Replies

THE PATH TO ENERGY SECURITY

OP-ED: By Mikheil Saakashvili, The Washington Post
Washington, D.C., Monday, January 9, 2006; Page A19

TBILISI, Georgia -- Last week Russia announced that it would halt and
then -- not long after -- that it was restarting natural gas shipments to
Ukraine. It was a momentary crisis that should have wide-ranging
ramifications for the economic security of Europe and raise questions
about any notion of a role for Russia as a reliable energy supplier.
Russia's arbitrary cutoff sent a clear message to the European Union:
There can be no energy security when an undependable neighbor is
willing and able to use its energy resources as a weapon in political
influence.

We in Georgia watched these events with great interest for two major
reasons. Last August, Georgia and Ukraine initiated the creation of the
Community of Democratic Choice. The CDC held its first meeting in Kiev
last month and began to mobilize democracies to work toward our common
goals.

In the course of the Rose and Orange revolutions in Georgia and Ukraine,
respectively, our peoples chose to develop open, democratic societies and
set out to reorient our economic and political ties to the West.

We believe it is critical to our future safety and economic security that we
integrate ourselves with Euro-Atlantic structures, which is why we are
working to gain membership in NATO and the European Union. We are
constantly striving for good relations with our giant neighbor, but the
Russian government's recent actions are yet another example of that
country's attempts to influence nearby countries. Because of our democratic
solidarity with Ukraine, our Black Sea neighbor, we shared the outrage
expressed in Europe at Russia's heavy-handed action.

We also expressed support for Ukraine because of our own experience. While
this was the European Union's first experience with a politically motivated
cutoff of natural gas, Russia has attempted to pressure Georgia this way on
many occasions. That is why we seek diverse sources of energy. In the wake
of these dramatic events, it is critical that the E.U. move to diversify its
energy sources and develop new transportation routes for its supplies. The
fig leaf of "market rates" that Russia traditionally uses as cover to jack
up prices or to cut off energy supplies is disingenuous at best.

There is nothing "free market" or "market rate" behind Russian energy
prices. Manipulation of energy prices and supplies is a critical tool of
those in Russia who believe that hydrocarbons are the best means of
political influence. In Georgia, both Abkhazia and South Ossetia, two areas
that are outside of our control and whose separatist authorities are
directly controlled by Russia, receive natural gas free -- hardly a practice
free-marketeers would applaud.

Russia uses not only its energy supplies but also the vast energy
transportation network that former Soviet states inherited -- and depend
on -- to exercise energy control. For example, when Russia demanded steep
price increases in natural gas from my country, we approached Kazakhstan and
reached a preliminary agreement to purchase gas from it at a genuine market
rate. But Russia's Gazprom refused to allow shipment through Russian
territory, thereby scuttling the deal.

It gets worse. The E.U. should take note that in December 1999 Georgian
natural gas from Russia -- our sole supplier -- was cut off for no reason in
the dead of winter and was restored only through U.S. intervention.

For Georgians, our path is clear: We are moving aggressively to diversify
our energy sources and transportation networks. The recently completed
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, which brings natural gas from Azerbaijan to
Turkey and crosses Georgia is a critical piece of this effort.

For Europe, the Black Sea states hold the key for new routes to bring in
energy supplies from the Middle East and Central Asia. We are willing to
work closely both with our European partners and with Russia to make the
whole system transparent, predictable and immune to -- or insulated from --
political shocks. -30-

NOTE: The writer is president of the Republic of Georgia.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/08/AR2006010801167.html

Maybe Russia should be kicked out of G8:
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/9327-12.cfm

G8 Membership important for Russia - poll

MOSCOW. Dec 25 (Interfax) - Seventy-one percent of Russian citizens think Russia's membership of G8 is important for the country, with only 11% disagreeing with this.

Forty percent of respondents surveyed in a poll by the Public Opinion Foundation said that Russia is a fully-fledged member of G8, while 35% think its plays a secondary role in the organization.

The poll, conducted among 1,500 respondents in December, suggests that only 28% of Russian citizens (49% of respondents with a higher education) knew that Russia is to host the G8 annual summit in 2006. Fifty-seven percent of those polled said that this would be a major step to draw Russia and West closer together, while 16% said it would not.

Fifty-four percent of respondents said that Russia's presidency of G8 in 2006 would benefit the nation and 3% said it would not."

Respondents who believe that presidency of G8 will benefit Russia argue that this will enhance Russia's authority and influence, and 20% said more countries will listen to Russia.

Seventeen percent of those surveyed hope Russia's presidency will promote economic development and indirectly enhance citizens' living standards. Some said that Russia will have a chance to demonstrate to the world that it is "a civilized nation."