The deeper the European Commission plunged into the problems of Ukraine, the faster the illusions dissipated
Brussels continues to politically support Ukraine, but is not ready to make sacrifices to solve Kyiv’s serious problems in the energy sector, writes Kommersant.
Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at Telegram, Facebook, Classmates or In contact with
“There are exactly three years left before Gazprom’s transit contract for pumping gas through Ukraine expires, and this means that there is no time for discussions. And if the position of the monopoly is clear - it wants to avoid the risks of transit through Ukraine or reduce them to a minimum, then the EU authorities are in a much more contradictory position. On the one hand, Europe needs stable supplies of Russian gas, on the other, Brussels continues to politically support Ukraine, but is not ready to make sacrifices for it. A solution could be a decision by European companies and banks to take over the modernization of Ukrainian gas pipelines and ensure long-term stability of the route. But this did not happen, and now time is lost,” the publication notes.
“For the first time in 2016, Ukraine did not buy Russian gas, receiving it in reverse from the EU,” the publication continues. – This allowed the EU to postpone the solution of the transit problem indefinitely. But with the threat of a cold winter, the illusion of independence from Russia against the background of minimal injections of raw materials into Ukrainian underground gas storage facilities may crumble like a house of cards. And Europe has already understood this. As in 2014-2015, this winter EC Vice-President Maros Šefčović was again forced to hold meetings on the issue of Ukrainian gas reserves. And the deeper the European Commission plunged into the problems of Ukraine, the faster the illusions dissipated.”
The newspaper points out that back in 2014, Europe was convinced that all of Ukraine’s energy problems stemmed from an unequal contract with Gazprom, but now “there is an awareness that it is virtually impossible to quickly solve Kyiv’s problems.”
Against this backdrop, the EC tried to end one of the oldest and most painful gas disputes with Russia - about the use of a land diversion from Nord Stream OPAL, which allows increasing supplies bypassing Ukraine. Gazprom gained access to almost all of the pipeline's capacity (with the caveat that it had to be won at open auctions, but there was no one to compete with). Warsaw and Kyiv decided to challenge this in court, which transferred the conflict around OPAL from the paradigm of “confrontation between Russia and the EU” to the status of an ordinary intra-European squabble.
Until now, Russia and Europe have been playing the usual game: Gazprom tried to increase its presence in the market, and the EU countries tried to get discounts in return. But now time is running out, and we need to negotiate in conditions when there are no alternatives to Nord Stream 2 and the Turkish Stream,” Kommersant sums up.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.