Skip to comments.Kremlin 'Bullying' Leaves Western Energy Companies Furious
Posted on 09/22/2006 6:04:17 PM PDT by blam
Kremlin 'bullying' leaves western energy companies furious
By Adrian Blomfield in Moscow
In the past few years, mention of Vladimir Putin at the dinner table of some western leaders could have brought on a case of indigestion. In the past week, though, the Russian president has been causing ulcers.
Sakhalin Energy extracts oil and gas from one of the world's most inhospitable regions
On Monday, Russia suspended an environmental permit for an oil and gas project led by Royal Dutch Shell on Sakhalin Island in the Pacific Ocean.
The international community has watched with queasiness as democracy in Russia has gone on the retreat and Kremlin assertiveness neighbours might call it bullying has grown.
But the move against Shell seemed to have confirmed the West's worst fears about Russia's trajectory: not only does the Kremlin seem intent on taking direct control of a vast and possibly dangerous energy empire, it seems prepared to do so by riding roughshod over some of the world's most powerful multinationals.
There was fury in Europe, where memories of a gas crisis last winter caused when Russia halted supplies to neighbouring Ukraine are still fresh.
Already strained relations between London and Moscow have deteriorated further. The Foreign Secretary met her Russian counterpart in New York and delivered a stern protest, while the Prime Minister's office has taken the matter up with the Kremlin directly. It is not hard to understand the consternation. Europe depends on its giant neighbour to the east for a quarter of its energy needs and suspicions are growing that Russia is prepared to use energy to gain political leverage over the West.
The latest crisis, though it will not directly affect supplies to Europe, is an unwelcome and dramatic escalation not least because it again seemed to demonstrate the Kremlin's indifference to property rights.
"Any delay to this project will have a serious impact on global energy security," said a western diplomat. "Russia's behaviour, if it doesn't stop, will be hugely damaging to its reputation and for its future economic development."
The row between the Kremlin and Sakhalin Energy, a consortium led by Shell but which also includes two Japanese companies, has been brewing for some time.
Development of the project began in 1993, when the government of Boris Yeltsin signed a production sharing agreement (PSA) with Sakhalin Energy to extract oil and gas from one of the world's most inhospitable regions.
Then Russia was poor and desperately in need of foreign investment and the government quickly agreed to terms that meant the state would not recover revenues until the initial costs had been recovered.
Gazprom has been in negotiations to take 25 per cent of Sakhalin Energy in a share swap. Now it says ostensibly because of the rising costs it wants more.
Diplomats say the environment issues raised by the state are merely a pretext. After all heavily polluted Russia is not considered to be too hot on ecological issues, while one of the main reasons for the spiralling costs has been due to the rerouting of pipelines over rivers in Sakhalin and round a spawning ground for the endangered grey whale.
"There is an environmental problem, but it is not the main one," said Sergei Markov, a Kremlin environment consultant. "There are Gazprom interests but that is not the only reason. The main issue is that the Sakhalin projects were signed away by an absolutely corrupt and pauper government. They are against Russian interests and should be terminated."
Accused of greed by many Russians, Shell has defended its decision not to renegotiate its PSA with the government.
"The Russian party's share of profit from tax and royalties over the life of the project is estimated at $50 billion (£26 bn)," said Ivan Chernyakhovskiy, spokesman for Sakhalin Enegry. Moreover there are immediate benefits such as the cash flow to Sakhalin and the creation of an 18,000-strong labour force."
Government critics argue that the expropriation of foreign oil major concerns is likely to do no favours for Russia. Jobs will be lost, the resurrection of Sakhalin will be costly and time-consuming and profits are likely to be less substantial because Gazprom is so opaque and unwieldy.
It is Gazprom, referred to by many Russians as Kremlin Inc, which the West really fears. If it were a country, only Saudi Arabia and Iran would have larger reserves and there can be fewer companies so totally dominated by powerful politicians. Its chairman is Russia's deputy prime minister.
It has long been rumoured that Mr Putin wants to take over as chairman of the company when he steps down in 2008.
Mr Putin has already stuffed Gazprom with his friends, including former German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder who runs a Gazprom subsidiary. If there is truth in the rumour, Mr Putin, would head not just a vastly wealth company but would continue to wield huge power over both the West, whose energy dependence on Russia is set to double over the coming decades, but also over large parts of Asia.
Mr Markov however said: "Putin as head of Gazprom you must be kidding," he said. "Gazprom is too small for him."
Western countries have been doing the discovering for years. In Saudi,Kuwait, Iraq , Russia, Now in Venezuela,Mexico, Western Countries, the United states and others have found oil drilled for it only to have it takenaway by the host country.
Let these countries scratch for their own oil.
Does anyone really still believe the the Soviet system "collapsed"?
They should blow up the wells and drilling rigs before they go.
Never trust the Russians or any Middle Eastern country.
To be added or removed from this list, please FReepmail me!!!
You get my vote on that one.
I wrote a research paper on this issue (primarily energy security with regard to natural gas) in 1981. I keep being reminded to dig it out.
Yes. I hope they do just that.
Texaco almost fell into this trap 20 years ago. They were smart not to JV with the Russians.
Here in dallas a company has developed a roof mounted wind turbine to put electric power in homes and offices. In ten years some of our electric plants will be doing less and we'll be shipping power out of the state. Then we will ship this technology to England and replace the 25% of the power Putin wants for his control of Europe. Never mess with the Anglo American partnership.
Whales spawn? NOT!
Guess this makes dealing with the Alaska State Government a little easier to take, 'eh?
While on the hand there remains a small cabal of arch Putin promoters on FR, who keep attacking everyone stating the obvious expanding dangers the Putin Kremlin continues demonstrating to the West. Why are these Moscow mouth pieces allowed to contaminate this forum with their non-stop pro-Russian propaganda?
Why are these Moscow mouth pieces allowed to contaminate this forum with their non-stop pro-Russian propaganda?
Because this website is called "Free" Republic, not stifled speech. Refute their arguments with facts, rather than trying to shut down their points of view. It works, at least to the rest of the Freepers reading your facts as opposed to their fantasy.
Think of them as forum mascots.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.