By John Lloyd
Published: October 2 2009 21:00 | Last updated: October 2 2009 21:00
September was the cruellest month for Europe’s centre-left. The greatest bloodbath came a week ago, when the Social Democratic party – Germany’s oldest, the foundation stone of social democracy across the continent – garnered less than a quarter of votes cast. Britain’s Labour party, whose polls are little better than the SPD’s result, put on a creditable show at its annual conference. But Gordon Brown’s generally well-received speech was instantly undercut by The Sun newspaper, which ended a 12-year policy of New Labour support with a front page proclaiming: “Labour’s lost it.”
In Italy, the continuing weakness of the left was exacerbated by a book published this past week – La Svolta (the turning point) – in which Francesco Rutelli, a former leader of the left in the 2001 parliamentary elections and co-founder of the Democratic party, the main left group, flatly states that “if the party turns to the left, it’s finished”. In a talk in Rome last week, Mr Rutelli told me he thought such a turn was overwhelmingly likely.
In France, the Socialist party remains transfixed by the feud between its former leader, Ségolène Royal, and the woman who narrowly secured a fiercely disputed succession, Martine Aubry, the mayor of Lille. The latter has sought a working truce with her rival; but, as the commentator Michel Noblecourt wrote in Le Monde, this “will be tainted with distrust, each doubting the legitimacy of the other and staying on guard”.
The irony – that the left fails together with the banks – has been much noted, but may be less of a contradiction than is apparent. In different ways, European social democracy was pro-market and pro-globalisation – especially New Labour, which in Tony Blair’s early years in power was both leader and exemplar. Liberal social reforms, a lesser role for trade unions and, above all, mass immigration were all part of centre-left politics and were broadly acceptable to the mass of the people so long as living standards rose and public services improved. Now, that implicit deal is threatened.
In this situation, it is not only the right that exults. The left, within these mainstream parties and outside, now sees a chance. The times are propitious: those charged with writing a manifesto for a party such as Die Linke (The Left, founded by Oskar Lafontaine, the renegade former SPD finance minister whose vote increased last week) would have a pleasant task. The widely mooted collapse of capitalism; rapidly rising unemployment; the determined resumption of the habits of greed by bankers and others able to skim off fresh supplies of cream; the present or coming cuts in public services and pay; the continuing human cost and fiscal drain of conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan – these are a rich menu on which to make a meal of a centre-left that did well out of a successful capitalism’s surplus and now struggles in its decline. John Harris, the left-Labour commentator, encapsulated his position’s scorn for New Labour in the current issue of Prospect magazine, describing its policies as “a mishmash of beliefs that only entrenched the changes wrought by Margaret Thatcher”.
It will be no balm to centre-left leaders to observe that they are victims of the success of many of their central projects – in particular, the maintenance of generous welfare states. No governing party of the right in Europe, from Sweden to Italy, has sought radically to reduce taxes or make cuts to big social programmes; and though the latter may increasingly be the order of the day as the cost of anti-recessionary measures must be paid, the centre-left governments of Britain and Spain are as much implicated in this as the right.
Further, the right steals leftist clothes: an anti-elitist populism in Italy; a co-option of admired figures of the left into government in France; and in Britain, a resurgent Conservative party rails against Labour’s “top down” and “bureaucratic” reforms and talks of helping communities to help themselves. In ground long scorched for Conservatives – the constituency of Glasgow Central – the Tory candidate John Bradley brought in young Conservative students to work with local residents to clean up the Strathbungo area of the constituency. Mr Bradley claimed, on the website Conservative Home, that “bringing in local communities, and seeing their delight at what all of us have achieved at the end of a day’s work, is simply magnificent.”
The great causes – race, women’s and homosexual equality, community involvement, the spread of democratic practice – which had been significantly dominated by the left, are now largely uncontroversial on the western European right, except on its fringes and in parts of Italy’s governing coalition. The very success of decades of struggle render archaic the feminist rhetoric of Harriet Harman, Labour’s deputy leader, and has caused a debilitating split in Britain’s Equality Commission between those who, like Ms Harman, believe the struggle must continue and those who seek a targeted, post-equality agenda.
Neither success nor failure are permanent in politics; and in the gross inequalities of contemporary market societies, the centre-left may – as Mr Brown sought to do with his appeal to the “squeezed middle” of British society – recover a cause. But a remedy will be harder. For now, their party is over.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Greek socialists ride wave of discontent
By Kerin Hope in Athens
Athenians sipping cappuccino freddo applaud as Athina Dretta, a parliamentary candidate with the Panhellenic Socialist Movement, arrives on a motorcycle to make a 15-minute speech at the “Face Place” café.
