Putin leaves Azerbaijan With Limited Improvements

Russian President Vladimir Putin traveled to Azerbaijan in August 2013 to enhance Russian interests in the near abroad.  He was accompanied by six key ministers, including the Russian Minister of Defense, Sergei Shoigu and Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov.

The visit was surrounded by rumors.  Leonid Gusev, senior research fellow of the Institute of International Studies, Moscow State Institute of International Relations, focused on the inclusion of the defense minister.  "Why take Shoigu with you?  Because recently there was information that Azerbaijan and Turkey will create a unified army, and Georgia may join as well.  I think that the leadership of Russia wants to find out what it is, because you understand that Turkey is a NATO country."  Gusev's sources were remarks from Azerbaijani parliamentarian Zakhid Orudzh and Georgian Defense Minister Irakli Alasania.

Gusev's imaginings were quickly dismissed by Azerbaijani parliamentarian and political scientist Rasim Musabekov.  "There are issues in the military area that should be discussed," he said.  "It is not just military cooperation.  It is very important to consider issues that may affect Azerbaijan, such as the situation on the Caspian Sea where military activity has been gaining momentum; there is also the Iranian context, Middle East events and, most importantly, the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.  It is difficult to imagine the settlement of this conflict without Russia."

The Armenians also reacted negatively, convinced that the meeting would result in closer ties between Russia and Azerbaijan.  "Naturally, any bilateral relationship between our enemy and partner states cannot fail to worry us," said the chairman of the Armenian parliamentary committee on foreign relations.  "Azerbaijan is ready to exploit its relationship with any state for painting a distorted picture of its actions in the region."  Similarly, Armenian opposition leaders sounded the alarm.  Armenian National Congress spokesman Vladimir Karapetian said, "These are very worrisome developments for Armenia.  We must be prepared for further developments, especially in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process."  Gior Manoyan of the Dashnaks criticized the Russian president, stating the visit was "not an ally's behavior."

The Armenians need not have worried.  Azerbaijani president Ilham Aliyev tried to enlist Putin's cooperation on the issue.  "Azerbaijan would like to see Russia as a referee," he said.  "The occupation of Azerbaijani land has continued for more than two decades.  What could be demolished has been demolished.  Twenty percent of our territory is occupied; the U.N. resolutions remain on paper."  In reply, Putin responded with a bland statement that any solution would have to be political.  "I want to stress that Russia is actively facilitating the search for the fastest conflict resolution, which is only attainable by peaceful means," he said.

Relations between the two countries have been strained over the past year.  Against Russia's wishes, Baku cancelled its use of the Baku-Novorossysk pipeline because it was uneconomical, and Russia cancelled its lease of the Gabala radar station rather than pay the rent Azerbaijan was demanding.  Despite these setbacks, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov insisted the relationship had been neither affected nor deteriorated. 

Emphasizing the good relations between the two countries, President Aliyev highlighted the growing defense cooperation between them.  He said that Azerbaijan was among the top buyers of Russian arms and other military equipment, and the defense relationship was already worth $4 billion dollars.  This defense cooperation was highlighted by a visit of the Russian warship the Dagestan.

Missing from the summit’s summary were any agreements for Azerbaijan to join in Russian initiatives such as the Commonwealth of Independent States Free Trade Area (CISFTA), Eurasian Economic community (EurAsEC), or the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTAO-Azerbaijan allowed its membership to lapse in 1999)

The two presidents discussed the legal status of the Caspian Sea, a long-running dispute with ramifications for the underwater deposits of oil and gas there.    Putin described the discussion to reporters:  “During the talks we paid a lot of attention to the issues of the Caspian region,” reported Radio Liberty.  “There really are a very great number of unresolved problems, including security, border delimitation, preservation of biological diversity of the Caspian Sea, etc.  We have a vested interest in seeing all of these issues solved.”  In the past, Russia has used these issues to demand a veto over Azerbaijani proposals to build a Trans Caspian Pipeline.  No progress appears to have been made on these issues.

There were some positive results from the meeting.  The Russkiy Mir Foundation reported that a document on cooperation between emergency ministries was signed, as well as intergovernmental agreements on cooperation in air search and rescue, on the construction of a road bridge over the river that marks the border between the two countries, and a humanitarian cooperation program.

More importantly, Rosneft chief Igor Sechin signed an agreement with State Oil Company of the Azerbaijan Republic (SOCAR) cheif Rovnag Abdullaev.  The two CEOs pledged to cooperate on unspecified joint projects.  Sechin told reporters these would include "reciprocal deliveries, swap operations and opportunities for the use of joint infrastructure."  Rosneft subsequently released a statement that, "The companies agreed to cooperate in marketing and trading operations for hydrocarbons and petroleum products as well as jointly operate certain infrastructure facilities, such as pipelines and terminals."

