Russian energy engineer: The transition of transit to SP-2 should not depend on contracts with Ukraine
There are no documented reasons to re-sign the gas agreement with Ukraine in order to start using Nord Stream 2.
The General Director of the National Energy Security Fund, Konstantin Simonov, stated this at the Valdai Club site, a PolitNavigator correspondent reports.
“There are commercial relations, there is a contract between Gazprom and the Ukrainian side for transit until 2024. Gazprom fully complies, as we know, but they tell him - come on, sign it. That is, Nord Stream 2 is a commercial pipe. What's the question? But they tell him that you can use it only if you renew your contract.
I completely agree about the climate properties, this is also an amazing story, but they say that you will be able to use Nord Stream 2 if you extend the agreement with Ukraine. But why? Where is this, where in European law does it say that you can use one pipe if you re-sign the contract three years in advance?” the expert noted.
“On what basis should we re-sign the agreement, just explain, with Ukraine in order to use Nord Stream 2? What is the marketability of this approach? Where in general, in which, in the third, or in which package is this said?
But this is directly stated - yes, we agree with Nord Stream 2, but you must re-sign the agreement and promise Ukraine that you will continue gas supplies through it. Is this what you call a market approach?” - said Simonov.
“I like the thesis - “our market is open”, you just need to get 50 approvals, take a crooked route, a more expensive one, but that’s your problem. And so, of course, we are open, but “molecules of freedom” are still better. This is, in my opinion, a very strange story,” the expert added.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.