But beyond the brightly lit café strip, empty shops displaying “for rent” signs and stalled construction projects give the Neo Iraklio suburb a depressed look. “Greece was booming until last year. Now we face recession and anxiety about the future. Will our kids be able to find jobs?” asks Mrs Dretta, a dentist and mother of two.
With a 5-7 percentage point lead over the governing New Democracy party, the socialists are poised to win Sunday’s general election and buck a European trend of backing centre-right political parties. The socialists under George Papandreou, a former foreign minister, are riding a wave of popular discontent over ND’s economic policies. Greece faces a long period of recession, with the economy set to shrink by about 1 per cent this year and 0.5 per cent in 2010.
While Kostas Karamanlis, prime minister, proposes two years of tight fiscal policies, the socialists plan to launch a €2.5bn ($3.6bn, £2.3bn) stimulus package for small and medium businesses and raise revenues through tax rises on high incomes. “We can’t have a recovery if we don’t take steps to get the economy moving again,” Mr Papandreou tells his supporters.
Until this year, Mr Papandreou struggled to persuade his party to set aside its militant leftwing tradition and adopt a social democrat platform of “soft development”.
“This is a time for institutional change,” Mr Papandreou said last week as he outlined plans for overhauling the state healthcare and pension systems and environmentally sound “green growth”.
New Democracy has lost credibility over a series of corruption scandals, the government’s failure to curb last December’s riots, and a disastrous forest fire last August that highlighted inefficiencies in public administration.
“As long as the economy was OK, you could overlook other things. Disappointingly, Greece faces not just a recession but several years of stagnation,” says Carolos Anastasiades, a businessman and ND supporter.
Public finances are in disarray, with the budget deficit projected to reach 6-8 per cent of gross domestic product this year. A 50 per cent increase in borrowing to fund the public debt – at 105 per cent of GDP, the eurozone’s second-highest – undermines the conservatives’ claim that Greece can weather the crisis without lasting problems.
Yet despite the socialists’ clear lead, under Greece’s proportional poll system, a last-minute swing to the far left could deprive them of an absolute majority.
Mr Papandreou has declared the socialists open to co-operation with smaller parties, but rules out a coalition or a minority government. If they fail to win outright, he is ready to fight another election next month.
“Every vote can make a difference, we mustn’t lose any. Only a stable government with a strong majority can implement the changes we need,” he says.
Athenians sipping cappuccino freddo applaud as Athina Dretta, a parliamentary candidate with the Panhellenic Socialist Movement, arrives on a motorcycle to make a 15-minute speech at the “Face Place” café.
But beyond the brightly lit café strip, empty shops displaying “for rent” signs and stalled construction projects give the Neo Iraklio suburb a depressed look. “Greece was booming until last year. Now we face recession and anxiety about the future. Will our kids be able to find jobs?” asks Mrs Dretta, a dentist and mother of two.
With a 5-7 percentage point lead over the governing New Democracy party, the socialists are poised to win Sunday’s general election and buck a European trend of backing centre-right political parties. The socialists under George Papandreou, a former foreign minister, are riding a wave of popular discontent over ND’s economic policies. Greece faces a long period of recession, with the economy set to shrink by about 1 per cent this year and 0.5 per cent in 2010.
While Kostas Karamanlis, prime minister, proposes two years of tight fiscal policies, the socialists plan to launch a €2.5bn ($3.6bn, £2.3bn) stimulus package for small and medium businesses and raise revenues through tax rises on high incomes. “We can’t have a recovery if we don’t take steps to get the economy moving again,” Mr Papandreou tells his supporters.
Until this year, Mr Papandreou struggled to persuade his party to set aside its militant leftwing tradition and adopt a social democrat platform of “soft development”.
“This is a time for institutional change,” Mr Papandreou said last week as he outlined plans for overhauling the state healthcare and pension systems and environmentally sound “green growth”.
New Democracy has lost credibility over a series of corruption scandals, the government’s failure to curb last December’s riots, and a disastrous forest fire last August that highlighted inefficiencies in public administration.
“As long as the economy was OK, you could overlook other things. Disappointingly, Greece faces not just a recession but several years of stagnation,” says Carolos Anastasiades, a businessman and ND supporter.
