as a hypothetical escalation and situations like the Kharkiv explosion [on Sunday] change the outlook, favoring the idea to abandon the Ukrainian gas transit system.

On the other hand, he noted that in January "Ukraine received more gas from the West than from Russia: reverse gas flow emerged in the region." He cited this as an example showing Europe does not need large-scale projects, given that many of the important stakeholders pull out of key energy ventures, while Russia finds it more and more difficult to provide guarantees. Turkey at the same time is a "country that will be less and less ready to carry out such projects without taking economic dimensions into account."
He also surprised the guests and participants in the discussion with a forecast that Bulgaria will diversify gas supplies in just two years.
Full article: http://www.novinite.com/articles/166759/EU+%27Should+Involve+Turkey+in+Energy+Talks+with+Russia#sthash.Mbvsgc4k.dpuf


EU Success 'Lies in Smaller Projects'

Iliyan Vasilev, a former Bulgarian Ambassador to the EU, was also skeptical of the likelihood for Ankara and Moscow to have a long-haul alliance.

He also pointed to the diverging interests of both countries in the energy sector:

"Blue Stream had the main idea to stop alternative supplies via Turkey by inundating it with Russian gas to the extent that Turkey needn't use any other gas." This is, in his opinion, also the driving force behind "Turkish Stream": "Putin has very weak cards in his hand... His entire idea is to stop again alternative supplies to Turkey. The big problem with Russia is that if Putin puts emphasis on geopolitical dividends, Turkey always relies on sound economic and financial logic."

"Turkey, on the other hand, is facing the problem that nobody could be a gas hub more than their transit capacity allows," he said.

The former ambassador predicted that Europe's position will shift the balance toward retaining the gas transit corridors via Ukraine, contrary to Moscow's plans that the completion of "Turkish Stream" should redirect gas flow to Europe: "You will see that the European Energy Union will very soon react with a more logical solution to buy gas at the Ukrainian border and to use gas depots in Ukraine. Because whatever politicians decide, gas flows where there is consumption."

The future development of the Ukraine crisis, however, could have a huge impact on the situation, Vasilev emphasized. On the one hand, as a hypothetical escalation and situations like the Kharkiv explosion [on Sunday] change the outlook, favoring the idea to abandon the Ukrainian gas transit system.

On the other hand, he noted that in January "Ukraine received more gas from the West than from Russia: reverse gas flow emerged in the region." He cited this as an example showing Europe does not need large-scale projects, given that many of the important stakeholders pull out of key energy ventures, while Russia finds it more and more difficult to provide guarantees. Turkey at the same time is a "country that will be less and less ready to carry out such projects without taking economic dimensions into account."
He also surprised the guests and participants in the discussion with a forecast that Bulgaria will diversify gas supplies in just two years.
- See more at: http://www.novinite.com/articles/166759/EU+%27Should+Involve+Turkey+in+Energy+Talks+with+Russia#sthash.Mbvsgc4k.dpuf

EU Success 'Lies in Smaller Projects'

Iliyan Vasilev, a former Bulgarian Ambassador to the EU, was also skeptical of the likelihood for Ankara and Moscow to have a long-haul alliance.

He also pointed to the diverging interests of both countries in the energy sector:

"Blue Stream had the main idea to stop alternative supplies via Turkey by inundating it with Russian gas to the extent that Turkey needn't use any other gas." This is, in his opinion, also the driving force behind "Turkish Stream": "Putin has very weak cards in his hand... His entire idea is to stop again alternative supplies to Turkey. The big problem with Russia is that if Putin puts emphasis on geopolitical dividends, Turkey always relies on sound economic and financial logic."

"Turkey, on the other hand, is facing the problem that nobody could be a gas hub more than their transit capacity allows," he said.

The former ambassador predicted that Europe's position will shift the balance toward retaining the gas transit corridors via Ukraine, contrary to Moscow's plans that the completion of "Turkish Stream" should redirect gas flow to Europe: "You will see that the European Energy Union will very soon react with a more logical solution to buy gas at the Ukrainian border and to use gas depots in Ukraine. Because whatever politicians decide, gas flows where there is consumption."

The future development of the Ukraine crisis, however, could have a huge impact on the situation, Vasilev emphasized. On the one hand, as a hypothetical escalation and situations like the Kharkiv explosion [on Sunday] change the outlook, favoring the idea to abandon the Ukrainian gas transit system.

