EURASIAN ENERGY SECURITY IN THE FACE OF RUSSO-UKRAINIAN TENSIONS AND TURKEY’S ROLE AS A POTENTIAL ENERGY HUB

Abstract

After the political and military crisis between Russia and Ukraine in 2014, the EU’s energy security was again in question. In fact, this was not the first time for the EU to question the reliability of the Russian energy supply. Similar disputes sparked controversies over gas prices in 2006 and 2009 in the context of efforts to maintain secure and reliable energy markets. Russia has often used its energy resources as an instrument of threat and blackmail in foreign policy relations with the EU, especially after the 2000s. Regarding alternative energy routes, Turkey has raised an important option since the end of the Cold War. Its location as a geographic bridge connecting east and west, as well as the strategic ownership of gas pipelines such as TANAP increase Turkey’s potential to contribute to the European energy security in case if it becomes a real energy hub rather than a transit country.

Keywords

• Energy security
• Nabucco
• TANAP
• Turkish Stream
• Russia

References

1. Aalto, Pami (2009). European Perspectives for Managing Dependence in Jeronim Perovic, Robert Orttung and Andreas Wenger, eds. Russian Energy Power and Foreign Relations. London: Routledge, 157-180.
2. Aseeva, Anna (2010). “Rethinking Europe’s Gas Supplies After the 2009 Russia-Ukraine Crisis”. China and Eurasia Forum Quarterly 8(1): 127-138.
3. Austvika, Ole G. and Gulmira Rzayeva (2017). “Turkey in the geopolitics of energy”. Energy Policy 107(2017): 539-547.
4. Baran, Zeyno (2005). The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline: Implications for Turkey in Frederick Starr and Svante Cornell, eds. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline: Oil Window to the West. Washington D.C.: Central Asia-Caucasus Institute.
5. Barysch, Katinka (2007). Russia, Realism and EU Unity. Centre for European Reform Policy Brief. Bbc.com (2014). Russia-Ukraine Gas Deal Secures EU Winter Supply. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/business-29842505. Accessed: 2.11.2018.
6. Bbc.com (2014a). Russia Drops South Stream Gas Pipeline Plan. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30283571. Accessed: 2.12.2017.
7. Belyi, Andrei (2005). “New Dimensions of Energy Security of the Enlarging EU and Their Impact on Relations with Russia”. European Integration 25(4): 351- 369.
8. Berger, Rupprecht (2005). Nabucco Gas Pipeline Project: Gas Bridge between Caspian Region/Middle East and Europe. Paper Presented at the 2nd Work Group Meeting on SEE Gas Industry Infrastructure Financing, Belgrade.