Public finances are in disarray, with the budget deficit projected to reach 6-8 per cent of gross domestic product this year. A 50 per cent increase in borrowing to fund the public debt – at 105 per cent of GDP, the eurozone’s second-highest – undermines the conservatives’ claim that Greece can weather the crisis without lasting problems.
Yet despite the socialists’ clear lead, under Greece’s proportional poll system, a last-minute swing to the far left could deprive them of an absolute majority.
Mr Papandreou has declared the socialists open to co-operation with smaller parties, but rules out a coalition or a minority government. If they fail to win outright, he is ready to fight another election next month.
“Every vote can make a difference, we mustn’t lose any. Only a stable government with a strong majority can implement the changes we need,” he says.
Irish 'Yes' to EU treaty expected
Voters appear to have backed the EU's Lisbon Treaty in the Republic of Ireland's crucial second referendum.
Early returns are showing clear majorities for the "Yes" campaign - just 18 months after voters rejected the treaty first time round.
The treaty, aimed at streamlining decision-making in the 27-nation EU, cannot take effect unless all member states ratify it.
Ireland's foreign minister predicted a convincing win for the "Yes" campaign.
"I am delighted for the country," Micheal Martin told Irish radio on Saturday.
The official result is expected late on Saturday afternoon.
Ireland was the only EU member state to hold a referendum on Lisbon, though there have been calls for referendums in several countries.
The leader of the anti-Lisbon lobby group Libertas, Declan Ganley, said the result marked a "very convincing win" for the "Yes" camp.
Counting started at centres across the country at 0900 (0800 GMT) and results are being relayed to the national count centre in Dublin Castle.
Tallies based on partial results indicate a 60:40 "Yes" vote in some constituencies.
Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, whose country currently holds the EU presidency, called it "an important victory for Ireland and for all of Europe".
He said it was just a matter of time until the EU "finally can push the button for the better European co-operation that the Lisbon Treaty will give us".
Turnout was higher than 50% when polling stations closed at 2200 on Friday.
Taoiseach optimistic
Many voters said they had switched from "No" to "Yes" this time around, the BBC's Jonny Dymond reports.
Opinion is thought to have swung behind the "Yes" vote this time because of the severity of the economic downturn, as well as the legal "guarantees" on Irish sovereignty that the EU pledged after the first referendum.
The legally binding "guarantees" state that Lisbon will not affect key areas of Irish sovereignty, such as taxation, military neutrality and family matters such as abortion - significant issues in last year's campaign in Ireland. But they have not yet been attached to the treaty.
The treaty is intended to make EU institutions better suited to the enlarged bloc of 27. The current Nice Treaty was designed for a 15-nation bloc and predates the EU's eastward expansion of 2004.
Opponents see Lisbon as part of a federalist agenda that threatens national sovereignty.
Big 'Yes' swing
Early count centre tallies showed constituencies in the capital Dublin had voted 56% in favour, with early indications from Galway putting the "Yes" vote at 63%, Irish broadcaster RTE reported.
An informal exit poll by the main opposition Fine Gael party estimated a 60% "Yes" vote, RTE said earlier.
Irish bookmaker Paddy Power was offering odds of 1/25 on a "Yes" vote - suggesting it was the overwhelming favourite.
In last year's vote, 46.6% of Irish voted "Yes" and 53.4% "No", and the rejection of the treaty plunged the EU into political gridlock.
The Irish anti-Lisbon group Coir said on Saturday voters appeared to have approved the treaty.
"We are extremely disappointed that the voice of the people was not heard the first time around," said Richard Greene, a spokesman for Coir, which means Justice in English.
Analysts say Irish approval of the Lisbon Treaty would be a big step towards full ratification across the EU. The only other countries yet to ratify the treaty are Poland and the Czech Republic.
Three million people were eligible to vote in the referendum.
All of the republic's major parties campaigned for a "Yes" vote except the nationalist Sinn Fein. The party believes rejecting the treaty would mean a more democratic EU.
Early returns are showing clear majorities for the "Yes" campaign - just 18 months after voters rejected the treaty first time round.
The treaty, aimed at streamlining decision-making in the 27-nation EU, cannot take effect unless all member states ratify it.
Ireland's foreign minister predicted a convincing win for the "Yes" campaign.
"I am delighted for the country," Micheal Martin told Irish radio on Saturday.
The official result is expected late on Saturday afternoon.
Ireland was the only EU member state to hold a referendum on Lisbon, though there have been calls for referendums in several countries.
The leader of the anti-Lisbon lobby group Libertas, Declan Ganley, said the result marked a "very convincing win" for the "Yes" camp.
