Usa, Russia, Germania, energia Wsws 05-06-10
Il discorso di Cheney tende ad acuire i contrasti sull’energia
tra i paesi europei
By Chris
Talbot
Tesi
WSWS:
–
Divisione del
lavoro nella politica estera USA tra Bush che corteggia la Germania,
ottenendone l’appoggio su questione
iraniana;
–
e il vice
presidente Cheney, che alza la voce contro Russia (su diritti umani e l’utilizzo
della leva energetica per intimidire), e si fa il paladino dei paesi Est Europa
nuovi membri UE a cui si rivolge come “Nuova Europa”, per ostacolare la
strategia tedesca della Merkel di alleanza con USA e Russia.
–
Lituania e
Polonia hanno appoggiato la linea USA anti-russa in dichiarazioni che hanno
preceduto la visita di Cheney:
o
Il presidente
lituano ha chiesto un fronte comune europeo contro il tentativo russo di accrescere
la propria influenza in Europa sfruttando il rifornimento energetico, e ha
condannato il gasdotto tedesco (European Gas Pipeline Company (NEPGC)) che bypassa
i paesi del Baltico e dell’Est Europa.
o
il ministro
della Difesa polacco ha parlato di “decisioni sopra la testa”, della Polonia;
il gasdotto del Baltico risponde solo agli interessi tedeschi, sarebbe stato
meno costoso adeguare i collegamenti esistenti…
–
La Merkel ha assicurato
Bush che il disaccordo tedesco con Schröder su Irak è cosa passata.
–
La quota
russa dell’import di gas tedesco salirà dal 41% attuale al 60% nel 2025.
–
Merkel ha
deciso di mantenere alleanza strategica con Russia, con divisione politica interna,
ma appoggio ambienti economici;
o
scambi
bilaterali Germania-Russia +25% da 2004 a 2005.
–
Contraria all’influenza
russa in Europa anche la City di Londra; il governo britannico ha minacciato di
bloccare l’offerta di Gazprom per l’acquisizione di centrica, grande società di
distribuzione del gas; la minaccia è poi stata ritirata, ma la Ue ha
sottolineato che nell’applicazione delle regole del libero mercato verrà tenuto
in considerazione il monopolio di Gazprom nell’export di gas dalla Russia.
–
Il FT ha studiato
la struttura della società RosUkrEnergo, con sede in Svizzera, per metà di
proprietà di Gazprom e per metà del commerciante ucraino Dmytro Firtash. Firtash
ha dichiarato che RosUkrEnergo è “un complemento” di Gazprom.
–
La
Commissione Ue è contraria all’accordo Germania-Russia, secondo il commisario
all’Energia, Andris Piebalgs, non accettabile per gli altri membri UE e «neppure
discusso».
–
Barroso ha
chiesto agli USA di appoggiare la richiesta UE di alla Russia di aprire il suo
mercato energetico.
–
Cheney e Ue hanno
chiesto alla Russia il rispetto dei diritti umani, mentre non ne hanno parlato rispettivamente
nelle relazioni con Kazakistan e Turkmenistan.
o
Il parlamento
UE ha proposto di riaprire un accordo commerciale, sospeso dal 1999, con il Turkmenistan,
che è disponibile a bypassare Russia e Ucraina con il suo gas da inviare in
Europa. La UE è il terzo maggior partner commerciale del Turkmenistan, dopo Iran
e Ucraina; negli ultimi 5 anni + 14% l’export
Ue verso Turk.
o
Il presidente
turkmeno, Niyazov, terrebbe gli introiti derivanti dal gas in conti esteri,
fuori dal bilancio statale, compresi circa $2MD in Deutsche Bank.
Il gruppo francese delle costruzioni Bouyues ha realizzato diversi dei grandi
progetti di Niyazov
Wsws 05-06-10
Cheney’s
speech will deepen divisions in Europe over
energy
By Chris Talbot
Europe has moved to the top of Washington’s
diplomatic agenda as the Bush administration prepares to take military action
against Iran. While George W.
Bush was soft-soaping Chancellor Angela Merkel in Washington, Vice President Cheney was
on a six-day “democracy” tour in eastern Europe.
