by Orkhan Sattarov, head of the European Bureau of VK
The diplomatic skirmish between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan turned out to be quite unexpected for many observers. Although its origin is clear, the two Caspian states have long-standing disputes over state borders on the Caspian. Turkmenistan insists on being the owner of the Kapaz Field and renamed it into Serdar. The oil field is the cause of tensions.
But why has the disputed field suddenly become so topical? Why has Turkmenistan decided to start exploration, knowing that it is the best way to start confrontation with Azerbaijan?
We believe that the territorial problem should not be viewed only within the framework of Azerbaijani-Turkmen bilateral relations. With arrival of Turkmen President Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov the relations had a very positive boost.
The Turkmen leader visited Baku in 2008, after a 12 year break of high-scaled relations. Berdimuhamedov inherited the conflict from his predecessor Saparmurat Niyazov with the title Turkmenbasy. Turkmenistan called its ambassador off from Baku in 2001. Relations were only restored with arrival of Berdimuhamedov.
The sides resolved the debt issue of Azerbaijan for Turkmen gas. During the visit of Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov to Baku, the two presidents reached an agreement that no activities would take place at the Kapaz Field until the issue gets a resolution. As stated by press secretary of the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry Elman Abdullayev, the agreement no work should be organized at the crossing of sectors of the two states in the Caspian Sea until the legal status of the Caspian is reached.
Such improvement of relations of Baku and Ashkhabad had prospects for joint entrance of the two states to the European gas market. European Commissioner Gunther Oettinger started active lobbying of the Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline project under the Caspian Sea, condemned by Russia and Iran. Moscow’s main argument against the Turkmen-Azerbaijani gas pipeline was the high risk of accident and ecological catastrophe in the Caspian. But in reality, the Kremlin’s concern has hardly anything to do with ecology. It is more likely a matter of geoeconomic interests, attempts to prevent competitors from entering the European gas market. Besides, the Russian Nord Stream project runs under the Baltic Sea, but it was not a reason for scrapping the pipeline. Another argument of Moscow and Tehran is the unresolved status of the Caspian Sea. But the water zone the pipeline would run through is not a disputed territory Russia or Iran could claim, regardless of the principle for delimiting the Caspian, according to sectors or equal parts.
European Commissioner Gunther Oettinger said at the conference “Energy Dialogue: Russia – EU. The Gas Aspect” in May 2012 that negotiations of the European Commission with Azerbaijan for the Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline could be granted in mid-2012.
Russia expressed its position at the same conference as well. The Russian side sees great aggravations, should the Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline be built according to separatist decisions, Russian representative to the European Union Vladimir Chizhov told Interfax in Brussels. “Realization of the project the way the European Union wants it, and I am not only talking about the European Commission, but about the European Union, because the Council of the EU approved the mandate, is a potential annoyance in relations of Russia and the European Union”, the Russian official said. “But it is also a potential source of tensions in the Caspian Region. Non-transparent deals of some states of the region and the European Union without account of positions of other states are certainly a potential source of tension, I believe, no one wants in the region”, the Russian diplomat emphasized.
Not a word was mentioned about ecology. Yet, the hints that Russia neither wants independent infrastructure policy of Baku and Ashkhabad nor activity of the EU in the issue were very clear.
Despite obvious grievances of Russia, the EU position in the trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline project remains unchanged. The project meets requirements of the long-term strategy of Europe for diversification of gas sources. The European Union sees no political or ecological obstacles for construction of the gas pipeline under the Caspian Sea, representative of the European Union to Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan Aurelia Buchez said, News Kazakhstan reports.
Buchez said at the petroleum conference “Development of the Caspian Shelf 2012” that the EU was supporting development of the project by the two states in their territorial waters.
She emphasized that the European Union does not take sides in negotiations of the legal status of the Caspian, because “the issue can only be settled by the five coastal states”.
At the same time, the unsettled status of the Caspian and “negotiations of the coastal states over the new status of the Caspian are not an obstacle for construction and exploitation of oil and gas pipelines”, she stresses.
She believes that there is no need for delimitation, pipelines may be built through borders that exist without approval of their status. It is common practice for the EU, for example in the North Sea. The third thesis Buchez mentioned is the high safety standards. Not a single ecological problem has been found for construction of the Trans-Caspian Gas Pipeline after studies financed by the EU.
The EU official insists that the gas pipeline through the Caspian Sea would have minimal ecological impact, compared with other routes or similar schemes for hydrocarbon exports. The EU regional representative concluded that the European Union wants to finance further work to resolve all ecological disagreements with Caspian partners and international financial institutions.
Joint access of Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan to the European gas market meets European interests in reducing economic dependence on Russian gas. Azerbaijani gas of the second stage of Shah Deniz development alone might be inefficient for the European diversification. It would be more fruitful to have Turkmen, Iraqi or Iranian gas involved. It would also be advantageous to have a transport corridor linking Middle Asia and Europe without Russian or Iranian control. South Caucasus is the best solution in this case.
Some experts reckon that Russia contributed to the Azerbaijani-Turkmen conflict. Vaf Guluzade, an Azerbaijani political analyst and former Presidential Advisor for Foreign Policy, has confidence that Russia is behind tensions in relations of Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan.
“This is not the first time we see quarrels between Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan. I believe, Baku and Ashkhabad need and should reach common grounds on their own, without foreign interference. Russia is behind these events, I am 100% sure. It is easier for us to reach an agreement with Turkmenistan to use the Kapaz Field together via petroleum companies realizing barter deals. But Russia does not want this, that is why the dispute occurs”, the political analyst told Vesti.az.
Bakhruz Abdolwand, a German expert for the Caspian Region, has a similar point of view. In a conversation with VK, he noted that certain groups in the Turkmen government might have started a provocation with the help of foreign forces.
But in the light of harsh top-down hierarchy of power in Turkmenistan, it is hard to believe that some forces in the Turkmen government could start the provocation in the Caspian Sea without letting the president know. In other words, if there really was any Russian involvement, it was sanctioned by the Turkmen government. It might have changed its priorities in energy policy, including the problem of European gas supplies for the benefit of other buyers, for example, Russia or China and their readiness for increase gas purchases every year.
The game of Ashkhabad may also be an element of bargain with Europe. Further developments in the Caspian Sea will show how high the chances of the European project for realization are in the complicated region, especially if the European Union keeps “abstaining” from resolving hard political problems.