Counting started at centres across the country at 0900 (0800 GMT) and results are being relayed to the national count centre in Dublin Castle.
Tallies based on partial results indicate a 60:40 "Yes" vote in some constituencies.
Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, whose country currently holds the EU presidency, called it "an important victory for Ireland and for all of Europe".
He said it was just a matter of time until the EU "finally can push the button for the better European co-operation that the Lisbon Treaty will give us".
Turnout was higher than 50% when polling stations closed at 2200 on Friday.
Taoiseach optimistic
Many voters said they had switched from "No" to "Yes" this time around, the BBC's Jonny Dymond reports.
Opinion is thought to have swung behind the "Yes" vote this time because of the severity of the economic downturn, as well as the legal "guarantees" on Irish sovereignty that the EU pledged after the first referendum.
The legally binding "guarantees" state that Lisbon will not affect key areas of Irish sovereignty, such as taxation, military neutrality and family matters such as abortion - significant issues in last year's campaign in Ireland. But they have not yet been attached to the treaty.
The treaty is intended to make EU institutions better suited to the enlarged bloc of 27. The current Nice Treaty was designed for a 15-nation bloc and predates the EU's eastward expansion of 2004.
Opponents see Lisbon as part of a federalist agenda that threatens national sovereignty.
Big 'Yes' swing
Early count centre tallies showed constituencies in the capital Dublin had voted 56% in favour, with early indications from Galway putting the "Yes" vote at 63%, Irish broadcaster RTE reported.
An informal exit poll by the main opposition Fine Gael party estimated a 60% "Yes" vote, RTE said earlier.
Irish bookmaker Paddy Power was offering odds of 1/25 on a "Yes" vote - suggesting it was the overwhelming favourite.
In last year's vote, 46.6% of Irish voted "Yes" and 53.4% "No", and the rejection of the treaty plunged the EU into political gridlock.
The Irish anti-Lisbon group Coir said on Saturday voters appeared to have approved the treaty.
"We are extremely disappointed that the voice of the people was not heard the first time around," said Richard Greene, a spokesman for Coir, which means Justice in English.
Analysts say Irish approval of the Lisbon Treaty would be a big step towards full ratification across the EU. The only other countries yet to ratify the treaty are Poland and the Czech Republic.
Three million people were eligible to vote in the referendum.
All of the republic's major parties campaigned for a "Yes" vote except the nationalist Sinn Fein. The party believes rejecting the treaty would mean a more democratic EU.
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Georgia 'started unjustified war'
Georgia 'started unjustified war'
The war in Georgia last year was started by a Georgian attack that was not justified by international law, an EU-sponsored report has concluded.
However, the attack followed months of provocation, and both sides violated international law, the report said.
Russia said the report delivered an "unequivocal answer" on the question of who started the conflict.
But Georgia said the investigation proved that Russia had been preparing for war all along.
The report said about 850 people were killed in the August 2008 war, and that more than 100,000 fled their homes, about 35,000 of whom are still displaced.
The conflict erupted on 7 August 2008, as Georgia shelled the breakaway region of South Ossetia, in an attempt to regain control over it. The previous months had seen a series of clashes.
Russian forces quickly repelled the assault, and pushed further into Georgia.
The conflict lasted for five days before a ceasefire was agreed. Russia pulled back, but built up its military presence in both South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
'Not justifiable'
"The shelling of Tskhinvali (the South Ossetian capital) by the Georgian armed forces during the night of 7 to 8 August 2008 marked the beginning of the large-scale armed conflict in Georgia," the report says.
It adds later: "There is the question of whether [this] use of force... was justifiable under international law. It was not."
It also says Georgia's claim that there had been a large-scale Russian military incursion into South Ossetia before the outbreak of war could not be "sufficiently substantiated", though it said there was evidence of a lower-level military build-up.
The report states that while Russia's initial actions in fighting back against attacks on its personnel in South Ossetia were justified, its subsequent actions, in pushing far into Georgia proper "went far beyond the reasonable limits of defence" and was "in violation of international law".
"Furthermore, continued destruction which came after the ceasefire agreement was not justifiable by any means."
Given the European Union's relations with Russia have improved compared to a year ago, the EU may welcome the report itself, but may want to distance itself from the content, says the BBC Brussels correspondent Dominic Hughes.
EU countries said in a statement the report was not about apportioning blame, but they hoped it could "contribute toward a better understanding of the origins and the course of last year's conflict".