– On her second visit to the US
in four months, Merkel assured Bush that the disagreements with her
predecessor, Gerhard Schröder, over the Iraq war are a thing of the past. Bush sought and got Merkel’s backing
over Iran, and the US president is to visit Germany in the
near future.
While these talks were in progress, however, Cheney was delivering a
provocative speech attacking Russia
over restrictions on democratic
rights and its use of oil and gas as “tools of intimidation and blackmail.”
Cheney was referring to Gazprom temporarily turning off supplies to Ukraine in
January of this year to enforce a price increase, resulting in shortages
throughout the European Union, which receives a quarter of its gas from Russia.
The
supply shutoff was followed by a speech last month by Gazprom chief Alexei
Miller to 25 EU ambassadors in which he threatened to switch gas sales to China if Gazprom’s investment interests in Europe were restricted.
– Cheney’s intervention in
European politics can only exacerbate the divisions between European
governments over energy policy and make life increasingly difficult for Merkel,
who is attempting to build a close alliance with both Moscow
and Washington.
Only last month, the German government endorsed the €1 billion
($825 million) credit guarantee made by former chancellor Schröder for the
North European Gas Pipeline Company (NEPGC), of which he is now chairman.
The pipeline will go directly
from Russia to Germany under the Baltic Sea, bypassing Ukraine, Poland
and Belarus.
NEPGC is owned by Gazprom, together with the German companies E.ON and
Wintershall as junior partners.
– Russia’s share of Germany’s gas
imports is due to increase from 41 percent now to 60 percent in 2025.
– Merkel has decided to continue with the “strategic partnership”
developed under Schröder, and whilst there are divisions within the German
ruling elite over this closeness to Russia, business has in general pushed for
it, with bilateral trade between the countries increasing by 25 percent from
2004 to 2005.
By putting its national interests first, Germany has antagonised other
members of the European Union, especially the new entrants in eastern Europe.
Cheney was deliberately boosting the leaders of “New Europe” by speaking at the
“Community of Democratic Choice” meeting in Vilnius.
– Lithuanian President
Valdas Adamkus called for a common European Union front against Russia in an interview in the Financial Times the day before Cheney’s intervention. Adamkus called on the EU to oppose Russia’s use of its energy supplies to gain
“political influence” in Europe. He condemned the German NEPG that
will bypass the Baltic and eastern European countries. “I believe I can
understand the Russian position but I can’t understand the German position,” he
said. “As a member of the EU, they acted without even extending the courtesy of
advising the Baltic states [about their plans].”
– Polish responses to the German pipeline have been less restrained. Defence Minister Radek Sikorski
said, “In Poland
we have a particular sensitivity to corridors and deals above our head.”
Referring to the 1939 carve-up of Poland
between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, he
added, “that was the Molotov-Ribbentrop tradition.”
The Polish government claims that the NEPG is motivated entirely by Germany’s
political interests in wanting gas supplies that bypassed eastern Europe.
It will cost at least $10 billion, and it would have been much cheaper and
quicker to upgrade the existing pipeline connections.
Sikorski was speaking at an annual transatlantic
conference for political and business leaders, the Brussels Forum, which took place the weekend before
Cheney’s visit. This appears to have been the occasion to give the US ruling class’s anti-Russian
agenda a preliminary airing.
– Right-wing Republican
Senator John McCain gave the keynote speech in which,
in addition to making a comparison between Iranian President Ahmadinejad and Hitler,
he demanded joint US-European
opposition to the Putin regime. Putin had “some perverted vision of a
restoration of the Soviet empire,” and “in all the days of the Soviet Union, Russia never
turned off a spigot of gas. Putin did,” he thundered.
The hostility to Russian influence in Europe is not confined to the
eastern countries; the financial circles in the City of London are also clearly vexed. Gazprom chief Alexei Miller was responding to threats from the
British government to block a bid from Gazprom to take over Centrica, a major
gas-distribution company in the UK.
The threat was withdrawn, and
Prime Minister Tony Blair has assured the world that he remains committed to
free market principles, even if it involves Russian companies buying up
strategic British concerns. But the EU bureaucracy in Brussels,
presumably prompted by Britain,
has pronounced that whilst the EU would apply the same competition rules to
Gazprom as to any other company, the fact that Gazprom has a monopoly over gas exports from Russia
to the EU would be a “significant factor” in the application of the rules.
