Nine lives or no lives? That is the prospect for Nabucco.
Noise or game changing events: another round of alternative pipeline plans, the re-positioning of political actors, makes another act in the Nabucco opera either more intriguing or increases the restlessness of the audience.
Separate actions inflict little wounds on Nabucco but collective cuts may be eroding the ground underneath. Does the U.S. still fully support Nabucco? What’s the purpose and/or reality of the new South East Europe Pipeline project?
Will there be any life for Nabucco?
All these questions lead to separate and diverse perspectives of what the future may hold for Nabucco. The doubts begin to settle in as the relationship between EU backers and the governments in the two distant regions move beyond the courting phase of their relationship and seek to build a solid gas link.
Reassessment of relations
There comes points in a long-term relationship where an assessment of what each partner wants…. is it true love, infatuation or is there a true coupling where each partner brings important elements to the relationship? Europe must decide whether it wants to develop the relationship further with the countries of the Caucases and Central Asia. The recent – warning shot – provided by the U.S. State Department Special Envoy for Eurasian Energy, Richard Morningstar should begin to focus attention in Brussels. The ‘misinterpreted’ comments that smaller pipeline projects that are more commercially viable may be better. While the U.S. embassy rushed out a ‘clarification’ it still states that the sooner a commercially viable pipeline is built the better.
Reality or love
There are always reasons why a relationship will fail over the long term. Particularly when you put two ‘individuals’ together from two different cultures. Maybe now is the right time to review these. What are the worries that prevent countries from the EU to solidify their relation with potential supplier countries for Nabucco?
Financial: “How are we going to pay for it?”
Distance: “But you are so far, can we really have a long distance relationship?”
Distractions: “What if you find someone else, while I’m away?”
Parental approval: “My mother wouldn’t approve” (i.e. Mother Russia)
“Your father has other plans for you.” (i.e. US wants EU to use shale gas)
Hometown girl: “Maybe you want a girl from home.” (i.e. shale gas)
Like most love story, it is the parents that get in the way. Those guardians that seek to steer their children in the right direction. Mother Russia certainly has a strong interest to insure that the EU is only supplied by Russia. The United States, is attempting to force a gas strategy on Europe – shale gas. The recent Baker Institute Study that projects a drop in European gas dependency from 27% to 13% because of the full utilization of European shale gas, has unfortunately – I believe, influenced US policy to push the EU to delay or stop the Nabucco Pipeline. Therefore comments emerge that discourage investment into Nabucco and encourage switching to a lower capacity pipeline that is commercially viable in the short term. Pursing the most commercially viable pipeline option today does not provide the long term boost to security of supply nor provide the foundation the EU needs to have gas fill its power plants.
Multilateral and multicultural relations are at the heart of everything the EU does. Also central to the EU is the role of energy – the foundation of the EU rests on energy. Providing the will and reasoned justification for building a robust pipeline that will serve the long term interests and needs of Europe requires significant commitment today. Many of the issues that are meant to derail Nabucco are not strong enough to trump the security of supply implications that expanded gas supplies, that are not controlled by Russia, offer. Just as love can overcome obstacles, the large and abstract notion of security of supply serves as the impetus to take resolute steps to cement a relationship. It is time to stop worrying about what the future in-laws think.