On Dec. 9 work began on the construction of an ambitious project, the so-called “bypass gas pipeline,” linking Russia and Western Europe via the Baltic Sea. This symbolic event occurred against the background of the current tensions in Ukraine-Russia relations. Gas has again become an instrument of settling international scores. In all likelihood, relations between Ukraine and Russia have not seen such tensions since the notorious “Tuzla tussle,” the climax being a tough statement that Russia’s President Vladimir Putin made last week. According to the Russian leader, the Ukrainian budget “has earned considerable revenues as a result of privatization and Western financial loans for energy projects.” “It is a matter of billions. This is quite sufficient to buy the required quantities of Russian gas at market prices,” Putin said. Last Friday’s statement by Anatoliy Matviyenko, deputy chief of Ukraine’s Presidential Secretariat, was a kind of reaction. He said that Ukraine has the right to raise the question of payments for the lease of the Russian Black Sea Fleet base at world prices, too. The Day asked a group of experts to answer the following question: What is the cause of the current tension between Ukraine and Russia and what instruments can be used to defuse it?
Yuriy SHCHERBAK, former Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine:
“The dispute over market prices for gas should not be linked to any political campaigns: this is an altogether different dimension. One can endorse the idea that Russia is switching over to market relations. But one should say in this case that Ukraine, too, is going to opt for market relations regarding gas transportation and storage as well as the Black Sea Fleet, which so far is being leased at absolutely non-market rates. We should not allow the political whims of either side to interfere in the normal process of economic negotiations. But, unfortunately, gas is again being used as a political weapon on the very eve of the elections.
“Can there be energy security if there is no trust between partners, one of which is the gas supplier and the other, the gas transporter? We are prepared to take part in an energy security system, but we must also be protected against steep price increases. If prices are to be raised, there should be a gradual increase of gas transportation tariffs and other services furnished by Ukraine.”
Vadym KARASIOV, director, Institute of Global Strategies:
“I can see four chief factors that have caused the current tensions in Ukrainian-Russian relations. The first one is the different genesis of political regimes in the two countries. Ukraine’s political regime and new elites are the products of a revolution, whereas the current Russian political elite and regime seem to be consolidating and mobilizing themselves on the principle of forestalling ‘colored revolutions’ both in Russia and the entire post-Soviet space.
“Secondly, although relations between the two countries were not trouble-free before the Orange Revolution, they still rested on the structural political affinity of the Ukrainian and Russian elites, on friendship and personal contacts between the presidents and their chiefs of staff. Those were not relations between states but relations between post-Soviet elites that resembled each other by their origin and their instrumental and mental codes. After the ‘colored revolution’ and Viktor Yushchenko’s ascent to power, this structural and mental basis of interaction crumbled.
“The third factor is energy. The point is that there is still no alternative to Russia as a source of energy resources for Ukraine. This lack of an alternative, coupled with the above-mentioned factors, is shaping a contradictory and even conflict-prone context of Russian-Ukrainian energy relations primarily through gas problems.
“This leads to another factor that has further aggravated Russian-Ukrainian relations. Russia is trying to use gas as an instrument and argument with respect to Ukraine. The old forms of dependence, loyalty, and contacts, which were largely shaped on the basis of gas dependency and gas preferences, are dying out. Russia is discarding them, suggesting that gas be paid for in hard cash. Ukraine does not need this gas dependency either because this can later be transformed into certain forms of political loyalty and dependence.
“Come what may, Ukraine and Russia are beginning to position themselves as two different nations that are developing in various political and geopolitical trajectories. These divergent integrational, strategic, and geopolitical trajectories of development cannot help producing flare-ups of tension in such spheres as diplomacy, public opinion, and economic and energy-related cooperation, all the more so as neither Russian nor Ukrainian diplomats have learned how to work in these conditions and have been taken by surprise in many cases.”
Maria LIPMAN, Carnegie Center, Moscow:
“Today’s strained relations between our countries are caused by the fact that the Russian government is now feeling very confident in the world and is again signaling that Russia is a great power. Huge reserves of resources and very high oil and gas prices enable Russia to feel very confident in the world arena in general and in its relations with neighbors in particular. And since Russia exports these important energy resources into and through Ukraine, this allows it to dictate its conditions. Russia is also very keen on taking revenge, one way or another, for the failed attempt to influence the political situation in Ukraine one year ago. And Russia has the potential to do this.
“However, since neither side presumes that the two countries may break off their relations, that Ukraine will find another source of energy resources for itself, or that the Europeans will opt for some other transit route, our countries will finally have to come to terms. Here very much will depend on the art of diplomacy, real potential, leverage, and each side’s arguments. It still seems to me that Russia wields heavier clout at the ongoing talks. The fact that the gas talks have now reached the highest level — the presidents have conferred on the phone — shows unmistakably that a compromise will be found. If the differences were deepening, the presidents would not choose to speak with each other at the moment.”