Russia has recognised South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent and has vowed to protect them.
However, Georgia and the vast majority of the international community still views them as part of Georgia, and the report's author said Russia's recognition "must be considered as being not valid in the context of international law, and as violations of Georgia's territorial integrity and sovereignty."
Aid agencies say a refugee crisis continues in the region, with the Russian-backed authorities in South Ossetia refusing to allow tens of thousands of ethnic Georgians back to their homes in the region.
The war in Georgia last year was started by a Georgian attack that was not justified by international law, an EU-sponsored report has concluded.
However, the attack followed months of provocation, and both sides violated international law, the report said.
Russia said the report delivered an "unequivocal answer" on the question of who started the conflict.
But Georgia said the investigation proved that Russia had been preparing for war all along.
The report said about 850 people were killed in the August 2008 war, and that more than 100,000 fled their homes, about 35,000 of whom are still displaced.
The conflict erupted on 7 August 2008, as Georgia shelled the breakaway region of South Ossetia, in an attempt to regain control over it. The previous months had seen a series of clashes.
Russian forces quickly repelled the assault, and pushed further into Georgia.
The conflict lasted for five days before a ceasefire was agreed. Russia pulled back, but built up its military presence in both South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
'Not justifiable'
"The shelling of Tskhinvali (the South Ossetian capital) by the Georgian armed forces during the night of 7 to 8 August 2008 marked the beginning of the large-scale armed conflict in Georgia," the report says.
It adds later: "There is the question of whether [this] use of force... was justifiable under international law. It was not."
It also says Georgia's claim that there had been a large-scale Russian military incursion into South Ossetia before the outbreak of war could not be "sufficiently substantiated", though it said there was evidence of a lower-level military build-up.
The report states that while Russia's initial actions in fighting back against attacks on its personnel in South Ossetia were justified, its subsequent actions, in pushing far into Georgia proper "went far beyond the reasonable limits of defence" and was "in violation of international law".
"Furthermore, continued destruction which came after the ceasefire agreement was not justifiable by any means."
Given the European Union's relations with Russia have improved compared to a year ago, the EU may welcome the report itself, but may want to distance itself from the content, says the BBC Brussels correspondent Dominic Hughes.
EU countries said in a statement the report was not about apportioning blame, but they hoped it could "contribute toward a better understanding of the origins and the course of last year's conflict".
Russia has recognised South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent and has vowed to protect them.
However, Georgia and the vast majority of the international community still views them as part of Georgia, and the report's author said Russia's recognition "must be considered as being not valid in the context of international law, and as violations of Georgia's territorial integrity and sovereignty."
Aid agencies say a refugee crisis continues in the region, with the Russian-backed authorities in South Ossetia refusing to allow tens of thousands of ethnic Georgians back to their homes in the region.
ICG warns of possible Cyprus partition
By Delphine Strauss in Ankara
A de facto partition of Cyprus will be the only option remaining if talks to reunify the island have not produced a settlement by the spring, the International Crisis Group warns in a report published on Wednesday.
A year of United Nations-brokered talks between Demetris Christofias, president of the internationally recognised Greek Cypriot government of Cyprus, and Mehmet Ali Talat, his Turkish Cypriot counterpart and friend, have made only limited progress on the most controversial issues of property, security and power sharing.
If a referendum on reunification does not take place before April’s elections in the north, which is recognised as a state only by Turkey, Mr Talat is likely to be replaced by a candidate sceptical of the basic formula of a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation.
Mr Talat told the FT in an interview earlier this month that it was the “last chance for a solution”, although he gave no deadline by which talks must be concluded.
“The future is either federation or partition,” according to a senior diplomat from the region cited in the report.
The ICG notes it would be difficult to revive talks, as the UN and other possible brokers are reluctant to be implicated in further failures, and young people in both communities are growing increasingly indifferent to the issue.
A permanent split, whether formally recognised or not, would mean slower economic growth, higher defence spending and reduced international credibility for both sides, the report argues. It could also persuade many Turkish Cypriots to seek better prospects elsewhere, whether overseas or in the south of the island.
A UN-sponsored reunification plan, which would have turned Cyprus into a loose federation, was derailed in 2004 when Turkish Cypriots approved it by 65 to 35 per cent in a referendum but Greek Cypriots rejected it by 76 to 24 per cent. The European Union admitted the Greek Cypriots as the island’s sole representatives, a step that has severely complicated Turkey’s EU accession talks.
