[ad_1]
Despite the significant reduction in dependence on Russian gas from 40% to 12%, some EU member states want to continue receiving gas supplies from Russia, increasing their collective energy security. and endangering political autonomy.
Recent calls for a transit extension by Slovakia and Austria highlight this dilemma and clash with the EU’s REPowerEU plan to end dependence on Russian fossil fuels by 2027.
Continued dependence on Russian gas will not only undermine the unity and cohesion of the EU, but will also strengthen Russia’s ability to invade Ukraine.
This underlines the urgency of a clear and unified EU position to stop all gas imports (pipelines and LNG) from Russia and build a secure and independent energy future for the Central and Eastern European region. There is.
In 2023, Russia’s pipeline gas sales to Europe are estimated at 25 bcm (1 billion cubic meters), of which 14.56 bcm passed through Ukraine. About 12 bcm were sent to EU member states Slovakia, Austria and Italy, bringing in about $6 billion to Russia.
Austria is a major importer of Russian gas, accounting for almost half of total imports in the past 12 months. Italy also received significant quantities of Russian gas (estimated at 3-4 bcm) through pipelines through Ukraine. Slovakia imports nearly 2 bcm, with about a third of its imports coming from Russia via Ukraine.
Notes that for these countries gas imports from the Russian Federation are no longer determined by technical limitations of gas infrastructure or gas shortages on the EU gas market, but purely by economic and political considerations This is very important.
Other interesting topics
Belgium investigates EU lawmakers accused of accepting bribes from Russian government
Belgium is concerned about an alleged Russian propaganda plot targeting the European Parliament.
Russia is keen to maintain its presence in the lucrative European gas market, seeking continued revenue streams and political influence over European countries. Pro-Russian politicians in Europe, along with their Russian counterparts, have begun lobbying for continued passage.
The situation escalated on March 26, when Russia attacked and damaged gas transportation and storage infrastructure in western Ukraine for the first time, and notified the EU that the EU could not store gas in Ukraine unless Russian gas passed through Ukraine.
For Ukraine, the continuity of traffic after 2024 is not important from an economic or technological point of view. In 2023, Ukraine’s transit fees from Russia amounted to about $800 million, accounting for only 0.46% of GDP.
The passage also raises very difficult political questions for the Ukrainian government, as the country’s population does not support such cooperation with Russia amid the ongoing conflict. Therefore, Ukraine’s position is to refrain from direct negotiations with the Russian Federation on the extension of the transit agreement beyond 2024.
However, this vague description leaves room for various interpretations. Some European leaders see this as an opportunity to continue receiving gas from Russia via Ukraine. As the contract deadline approaches, Slovak and Austrian officials have expressed support for continued transit.
In response to claims that gas transport should stop in 2025, Austria’s energy regulator said: “E-Control maintains that transport can continue as long as the pipeline remains intact.”
Alfred Stern, CEO of Austrian energy company OMV, declared: “As long as Gazprom supplies…we will continue to receive these quantities from Gazprom.”
During a recent visit to Ukraine, Slovakia’s newly elected Prime Minister Roberto Fico said: Probably, without the direct participation of Ukrainian companies … I think they will. [the Ukrainians] This is an issue that concerns not only Slovakia, but also Italy and Austria, which support this idea, so it would be a big mistake to not create conditions for the transport of Russian gas to Europe. ”
These statements by politicians who support continued transit completely contradict the NATO leadership’s vision that the alliance should prepare for the possibility of military conflict with Russia within three to five years. .
Unfortunately, the European Commission has not been able to help reach an agreement on the implementation of sanctions against Russian LNG and pipeline gas. Instead, it gave each EU member state the opportunity to independently decide whether to impose sanctions on Russian gas.
Clearly, Ukraine and Slovakia should not be at odds over the extension of the transport contract beyond 2024.
Instead, these countries should work together to develop innovative business models. Imagine the possibility of integrating Europe’s largest gas storage facility in Ukraine with the Western gas hub through Slovakia and co-creating a regional gas hub.
We envision the establishment of a robust north-south gas corridor that seamlessly connects Greek and Turkish LNG terminals with gas markets in Central and Western Europe via the Transbalkan Pipeline.
Now is the best time for the EU to ban the import of Russian gas and LNG via Ukraine, demonstrating solidarity and determination to move away from dependence on Russian energy resources and reduce the Russian state’s export earnings. be.
Sergiy Makogon is a senior energy expert and former CEO of Gas TSO of Ukraine (2019-2022)
[ad_2]
Source link
