Drakakhrust: "September 19, the European Commission made proposals on the reform of the EU energy market, which rightfully can be called revolutionary. Sense proposal is, in the 1-x, in the de-monopolization of the state of energy markets in the countries of the Union, and in-2, in the transference the level of the whole Union questions about selling energy infrastructure of Union foreign monopolies. Simply speaking, the national gas and oil monopolies, say, France, Germany, Italy must be broken, and the question, for example, the sale of "Gazprom" British gas distribution networks must address The European Commission, with the most likely solve negatively.
It should be noted that the Belarusian municipal media, ideologically not seen in the love of economic liberalization, hot Brussels welcomed the proposals to reform» of a united Europe. There are two questions: how this concept can be realized? And second — which benefits from its implementation, or even attempts to implement Belarus can get? "
Rahr: "It is very hard to say yet how Belarus would be able to fit into the latest EU energy doctrine. Necessary to say that in the Union, the European Commission received new offers versatile. Struggle about the future of European politics is inside the Euro Union.
What the Commission proposes, excellent for small countries and for those countries where gas and oil industry absolutely privatized. In France, it is certainly not so in Germany, too, there is a huge monopoly in the oil and gas industries, so that at least those two countries will oppose these proposals.
Our homeland, which does not go into the European Union is obviously also be against the new regulations. Belarus, which is one of the main transit Russian energoelementov the West, of course, is "yes" with 2 hands, as it will benefit from the decentralization of these monopolies in Europe, including "Gazprom" if it continued to be one of the main suppliers to the European market. So Belarus in this great energy game will find their niche.
But not all so simple. In 1-x, very very Belarus is dependent on Russian energoelementov. I can not imagine for themselves which method Azerbaijani oil can now enter Belarus. And in-2, Belarus itself very late in the privatization of its energy transport systems. And the European Union will create some difficulties in cooperation with the state, where the government has such great control over the economy. "
Drakakhrust: "Statements that are heard from the lips of European representatives in the last days, causing some surprise. Last week, a senior official of the European Union, Javier Solana, in an interview with the Ukrainian weekly said that Europe will not even talk to Minsk in energy security, while Belarus will not make significant steps towards democratization. And this week Minsk arrives Energy Charter Secretary General Andre Marne and leads negotiations with the Belarusian dense bureaucrat that it would be good Belarus to ratify the document. Representatives of the Belarusian authorities show willingness and Tipo, but nod to Moscow.
In short, a dialogue still obviously occurs with one of the fundamental institutions of a united Europe, responsible for just energy. How, then, about the application of the sovereign Solana and other representatives of the European Union, that "we can not have a dialogue with the last dictatorship in Europe"? Sovereign Rahr, how would you comment this contradiction? "
Rahr: "I hit the statements of officials and politicians from the European Commission, who love to act on behalf of the whole of Europe, on behalf of the European industry, on personal business. I believe that it is frivolous. These ladies and gentlemen taught his vision of how the EU should conduct business. But in fact this is not so.
Emperor Sarkozy’s own energy policy is not fully looked at Brussels, and makes in North Africa, he wants. I believe that the German company if they currently receive benefits in Belarus, also will not open a discussion of their business plans with Ms Ferrero-Waldner either sovereign Solana.
Especially since this is true of energy policy. Capital is not where he says the emperor Solana, and to where he can work productively. So if Belarus will open and will privatize its economy to the role of foreign investors, then things will go well.
But if Lukashenka want to keep everything in his own hands and hopes that someone in the West will help him preserve the system that exists in Belarus, I think he will soon lose these illusions.
Energy strategy is being developed in conjunction with energy companies and not in the offices of Ms Ferrero-Waldner or sovereign Solana. If the energy dialogue is conducted with Russia, he will cut one transit countries — Ukraine, Poland, the Baltics, Belarus, as without it? And commercial benefits plus those pipes that would either not be prakladatstsa.
Obviously, this policy dialogue will play a huge role. But we can not forget the general economic nuance. Pipelines do not build the country, and the company, we often forget about it.
But I repeat — all depends on how the economic way to go Belarus. I assure you that if there begin reforms which the EU expects more than 10 years, the West will want to participate. And it will seek to make economic, political and energy policy dialogue with Minsk. "
Drakakhrust: "Well, in the end — about the events of a week ago, Alexander Lukashenko’s speech at the celebration of" Dozhinki. "Among other things, the President has fallen sharply criticized for" Gazprom ", stating that prices for Belarus Russian monopolist sets are the same as for Germany, and expressed hope that the agreement on gas for the next year will be signed "to fight the Christmas chimes."
I would not want to get anyone’s side, but it seems that in the past year December 31 specifically a chiming clock signed a contract on gas supplies and transit not only for this year, was picked clear formula gradual increase in prices with the release in 2011 on the average European prices. If so, then what is the cause of accusations and arguments, if it will work in This year time to sign a contract? And if this is not so, how? "
Rahr: "I believe after First, quite a dramatic increase in gas prices, when six months have passed, in Minsk began convulsively count and realized that Belarus may not be of such funds to pay the highest price as Russian gas. And in Minsk seek out any ability that conditions with Russia differently. But it is very difficult.
Belarus is at a critical point of its own history, it should allow a their country investors — Russian, and who are currently working in the country or western. This is a fundamental political decision which must take leadership in Belarus. It’s hard because at the moment Lukashenko and his associates at the moment trying at the last minute to agree with Putin’s Russia or in their own pressure on Russia, which in the European context is also in a difficult position. It should also come up with a strategy, as further work with the West, and when the Russian front in the West, many doors are locked.
This strategy is diplomacy by Belarus at the moment is in relation to Russia. But I think that in the end "Gazprom" fails in its own terms and with transit countries and the European Union. It is very sensitive, especially here in Germany, dependence on Russian gas revenues. "