– In the pages of the Financial
Times, there has been a detailed examination of a Swiss-based company RosUkrEnergo,
which is half owned by Gazprom. Most of the other half is owned by Ukrainian trader Dmytro Firtash,
whose identity was a secret until two weeks ago.
– According to one article, Firtash insisted that he was “not a
parasitic middleman charging extortionate fees to supply Russian and Turkmen
gas to Ukraine and Europe,” but that RosUkrEnergo was a “complement” to
Gazprom. Firtash, who apparently has close relations with a number of British
businessmen, is considering floating his company on the London Stock Exchange.
If he is to achieve that, he will need to be more transparent in his business
dealings than he has been in the past. He assured reporters that he intended to
be more open, but, like St. Augustine,
he demurred, “not just yet.”
– The EU Commissioners,
whilst diplomatic in their language, are clearly opposed to the German-Russian
energy deal. Andris Piebalgs, the EU energy commissioner, is quoted as saying,
“We should never have the situation we will have with this [German-Russian]
pipeline. One partner country [Germany]
decided a project that is not acceptable to others, not even discussing it.”
Also speaking at the Brussels Forum was European Commission President Jose
Manuel Barroso. According to reports of the discussion at the conference, he called for the US to join Europe in pressing Moscow to open up its energy markets.
Russians had to decide whether they wanted “a real democracy or a
half-democracy,” he said. The Kremlin was increasingly resorting to “the use of
energy resources as an instrument of political coercion.”
The demand for “democracy” from the EU
bureaucracy in relation to Russia
is selective and hypocritical. Just
as Cheney made no reference to the total lack of democratic rights in Kazakhstan, where he was heading after Lithuania, the EU has close connections with the regime in Turkmenistan, the source of much of RosUkrEnergo’s
gas, which it sells to Europe.
– The US-based organisation
Human Rights Watch has pointed out that the foreign and
trade committee of the EU
parliament has proposed to reopen a trade agreement between the EU and Turkmenistan,
on hold since 1999 because of concerns over human rights. Keeping the supply of gas from Turkmenistan
to the EU is clearly the underlying rationale. Turkmenistan
is said to be keen to bypass Russia
and Ukraine
with its gas.
The EU is Turkmenistan’s
third largest trading partner (after Iran
and Ukraine), and its exports
to the country have increased by 14 percent over the last five years.
According to the London-based campaign group Global Witness, Turkmen President Saparmurat Niyazov
keeps most of the country’s gas earnings in off-budget overseas accounts,
including some $2 billion held at Deutsche Bank. French building company
Bouygues has been erecting many of the grand projects that Niyazov has ordered.
Since independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, less and less money has been spent
on the impoverished population.
The regime has one of the worst human rights records in the world, with
arbitrary arrest and oppositionists routinely tortured, killed or thrown into
jail for years. Niyazov has
absolute power and has created a personality cult in which schools,
streets and hospitals are named after him, his picture is displayed everywhere,
and most of the books in schools and libraries are written by him.
The mounting energy crisis in Europe has
given minor tyrants like Saparmurat Niyazov increased political leverage, as it
has Putin and the oligarchs who surround him. Having
enriched themselves from the denationalisation of Soviet natural resources,
they now see a way to take to the world stage.
In the final analysis, however, the
energy crisis is being driven by the aggressive nature of US foreign policy,
which has destabilised oil supplies from the Middle East.
With characteristic disregard for the political implications of his actions, Cheney has stirred up the conflicts
within Europe to a point where the cooperation
between EU members threatens to break down. His speech reflects a
reckless approach to foreign policy that disregards the entire history of the
twentieth century, when conflicts over strategic resources and conflicting
national interests produced two world wars in Europe.
Since the end of World War II, US
foreign policy has been directed towards maintaining European cooperation in an
attempt to avoid a repetition of this recurrent disastrous conflict. Cheney’s
speech demonstrated the extent to which the US under the Bush administration
has broken with the tradition.