In the end, both Azerbaijan and Russia emphasized the agreements that were signed, and labeled the visit a success.  On balance, however, when one balances what was achieved with the issues that were left unresolved, one can only conclude that Putin left empty-handed.  The summit meeting, Putin's first visit to Baku in seven years, was a lost opportunity.

Transcaspian Edging Closer to Beginning

The long-awaited Trans Capian Pipeline (TCP) continues to edge closer to a start date.  As recently as August 2011, Turkmenistan President Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov remained cagey about his commitment to the project.  Told of European Union interest in building the pipeline, the President said that cooperation with the EU was a "strategic priority" for his country, and that any proposals would be studied.
Things changed on 12 September 2011, when the EU proposed a binding, union-wide treaty with Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan to support the pipeline. EU Energy Commissioner Gunther Oettinger issued a statement that "Europe is now speaking with one voice.  The trans-Caspian pipeline is a major project in the Southern Corridor to bring new sources of gas to Europe.  We have the intention of achieving this as soon as possible."  In reply, Italian Industry Minister Paolo Romani commented, "Now, with the mandate of 27 countries, Oettinger has sought to bring...clarity, calling (Gazprom-backed) South Stream an atempt by Russia to hamper the realization of the alternative Nabucco gas pipeline, actively supported by Europe."

Berdymukhamedov flew to Austria to discuss the project  "Today, we get down to work on the contractual and legal basis for supplying Turkmen energy to Europe," he said.  "We are inclined to hold a constructive energy dialogue with Europe."  Separately, EU Special Representative for Central Asia Pierre Morel said that the EU is willing to fund a good part of the TCP.

In February 2012, Azerbaijani Minister of Industry and Energy Natiq Aliyev confirmed the legal framework was being established to build the pipeline.  He said the three parites were preparing a political document to support the Southern Gas Corridor, and an inter-governmental agreement on the TCP.  Aliyev predicted the documents would be completed by the end of the year.  By March 2012, energy consultant Robert Cutler was reporting that he had heard from multiple sources that Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan had overcome bilateral diplomatic disputes, and had reached an agreement to build the TCP.  Cutler reported that Turkmenistan would rely on the EU to overcome Russian opposition to the project.

With the TCP moving closer to reality, other countries are expressing an interest in Turkmen gas.  Ukraine, which is involved in natural gas price disputes with Russia and being eclipsed as a transit route by Nord Stream and (possibly) South Stream, wants to join the TCP project.  Ukranian Prime Minster Mykola Azarov told Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev that "Ukraine is interested in the implementation of the Trans-Caspian gas pipeline project." Turkmenistan had previously offered to sell Ukraine its gas for $5 per thousand square meters less than the price they charge China but, until now, there has not been any serious discussions on how the gas would be delivered.

To stop construction, the Russians have offered to renew their purchases of Turkmen gas.  Before 2009, Russia had been Turkmenistan's principle purchaser of natural gas.  When they cut back on purchases, pressure in the pipeline dropped which caused an explosion.  Previously, Russia had been buying 48 bcm of gas from Turkmenistan; in 2010 it was only 10.5.  According to the Russian newspaper Kommersant, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Berdymukhamedov met in December 2011 and Medvedev planned to offer to buy 80-90 bcm per year.  This would have effectively taken up all the spare Turkmen gas production, leaving it unable to support the TCP.

Russia continues to oppose the project, and this opposition makes Azerbaijan nervous.  According to Alexander Karavayev, deputy general director of Moscow State University's Information and Analytical Center, Moscow's attitude toward the TCP has been negative from the beginning.  "I find it hard to imagine the conditions under which Moscow would be happy to agree to alternative access for European consumers to Central Asian gas...Moscow will try to prevent the emergence of this pipeline.  The talks on commercial competition and transparency of access to resources are fair and important, but behind them lie the tough games and interests of the superpowers...Baku fears possible confrontation with Moscow over the Trans Caspian."  Alexander Ruhr, director of the Russian/Eurasia program, German Council, on Foreign relations, concurs.  He warns that the opposition to the pipeline from Russia and Iran is so intense, "If Turkmeistan were to lay out the pipeline a conflict might break out."

Russia and Iran have cited a number of reasons for their opposition:  the legal status of the Caspian has not been resolved, meaning all littoral states needed to approve any pipeline project; their is an environmental risk if the pipeline ruptures; there is a possibility that the pipeline could be destroyed by earthquake, etc.  All these arguments are negated by the two countries' own construction in the Caspian of offshore oil platforms and connecting pipelines.  As an example, in April 2012 a Lukoil susidiary gave a contract to build a 40 kilometer contract to build upderwater pipelines linking the Filanovskoye and Korchagin deposits.

