Serhiy Korsunskyi, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Ukraine to Turkey

Let me thank the organizers for inviting me to the Forum. We are talking about national energy strategies versus regional synergies. I would start, of course, from Russia. This country definitely has a strategy, and its strategy is very impressive. From my point of view, it is very simple and it includes several points that I would like to emphasize. First of all, it is to monopolize resources; second is to monopolize routes for their delivery; third, - to block inner diversification projects which may bring other resources rather than Russian and Central Asian through Russia to Europe, and, fourth, which is important as well, to divert attention and efforts of international community from real problems and real projects to surreal once, like South Stream, Blue Stream, North Stream or gas OPEC. Russians are very impressive in working with some governments of European countries to secure markets for future increasing gas delivery. What instruments we have to counter this strategy?

We have to accept it, we have to work with it, and we have to do something with it. I agree with Dr. Balmaceda that national strategies are very important. But I do believe that on the national level we cannot work with Russians and we cannot solve real energy security problems in Europe because this is the nature of modern world. No one can fight global problems alone. So, we need a kind of synergy or even synergies. NATO is one of kind of synergy we have. Ukrainian-Lithuanian-Azerbaijani-Georgian-Polish initiative which Mr. Sokolovskyi told us about, that is another good example of an attempt to develop regional synergy and to build a kind of pool of the countries to secure our common interests in working vis-a-vis Russians on gas transit and consumption as well. I also have to mention the EU plus Turkey plus Azerbaijan plus some other countries’ initiatives in trying to develop a famous now project Nabucco, which is becoming my favorite project together with Odesa-Brody, being a never ending story. Each year we talk about it again and again, again and again, where to get resources for Nabucco or Odesa-Brody and continuously we fail to do both. I would like to mention as well a synergy approach named the Energy Charter which was discussed on the previous panel, and failure of this important international body to deliver a comprehensive framework specifically on transit of energy resources from Central Asia to Europe. But from my point of view the biggest problem we have is lack of unified stance in the EU. Let me tell you that now I have interesting position, so I can tell you my impression from Ukrainian side and now from Turkish side, which is very important, crucially important country in other transit corridors from Caspian basin of Central Asian resources to Europe. And I can tell you that I’ve found a striking similarity in both countries – in Ukraine and in Turkey. In both cases instead of moving fast and decisively to those two countries to include them into European energy area, to secure existing energy transit corridor which is Ukraine and the future key a transit corridor for energy which is Turkey, the EU, I mean Brussels, is very reluctant to move decisively ahead and to work with both countries to bring them into partnership which will secure European interests, and interests of those countries as well. The example one of the panelist brought earlier today about positive attitude of the EU officials on South Stream project is a very striking example of lack of understanding in the most important regional synergy which should be a unified policy of the EU. I would like to stop on this positive point. Thank you.

Downloads