9. Bilgin, Mert (2007). “New Prospects in the Political Economy of Inner-Caspian Hydrocarbons and Western Energy Corridor through Turkey”. Energy Policy 35(12): 6383-6394.
10. Bloomberg.com (2014). Russia to Charge Ukraine More Than Germany as Gas Discounts End. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-04-03/russia-to-charge-ukraine-more-than-germany-as-gasdiscounts-end. Accessed: 18.04.2018.
11. Bloomberg.com (2014a). Gazprom Raises Gas Export Price as Ukraine Looks for Cash. Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-01/gazprom-raises-gas-export-price-as-ukraine-looks-for-cash.html. Accessed: 2.04.2018.
12. Brzezinski, Zbigniew (1997). The Grand Chessboard. New York: Basic Books.
13. Brzoska, Michael (2004). “The Economics of Arms Imports after the End of the Cold War”. Defence and Peace Economics 15(2): 111-123.
14. Chevalier, Jean-Marie (2009). The New Energy Crisis: Climate, Economics and Geopolitics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
15. Cornell, Svante E., Mamuka Tsereteli and Vladimir Socor (2005). Geostrategic Implications of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline in F. Starr and S. Cornell, eds. The Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Pipeline: Oil Window to the West. Washington D.C.: The Central Asia-Caucasus Institute.
16. Dannreuther, Roland (2006). “Developing the Alternative to Enlargement: The European Neighbourhood Policy”. European Foreign Affairs Review 11(2): 183-201.
17. Dyer, Hugh and Maria J. Trombetta, (2013). The Concept of Energy Security: Broadening, Deepening Transforming in Dyer, Hugh and Trombetta Maria J., eds. International Handbook of Energy Security. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.: Northampton.
18. Elkind, Jonathan (2010). Energy Security: Call for a Broader Agenda in C. Pascual and J. Elkind, eds. Energy Security: Economics, Politics, Strategies, and Implications. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution.
19. European Commission (2014). European Energy Security Strategy. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/energy/publications/european-energy-securitystrategy_ en. Accessed: 3.06.2020.
20. European Commission (2015). Joint Declaration. March 16. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/commissioners/2019-2024_en. Accessed: 19.01.2020.
21. European Commission (2020). EU Imports of Energy Products - Recent Developments. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/ pdfscache/46126.pdf. Accessed: 19.01.2020.
22. Evgrashina, Lada (2012). Azerbaijani Oil Fund to Help Finance TANAP Gas Pipeline. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/06/azerbaijan- energy-idUSL5E8M6C1P20121106. Accessed: 17.11.2018.
23. Fredholm, Michael (2005). The Russian Energy Strategy and Energy Policy: Pipeline Diplomacy or Mutual Dependence? Conflict Studies Research Centre Russian Series 5/41.
24. Fuller, Graham (2008). The New Turkish Republic: Turkey as a Pivotal State in the Muslim World. United States Institute of Peace Press: Washington, D.C.
25. Gazprom.com (2017). Yamal-Europe. Retrieved from http://www.gazprom.com/about/production/projects/pipelines/yamal-evropa/. Accessed: 12.11.2017.
26. Gazpromexport.ru (2018). Delivery Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.gazpromexport.ru/en/statistics/. Accessed: 18.11.2018.
27. Goldthau, Andreas and Tim Boersma (2014). “The 2014 Ukraine-Russia Crisis: Implications for Energy Markets and Scholarship”. Energy Research and Social Science 3(2014): 13-15.
28. Grigas, Agnia (2017). The New Geopolitics of Natural Gas. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, London.
29. Guliyev, Farid (2014). TANAP: Economics over Politics. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/azeri/azerbaijan/2014/09/140920_enregy_projects_analysis, Accessed: 12.10.2014.
30. Hakura, Fadi (2005). Partnership is No Privilege: the Alternative to EU Membership is No Turkish Delight. Chatham House European Program Briefing Paper 5/2.
31. Heath, Edward (1969). “Realism in British Policy”. Foreign Affairs 48(1): 39-50.
32. Interfax-Ukraine (2014). Crimean Authorities not Ruling out Future Privatization of Chornomornaftogaz. Retrieved from http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/crimean-authorities-not-ruling-out-future-privatization-ofchornomornaftogaz-339347.html. Accessed: 6.09.2019.
33. International Energy Agency (2010). Key World Energy Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/energy/key-world-energy-statistics- 2010_9789264095243-en. Accessed: 3.06.2020.
34. Jarosiewicz, Aleksandra (2014). The Launch of the Modified Southern Gas Corridor. Retrieved from https://www.naturalgasworld.com/launch-modifiedsouthern- gas-corridor-bte-tanap-tap. Accessed: 11.10.2019.
35. Kalicki, Jan H. and David L. Goldwyn, eds. (2005). Energy and Security: Toward a New Foreign Policy Strategy. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
36. Kaplan, Robert D. (2018). The Geopolitics of Energy. Stratfor Worldview. Retrieved from https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/geopolitics-energy. Accessed: 25.10.2020.
37. Karakelle, Abdulkadir (2014). TANAP to Provide Energy Security to EU, Turkey: Experts. Retrieved from http://www.dailysabah.com/energy/2014/09/21/tanapto- provide-energy-security-to-eu-turkey-experts, Accessed: 17.11.2017.
38. Kim, Younkyoo and Stephen Blank (2016). “The New Great Game of Caspian Energy in 2013-14: ‘Turk Stream’, Russia and Turkey”. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 18(1): 37-55.
39. Klare, Michael T. (2001). Resource Wars: The New Landscape of Global Conflict. New York: Owl Books.
40. Kovacevic, Aleksandar (2009). The Impact of the Russia–Ukraine Gas Crisis in South Eastern Europe. The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
41. Kuser, Michael (2006). Turkey Boosts its Role as Strategic Energy Hub. Business Week Online.
42. Larrabee, Stephen (2011). “Turkey’s Eurasian Agenda”. The Washington Quarterly 34(1): 103-120.
