Former German Foreign Minister: Russia’s project is not in Europe’s interests

Mr Fischer, as a former German Foreign Minister, why are you working as the chief lobbyist for gas coming to Europe in future via the Nabucco Pipeline? Is Nabucco a political project?

No. It is not a political project, but clearly an energy project of this scale has political implications. If Nabucco was not to happen, Europe would lose access to the massive gas reserves that Turkmenistan has to offer. And Turkmenistan would supply Asian countries instead, in particular China.

Experts are always stressing the need to diversify our gas sources. In that case, shouldn’t Europe be happy with any additional pipeline, even the Russian South Stream Project?

South Stream is the Russians’ response to the Nabucco project. But it will not contribute to any diversification in Europe’s gas supplies. Rather, South Stream would deliver “old” gas to us through a new pipeline. The principal goal of that pipeline is to make the transit of Russian gas through Ukraine superfluous, albeit at an extremely high cost. If South Stream were ever to be built, it would be by far the most expensive pipeline project, costing more than ˆ20 billion. By comparison, the Nord Stream pipeline through the Baltic Sea is expected to cost ˆ11 billion, and Nabucco probably seven to eight billion.

Isn’t South Stream just an attempt to torpedo the Nabucco project?

That won’t work.

How do you assess the offer made by Russia to RWE to join South Stream?

RWE has made a clear commitment to Nabucco. There would, however, be nothing stopping Russian companies from participating in Nabucco.

Which project is further advanced – South Stream or Nabucco?

So far, no important decisions have been made in the case of South Stream, and in particular nothing which costs money, unlike the situation with Nord Stream. There, the Russians drew up their investment plans quickly. To date, South Stream has involved only bilateral agreements, incurring some labour costs for the officials who draw them up, but otherwise only the cost of printing and paper.

Who can object to Russia’s making an effort to make the transport of gas more secure by avoiding Ukraine and Belarus, where transit has recently been unreliable?

If natural gas is being used as a lever to put pressure on Ukraine to resume its former close ties to Russia, that is something that Europe cannot accept. The Russian government should separate its economic interests from its political ambitions. From an economic perspective, South Stream makes no sense. Politically, it is not in Europe’s interests.

Turkey plays an important role in the political tug-of-war over Nabucco. Are the Turks using the project as a lever to exert pressure?

Turkey has never tried to exploit the Nabucco project as a means of exerting pressure in its negotiations to join the EU. It has a fundamental interest in reducing its dependence on Russian gas and oil supplies, and therefore has a strong interest in Nabucco happening. It is correct to say that Turkey would like to become an energy hub, given that geopolitically, it is perfectly positioned. It is only logical for it to play this particular card. Nabucco is of paramount importance to Turkey. That is not the case for South Stream, which will take the long round to avoid bothTurkey and the Ukraine.

Will Turkmenistan ever supply gas for Nabucco?

The deciding factor is whether Azerbaijan will plump for Nabucco. If it does, Turkmenistan will follow. Negotiations with Azerbaijan are well on their way. At the same time, supplies from northern Iraq are no longer merely an abstract hope. Things have progressed in the right direction during summer, and will continue on a positive course in the second half of the year.

Will the Nabucco consortium be able to keep to its schedule and reach a decision on the construction of Nabucco by the end of the year?

Schedules are planning tools. One does not have to carve every month and day in these plans in stone.

Gas from Turkmenistan would have to cross the Caspian Sea. Where do the biggest problems lie – questions of sovereignty or technical issues?

The problems are surmountable. The westernmost gas field in Turkmenistan and the easternmost gas field in Azerbaijan are only 70 km apart. It should be possible to bridge that gap.

Is Iran not an option as a supplier country? Russia is already highly active there …

Iranian gas plays no part in the plans for Nabucco. Nor, in view of the current political situation, could it.

There are many scientists and politicians who see the world facing a period of global imperialism based on energy and raw materials. Do you share this view?

I consider this to be nonsense. In our highly interlinked global economy, in which the success of all the participants depends on those links, any such strategy would be pointless.


Juergen Flauger, Klaus Stratmann
/Handelsblatt/