Is Nabucco a Pipeline or a Pipe Dream?

Nabucco is even further from completion today than it was a year ago. There is no commitment for feedstock, and no real financing. Other competitors for the same initial gas, the Trans Adriatic Pipeline (TAP) and the Interconnector Turkey-Greece-Italy (ITGI), have a better chance of success because they are less ambitious, and less costly. The only possible way for Nabucco to survive appears to be in partnership with one of these smaller pipelines, or with its Russian-backed rival, South Stream.

In May, the pipeline announced it was pushing back the start of construction by three years to 2013, and the start of operations would be delayed until 2017. According to Nabucco managing director, the delay is due to the uncertainty surrounding the supply of raw materials, reports Russia Profile. Reinhard Mitschek said in a conference call that construction would start "as soon as there are firm indications that gas supply commitments are in place."

There are a number of indicators that Nabucco remains a serious contender. Reuters reports that the CEO of one of Nabucco's partners, OMV, insists that the pipeline will be completed despite delays and costs overruns. Turkey's energy and natural resources minister Taner Yildiz is on record stating the "Realization of the Nabucco project is among the key priorities for the Turkish government," according to the website Today.Az. In January, EC President Jose Manuel Barroso visited Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan to discuss the pipeline. "Our goal is to have the clear commitments of those countries regarding the Southern Corridor and including, of course, Nabucco," wrote Hurriyet Daily News. European Energy Commission Guenther Oettinger remains a strong supporter, telling Austria's Die Presse that Nabucco owners must be bold and construct the project, because there are enough supplies to build it. "It is clear that there is a certain risk. but if you want to try and make profits without risk, well that doesn't work," he said according to Reuters.


Bulgaria is willing to issue state guarantees for loans taken by state-owned Bulgarian Energy Holding to fund the project, according to Economy and Energy Minister Traicho Traikov as reported in the Sofia Echo. Bulgarian Prime Minister Boiko Borissov said the European Investment Bank was willing to extent a 1.2 billion euro banking guarantee to finance Bulgaria's share of the project, representing 100% of Bulgaria's operation, according to the Sofia Echo.

The Fukiyama nuclear disaster, and Europe's reaction to it, seem to be helping the Nabucco cause. In June, the Nabucco consortium signed agreements with transit countries, confirming that the laws of 2011 would apply regardless of what year the pipeline were built, according to UPI. Claudia Kemfert, an energy analyst at the DIW economic institute (Berlin) said, "The new German energy strategy will be a push for Nabucco. It seemed almost dead but the nuclear decision revived it," according to Hurriyet Daily News.

Despite all the positive play, the difficulties for Nabucco seem insurmountable. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin identified some of these issues when he said, "Nabucco's major problem is a lack of guaranteed volumes of raw materials and no source to fill the system...Russia will not deliver anything there, Iranian deposits are not explored, and Azerbaijan's volumes are small. Moreover, Azerbaijan has signed a delivery contract with Russia," according to RIA Novosti. Since the initial gas is supposed to come from Azerbaijan, Putin was saying there was not enough volume to both fill the Russian contract and the pipeline at the same time.

Indeed, State Oil Company of Azerbaijan (SOCAR) Vice President Elshad Nassirov was lukewarm about Nabucco in an interview last year that was published in the European Energy Review. Nassirov said that Azerbaijan was not prepared to "put all its eggs in one basket," meaning the Southern Corridor; that Azerbaijan would decide on which pipeline to support based on purchase prices, and transportation terms and tariffs; that it was conceivable that the Azeri gas would be sold only in Turkey and Azerbaijan; that if a pipeline was operating below capacity (because Azerbaijan is only promising 10 bcm per year and Nabucco can carry 31 bcm) Azerbaijan would not subsidize the pipeline's operation.

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev reiterated his neutrality when speaking to the World Economic Forum in Davos. He said he was giving equal priority to Nabucco as he was to other projects, according to Reuters. In an interview with Rossiya-24 television, he again hedged his support. "We support this project (Nabucco) but with respect to mutual interests. Primarily, we must secure commercial interests and ensure fair prices. There are very many issues related to the transit of our gas, its price for the end consumer and the financing issues of building a new gas pipeline, the role of Azerbaijan as a transit country, since it is clear that Nabucco cannot be filled only with Azerbaijani gas." Aliyev said the Southern Corridor was not just Nabucco, but included at least two other options.