The ICG urges Turkey to end a boycott on direct talks with Greek Cypriots, saying: “The gravest disconnect plaguing the talks is mistrust between two of the principal actors.” But it warns: “Today’s stronger, more prosperous Turkey is more ready than in the past to defy the EU and risk irreversible damage to the relationship over what it also sees as issues of national interest and justice.”
A de facto partition of Cyprus will be the only option remaining if talks to reunify the island have not produced a settlement by the spring, the International Crisis Group warns in a report published on Wednesday.
A year of United Nations-brokered talks between Demetris Christofias, president of the internationally recognised Greek Cypriot government of Cyprus, and Mehmet Ali Talat, his Turkish Cypriot counterpart and friend, have made only limited progress on the most controversial issues of property, security and power sharing.
If a referendum on reunification does not take place before April’s elections in the north, which is recognised as a state only by Turkey, Mr Talat is likely to be replaced by a candidate sceptical of the basic formula of a bi-zonal, bi-communal federation.
Mr Talat told the FT in an interview earlier this month that it was the “last chance for a solution”, although he gave no deadline by which talks must be concluded.
“The future is either federation or partition,” according to a senior diplomat from the region cited in the report.
The ICG notes it would be difficult to revive talks, as the UN and other possible brokers are reluctant to be implicated in further failures, and young people in both communities are growing increasingly indifferent to the issue.
A permanent split, whether formally recognised or not, would mean slower economic growth, higher defence spending and reduced international credibility for both sides, the report argues. It could also persuade many Turkish Cypriots to seek better prospects elsewhere, whether overseas or in the south of the island.
A UN-sponsored reunification plan, which would have turned Cyprus into a loose federation, was derailed in 2004 when Turkish Cypriots approved it by 65 to 35 per cent in a referendum but Greek Cypriots rejected it by 76 to 24 per cent. The European Union admitted the Greek Cypriots as the island’s sole representatives, a step that has severely complicated Turkey’s EU accession talks.
The ICG urges Turkey to end a boycott on direct talks with Greek Cypriots, saying: “The gravest disconnect plaguing the talks is mistrust between two of the principal actors.” But it warns: “Today’s stronger, more prosperous Turkey is more ready than in the past to defy the EU and risk irreversible damage to the relationship over what it also sees as issues of national interest and justice.”
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Iraq offers half gas needed for Nabucco
By Delphine Strauss and Ed Crooks
Iraq has offered to supply enough gas to fill half the capacity of the proposed Nabucco pipeline, the prime minister said, giving the project a boost even as heads of government met to sign a historic agreement approving the plan.
The offer from the Iraqi government to supply 15bn cubic metres a year of gas by 2015 helps address the greatest obstacle to the 3,300km pipeline from eastern Turkey to Austria: the prospect of there not being enough gas to fill it.
José Manuel Barroso, pre sident of the European Commission, said the signing of the Nabucco agreement in Ankara by the leaders of five countries on the pipeline’s route – Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, Roman ia and Turkey – could “open the door to a new era in the relationship between the European Union and Tur key, and indeed beyond”.
Dick Lugar, the most senior Republican in the US senate, said the agreement was “a signal to the rest of the world that partner governments will not acquiesce to manipulation of energy supplies for political ends”.
Nabucco is intended to provide an alternative to Russian supplies, which have caused growing concern following the disruption caused by disputes be tween Russia and Ukraine.
The hope is that the inter-governmental agreement will convince gas-producing countries that the project – scheduled to start in 2014 – is closer to becoming reality than rival European or Russian-sponsored schemes, and persuade them to commit the volumes needed for commercial viability.
The only supplier that will definitely be ready for the first phase of the project is Azerbaijan, but it is juggling Nabucco’s de mands against those of Russia.
Richard Morningstar, US energy envoy, described Azeri gas as a “necessary condition” but not sufficient for the €8bn ($11bn, £7bn) Nabucco project.
If Iraq is able to achieve its ambition of supplying an annual 15bn cu m a year, it will fill almost half the pipeline’s 31bn cu m capacity.
International oil companies are interested in investing in the country to develop its resources, including gas.
The Kurdistan region in the north of Iraq has also attracted a planned investment by a consortium of companies including OMV of Austria and Mol of Hungary, which are both members of the Nabucco group.
Nabucco executives say significant quantities of gas could be available from those Kurdish fields as soon as next year.
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, also reiterated his desire for Iran to be a supplier “when conditions allow”, despite US opposition.