43. Liuhto, Kari (2009). The EU Needs a Common Energy Policy – Not Separate Solutions by Its Member States in Kari Liuhto. ed., EU–Russia Gas Connection: Pipes, Politics and Problems. Turku: Publications of Pan-European Institute.
44. Lough, John (2011). Russia’s Energy Diplomacy, Chatham House Briefing Paper. Retrieved from https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/ 19352_0511bp_lough.pdf. Accessed: 15.02.2016.
45. Mané-Estrada, Aurelia (2006). “European Energy Security: Towards the Creation of the Geo-Energy Space”. Energy Policy 34(18): 3773-3786.
46. Mackinder, Halford J. (1904). “The Geographical Pivot of History”. The Geographical Journal 23(4): 421-444.
47. McFaul, Michael (2006). Importing Revolution: Internal and External Factors in Ukraine’s 2004 Democratic Breakthrough. CDDRL Working Papers.
48. Mearsheimer, John J. (2014). “Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West’s Fault: The Liberal Delusions That Provoked Putin”. Foreign Affairs 93(5): 77-89.
49. Melville, Toby (2014). BP to Become Member of TANAP Pipeline Project before the End of 2014. Retrieved from http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/10/27/ukazerbaijan-tanap-idUKKBN0IG1SK20141027. Accessed: 11.11.2017.
50. Naturalgasworld.com (2014). Troubled Waters for the Southern Corridor? Retrieved from https://www.naturalgasworld.com/southern-gas-corridor. Accessed: 17.11.2018.
51. Norling, Nicklas (2007). Gazprom’s Monopoly and Nabucco’s Potentials: Strategic Decisions for Europe. Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, Silk Road Paper.
52. Okumus, Olgu (2013). What Did Turkey Lose When EU Lost Nabucco? Retrieved from http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/07/eunabucco.html. Accessed: 15.11.2018.
53. Pamir, Necdet (2007). “The Black Sea: A Gateway to Energy Security and Diversification”. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 7(2): 245–263.
54. Pascu, Mircea (2006). Now the EU Must Awaken to Black Sea Security. Retrieved from http://www.europesworld.org/NewEnglish/Home_old/Article/ tabid/191/ArticleType/articleview/ArticleID/20380/language/en-US/Default.aspx. Accessed: 18.03.2011.
55. Pirani, Simon, Jonathan Stern and Katja Yafimava (2009). The Russo-Ukrainian Gas Dispute of January 2009: A Comprehensive Assessment. The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
56. Rzayeva, Gulmira (2014). TANAP – Hazar Gazini Avrupa’ya Tasiyan Atilim Projesi (TANAP - Venture Project Carrying Caspian Gas to Europe). Retrieved from http://www.hazar.org/UserFiles/yayinlar/MakaleAnalizler/Gulmira_Rzayeva.pdf. Accessed: 16.11.2014.
57. Sempa, Francis P. (2002). Geopolitics: from the Cold War to the 21st Century. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
58. Siddi Marco (2017). “The EU’s Gas Relationship with Russia: Solving Current Disputes and Strengthening Energy Security”. Asia Europe Journal 15(1): 107-117.
59. Smith, Keith C. (2006). Security Implications of Russian Energy Policies. CEPS Policy Brief, No.90.
60. Socor, Vladimir (2009). Chancellor Merkel Says Nein to Nabucco. Retrieved from http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1andtx_ttnews[tt_news]=34679. Accessed: 19.06.2011.
61. Sonmez, Osman, Hasan Mikail E. and Cihan Kucukyildiz (2013). “Azerbaijan is in the TANAP, TAP, and South Stream Project Triangle at the Deadlock of Nabucco”. Chinese Business Review 12(12): 814-820.
62. Soldatkin, Vladimir (2019). “Gazprom Grabs Record Share of Europe Gas Market despite Challenges”. Retrieved from https://cn.reuters.com/article/usrussia- gazprom-europe/gazprom-grabs-record-share-of-europe-gas-market-despite-challenges-idUSKCN1QF067. Accessed: 7.10.2020.
63. Sovacool, Benjamin K. (2010). Routledge Handbook of Energy Security. London: Routledge.
64. Statistical Report (2013). Eurogas. Retrieved from http://www.eurogas.org/uploads/media/Eurogas_Statistical_Report_2013.pdf, Accessed: 1.02.2014.
65. Stern, Jonathan (2006). The Russian-Ukrainian Gas Crisis of January 2006. The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
66. Stern, Jonathan, Simon Pirani and Katja Yafimava (2015). Does the Cancellation of South Stream Signal a Fundamental Reorientation of Russian Gas Export Policy? Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. Oxford Energy Comment.
67. Tagliapietra, Simone (2014). EU-Turkey Energy Relations after the 2014 Ukraine Crisis. Natural Gas Europe. Retrieved from http://www.naturalgaseurope.com/ eu-turkey-energy-relations-after-2014-ukraine-crisis. Accessed: 17.11.2019.
68. Tekin, Ali and Paul A. Williams (2011). Geo-politics of the Euro-Asia Energy Nexus- The European Union, Russia and Turkey. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
69. Theguardian.com (2018). Putin Blames EU as Russia Abandons Plans for South Stream Gas Pipeline. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/ business/2014/dec/01/russia-blames-eu-as-it-abandons-plans-for-south-streamgas-pipeline. Accessed: 2.12.2014.
70. Trenin, Dmitri (2015). “The Ukraine Crisis and the Resumption of Great Power Rivalry”. Politička Misao 52(2): 231-233.
71. von Hippel, David F., Tatsujiro Suzuki, James H. Williams, Timothy Savage and Peter Hayes (2010). Evaluating the Energy Security Impacts of Energy Policies in Sovacool, Benjamin K. Evaluating the Energy Security Impacts of Energy Policies. ed. London: Routledge.
72. Winrow, Gareth. (2001). Turkish National Interests in Yelena Kalyuzhnova, Amy M. Jaffe, Dov Lynch, Robin Sickles. eds., Energy in the Caspian Region: Present and Future, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
73. Winrow, Gareth (2011). “Turkey: An Emerging Energy Transit State and Possible Energy Hub”. The International Spectator 46(3): 79-91.
74. Yafimava, Katja (2020). ‘Finding a Home’ for Global LNG in Europe: Understanding the Complexity of Access Rules for EU Import Terminals. Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. NG 157.
75. Yilmaz, Suhnaz and Tahir M. Kilavuz (2012). Restoring Brotherly Bonds: Turkish-Azerbaijani Energy Relations. PONARS Eurasia Policy Memo No. 240.