On the other hand, he noted that in January "Ukraine received more gas from the West than from Russia: reverse gas flow emerged in the region." He cited this as an example showing Europe does not need large-scale projects, given that many of the important stakeholders pull out of key energy ventures, while Russia finds it more and more difficult to provide guarantees. Turkey at the same time is a "country that will be less and less ready to carry out such projects without taking economic dimensions into account."
He also surprised the guests and participants in the discussion with a forecast that Bulgaria will diversify gas supplies in just two years.
- See more at: http://www.novinite.com/articles/166759/EU+%27Should+Involve+Turkey+in+Energy+Talks+with+Russia#sthash.Mbvsgc4k.dpuf

EU Success 'Lies in Smaller Projects'

Iliyan Vasilev, a former Bulgarian Ambassador to the EU, was also skeptical of the likelihood for Ankara and Moscow to have a long-haul alliance.

He also pointed to the diverging interests of both countries in the energy sector:

"Blue Stream had the main idea to stop alternative supplies via Turkey by inundating it with Russian gas to the extent that Turkey needn't use any other gas." This is, in his opinion, also the driving force behind "Turkish Stream": "Putin has very weak cards in his hand... His entire idea is to stop again alternative supplies to Turkey. The big problem with Russia is that if Putin puts emphasis on geopolitical dividends, Turkey always relies on sound economic and financial logic."

"Turkey, on the other hand, is facing the problem that nobody could be a gas hub more than their transit capacity allows," he said.

The former ambassador predicted that Europe's position will shift the balance toward retaining the gas transit corridors via Ukraine, contrary to Moscow's plans that the completion of "Turkish Stream" should redirect gas flow to Europe: "You will see that the European Energy Union will very soon react with a more logical solution to buy gas at the Ukrainian border and to use gas depots in Ukraine. Because whatever politicians decide, gas flows where there is consumption."

The future development of the Ukraine crisis, however, could have a huge impact on the situation, Vasilev emphasized. On the one hand, as a hypothetical escalation and situations like the Kharkiv explosion [on Sunday] change the outlook, favoring the idea to abandon the Ukrainian gas transit system.

On the other hand, he noted that in January "Ukraine received more gas from the West than from Russia: reverse gas flow emerged in the region." He cited this as an example showing Europe does not need large-scale projects, given that many of the important stakeholders pull out of key energy ventures, while Russia finds it more and more difficult to provide guarantees. Turkey at the same time is a "country that will be less and less ready to carry out such projects without taking economic dimensions into account."
He also surprised the guests and participants in the discussion with a forecast that Bulgaria will diversify gas supplies in just two years.
- See more at: http://www.novinite.com/articles/166759/EU+%27Should+Involve+Turkey+in+Energy+Talks+with+Russia#sthash.Mbvsgc4k.dpuf

EU Success 'Lies in Smaller Projects'

Iliyan Vasilev, a former Bulgarian Ambassador to the EU, was also skeptical of the likelihood for Ankara and Moscow to have a long-haul alliance.

He also pointed to the diverging interests of both countries in the energy sector:

"Blue Stream had the main idea to stop alternative supplies via Turkey by inundating it with Russian gas to the extent that Turkey needn't use any other gas." This is, in his opinion, also the driving force behind "Turkish Stream": "Putin has very weak cards in his hand... His entire idea is to stop again alternative supplies to Turkey. The big problem with Russia is that if Putin puts emphasis on geopolitical dividends, Turkey always relies on sound economic and financial logic."

"Turkey, on the other hand, is facing the problem that nobody could be a gas hub more than their transit capacity allows," he said.

The former ambassador predicted that Europe's position will shift the balance toward retaining the gas transit corridors via Ukraine, contrary to Moscow's plans that the completion of "Turkish Stream" should redirect gas flow to Europe: "You will see that the European Energy Union will very soon react with a more logical solution to buy gas at the Ukrainian border and to use gas depots in Ukraine. Because whatever politicians decide, gas flows where there is consumption."

The future development of the Ukraine crisis, however, could have a huge impact on the situation, Vasilev emphasized. On the one hand, as a hypothetical escalation and situations like the Kharkiv explosion [on Sunday] change the outlook, favoring the idea to abandon the Ukrainian gas transit system.

On the other hand, he noted that in January "Ukraine received more gas from the West than from Russia: reverse gas flow emerged in the region." He cited this as an example showing Europe does not need large-scale projects, given that many of the important stakeholders pull out of key energy ventures, while Russia finds it more and more difficult to provide guarantees. Turkey at the same time is a "country that will be less and less ready to carry out such projects without taking economic dimensions into account."
He also surprised the guests and participants in the discussion with a forecast that Bulgaria will diversify gas supplies in just two years.
- See more at: http://www.novinite.com/articles/166759/EU+%27Should+Involve+Turkey+in+Energy+Talks+with+Russia#sthash.Mbvsgc4k.dpuf

Няма коментари:

Публикуване на коментар