Andris Piebalgs, EU energy commissioner, said the EU’s focus now would be on encouraging Turkmenistan to participate. Stefan Judisch of Germany’s RWE, the energy group that is a member of the Nabucco consortium, said Turkmenistan would be able to supply an annual 10bn cu m in the pipeline’s first phase, but would first have to find a way through disputes over the Caspian Sea.
Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov, president of Turkmenistan, said last week that participation in the project would help his country – which is locked in a dispute with Russia over gas supplies – to diversify its export routes.
Mr Piebalgs was optimistic about the consortium’s prospects of finding financing, saying: “If they have the gas, money will follow.”
However, there are fears that some companies in the consortium could struggle to finance their share of the pipeline – forcing them to accept a smaller share of its capacity.
Iraq has offered to supply enough gas to fill half the capacity of the proposed Nabucco pipeline, the prime minister said, giving the project a boost even as heads of government met to sign a historic agreement approving the plan.
The offer from the Iraqi government to supply 15bn cubic metres a year of gas by 2015 helps address the greatest obstacle to the 3,300km pipeline from eastern Turkey to Austria: the prospect of there not being enough gas to fill it.
José Manuel Barroso, pre sident of the European Commission, said the signing of the Nabucco agreement in Ankara by the leaders of five countries on the pipeline’s route – Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, Roman ia and Turkey – could “open the door to a new era in the relationship between the European Union and Tur key, and indeed beyond”.
Dick Lugar, the most senior Republican in the US senate, said the agreement was “a signal to the rest of the world that partner governments will not acquiesce to manipulation of energy supplies for political ends”.
Nabucco is intended to provide an alternative to Russian supplies, which have caused growing concern following the disruption caused by disputes be tween Russia and Ukraine.
The hope is that the inter-governmental agreement will convince gas-producing countries that the project – scheduled to start in 2014 – is closer to becoming reality than rival European or Russian-sponsored schemes, and persuade them to commit the volumes needed for commercial viability.
The only supplier that will definitely be ready for the first phase of the project is Azerbaijan, but it is juggling Nabucco’s de mands against those of Russia.
Richard Morningstar, US energy envoy, described Azeri gas as a “necessary condition” but not sufficient for the €8bn ($11bn, £7bn) Nabucco project.
If Iraq is able to achieve its ambition of supplying an annual 15bn cu m a year, it will fill almost half the pipeline’s 31bn cu m capacity.
International oil companies are interested in investing in the country to develop its resources, including gas.
The Kurdistan region in the north of Iraq has also attracted a planned investment by a consortium of companies including OMV of Austria and Mol of Hungary, which are both members of the Nabucco group.
Nabucco executives say significant quantities of gas could be available from those Kurdish fields as soon as next year.
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister, also reiterated his desire for Iran to be a supplier “when conditions allow”, despite US opposition.
Andris Piebalgs, EU energy commissioner, said the EU’s focus now would be on encouraging Turkmenistan to participate. Stefan Judisch of Germany’s RWE, the energy group that is a member of the Nabucco consortium, said Turkmenistan would be able to supply an annual 10bn cu m in the pipeline’s first phase, but would first have to find a way through disputes over the Caspian Sea.
Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov, president of Turkmenistan, said last week that participation in the project would help his country – which is locked in a dispute with Russia over gas supplies – to diversify its export routes.
Mr Piebalgs was optimistic about the consortium’s prospects of finding financing, saying: “If they have the gas, money will follow.”
However, there are fears that some companies in the consortium could struggle to finance their share of the pipeline – forcing them to accept a smaller share of its capacity.
Gas Pipeline in Turkey Gains European Backing
By SABRINA TAVERNISE and SEBNEM ARSU
A project for a gas pipeline that would reduce Europe’s dependence on Russian gas cleared a hurdle on Monday when four European governments signed an agreement with Turkey. But the project’s completion remained a distant goal, with no suppliers formally committed.
Government representatives of Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania joined Turkish officials in Ankara, Turkey’s capital, to sign the pact, a transit agreement on the so-called Nabucco pipeline, which would stretch 2,000 miles from the Caspian Sea to Austria through Turkey.
The project has long been delayed, bogged down in disagreements between Turkey and Europe over terms and by maneuvers from Russia, which is pressing for a competing pipeline, South Stream. Most significantly, the pipeline has no committed suppliers, the most important element in getting the project moving.
The agreement signed Monday, which Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, was present for, was just one small step, experts said.
“It does very little to remove obstacles from the pipeline,” said Ana Jelenkovic, an analyst at Eurasia Group in London. “We have no map. There are no committed supplies, and no committed financing.”
The project was proposed in 2002 by executives of European energy companies wanting to reduce their reliance on Russian gas, which dominates Europe’s energy market. It took on new urgency in 2006 and again last winter, when pricing disputes between Ukraine and Russia shut down supplies to Europe.
Azerbaijan, an oil-rich American ally on the Caspian Sea, was seen as a potential principal supplier, though countries like Egypt and Iraq — as well as Iran, despite American objections — had also been discussed.
But geopolitics intervened last year, when Russia fought a short war with Georgia, giving other former Soviet satellites like Azerbaijan pause. In an indication of that concern, Azerbaijan last week signed an agreement to supply small amounts of natural gas to Russia, a promise that Ms. Jelenkovic said would not threaten the Nabucco pipeline.
Azerbaijan has also hit a rough spot in relations with Turkey, which is trying to reconcile with Armenia, its neighbor. Azerbaijan and Armenia fought a bitter war in the 1990s.
And Moscow has continued to seek support for its project. Just last week, Russia’s deputy prime minister, Igor Sechin, was quoted by the Interfax news agency as saying that Russia had “offered Turkey cooperation with the South Stream.”
Monday’s agreement does not address the sticking point between Turkey and Europe, Ms. Jelenkovic said. Turkey wants to keep 15 percent of the pipeline’s potential supply for its own markets or for resale, and European countries have balked at that.
Borit Grgoc, an expert on Caspian energy issues who has worked as a consultant to the Azeri government, said that European nations were unlikely to have an interest in allowing Turkey to “sell gas back to them.”
However, reports in the Turkish news media said that Turkey had agreed to lower its demand after partners in the consortium, along with RWE of Germany, offered a 50 to 60 percent share in tax revenues from the project, which could be worth up to $650 million.
A project for a gas pipeline that would reduce Europe’s dependence on Russian gas cleared a hurdle on Monday when four European governments signed an agreement with Turkey. But the project’s completion remained a distant goal, with no suppliers formally committed.
Government representatives of Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania joined Turkish officials in Ankara, Turkey’s capital, to sign the pact, a transit agreement on the so-called Nabucco pipeline, which would stretch 2,000 miles from the Caspian Sea to Austria through Turkey.
The project has long been delayed, bogged down in disagreements between Turkey and Europe over terms and by maneuvers from Russia, which is pressing for a competing pipeline, South Stream. Most significantly, the pipeline has no committed suppliers, the most important element in getting the project moving.
The agreement signed Monday, which Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, was present for, was just one small step, experts said.
“It does very little to remove obstacles from the pipeline,” said Ana Jelenkovic, an analyst at Eurasia Group in London. “We have no map. There are no committed supplies, and no committed financing.”
The project was proposed in 2002 by executives of European energy companies wanting to reduce their reliance on Russian gas, which dominates Europe’s energy market. It took on new urgency in 2006 and again last winter, when pricing disputes between Ukraine and Russia shut down supplies to Europe.
Azerbaijan, an oil-rich American ally on the Caspian Sea, was seen as a potential principal supplier, though countries like Egypt and Iraq — as well as Iran, despite American objections — had also been discussed.
But geopolitics intervened last year, when Russia fought a short war with Georgia, giving other former Soviet satellites like Azerbaijan pause. In an indication of that concern, Azerbaijan last week signed an agreement to supply small amounts of natural gas to Russia, a promise that Ms. Jelenkovic said would not threaten the Nabucco pipeline.
Azerbaijan has also hit a rough spot in relations with Turkey, which is trying to reconcile with Armenia, its neighbor. Azerbaijan and Armenia fought a bitter war in the 1990s.
And Moscow has continued to seek support for its project. Just last week, Russia’s deputy prime minister, Igor Sechin, was quoted by the Interfax news agency as saying that Russia had “offered Turkey cooperation with the South Stream.”
Monday’s agreement does not address the sticking point between Turkey and Europe, Ms. Jelenkovic said. Turkey wants to keep 15 percent of the pipeline’s potential supply for its own markets or for resale, and European countries have balked at that.
Borit Grgoc, an expert on Caspian energy issues who has worked as a consultant to the Azeri government, said that European nations were unlikely to have an interest in allowing Turkey to “sell gas back to them.”
However, reports in the Turkish news media said that Turkey had agreed to lower its demand after partners in the consortium, along with RWE of Germany, offered a 50 to 60 percent share in tax revenues from the project, which could be worth up to $650 million.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)