As for the United States, Richard Morningstar continues to hedge his bets. As reported in News.Az, he said at a Baku press conference, "We prefer the Southern Corridor as a whole... As far as what's preferable from the strategic standpoint...the Nabucco pipeline would be the most preferable...we would support any of those pipelines. The question that one will have ultimately to determine is whether a Nabucco pipeline is commercially viable...If a determination is made that the full Nabucco pipeline is not commercially viable...then one would have to look at a smaller approach that would expand as more gas becomes available. That could be ITGI, it could be TAP, or it could even be some form of Nabucco." Morningstar also commented that a merger of the Southern Corridor projects would be helpful.

Since Azerbaijan will not commit its gas resources to Nabucco, the pipeline needs to look at alternative sources such as Turkmenistan, Iraq or Iran. According to Andreas Heinrich, a researcher at the University of Bremen's Center for East Asian Studies, the project does not have a chance unless Central Asian partners, especially Turkmenistan, join the project, according to Today.Az. Turkmenistan is on record as stating they can provide as much natural gas as the pipeline can handle, but has insisted that someone must build a Transcaspian Pipeline to get the gas to the Azeri side of the sea. Political considerations make Iranian gas problematic, and Iraq has not committed to Nabucco, according to UPI. "We have an agreement with the European Union where Iraq is going to supply the EU with some gas, not necessarily from Nabucco," says Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister for Energy Hussein al-Sharistani. "Iraq is not committed to that project."

Even if the source of gas is eventually determined, BP may have administered a death blow to an independent Nabucco when they doubled it's assessment of the cost of construction to almost 14 billion euros.


In addition, human rights organizations are opposed to Nabucco. On 20 January 2011, a group of 37 civil society groups sent a letter to the International Finance Corporation, which is planning to invest 800 million euros in the project. According to Eurasianet, the letter characterized Nabucco as unsustainable, and called for a review that would involve both supply and transit countries. The activists want civil society concerns factored into the equation. They also point out that it will be difficult to get oil from Turkmenistan across the Caspian, as the legal status of the Caspian remains unresolved. They posit that it would be difficult to get approval from Iran and Russia to build a Trans Caspian pipeline. The group also discusses the possibility of earthquakes and ecological damage.

ENI's CEO summarized the criticisms of Nabucco in testimony before the European Parliament: "We have never seen a pipeline, which needs tens of billions of dollars of investment, that does not have a gas producer as a partner. Nabucco is a consortium of gas consumers, so from our point of view it is not a solid project," reported the M&C website.


There is a possibly viable alternative: the merger of Nabucco with South Stream. In December, Turkish Ambassdor to the European Union Selim Kuneralp told conference participants in Brussels that the ITGI and Nabucco projects were not competitive, but complementary. His comments were followed by US State Department officer Louis Bono wh said the US government favored diversification of European energy sources, and that the best solutions were those with the best chance of commercial viability, according to the website Today.Az. There was no discussion of the strategic importance of Nabucco over the ITGI.

US Ambassador to Italy David Thorne told the Italian daily La Stampa that Nabucco and South Stream might merge. Thorne discussed the role of ENI, the Italian gas giant that is also a major shareholder in South Stream. He commented that ENI's CEO Paolo Scaroni had been in a number of meetings on this subject in both Rome and in Washington. "ENI has changed its approach, favoring a merge under the South Stream and Nabucco pipelines. I would say that we are in a constructive phase," La Stampa quoted the Ambassador, according to UPI. (Scaroni denied the remark, saying it would be impossible to merge with Nabucco since it was a project that still didn't exist, reports Bloomberg. Italian Industry Minister Paolo Romani also said South Stream, ITI and Nabucco were incompatible, according to Hurriyet Daily News.)

Dr. Manuela Troschke, senior researcher at the University of Regensburg's Institute for East European Studies, is also on record as stating a joint solution is what makes economic sense, according to News.Az. At another venue envoy Richard Morningstar made a more forceful statement that the US supports the integration of the Nabucco and ITGI pipelines. "But the final decision will be made by the consortiums," he said according to Today's Zaman. Nabucco CEO Reinhard Mitschek told the Hungarian business daily Vilaggazasag that Russia could ship gas thrugh the pipeline at a later stage, according to Azernews.az. Even EU Energy Commissioner Gunther Oettinger has reversed himself and said that Nabucco and South Stream were not direct competitors, according to the Sofia News Agency. The Director of the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies at Harvard University, Dmitry Primus Gorenburg, has also weighed in that "it may make sense to incorporate Gazprom into the Nabucco project--to reduce the political competition over routes and perhaps improve financing prospects," reported the Azeri Press Agency.

Former German foreign minister, Joschka Fischer--himself a consultant for Nabucco--has advocated Nabucco merging different partners: ITGI and/or TAP. "We have to integrate the European projects," he told the 2011 European Gas Conference in Vienna. "Business interests would be brought toegether, but, above all, it would allow Europe to diversify." Fischer was not interested in merging with South Stream, however, as merging with a Russian company would do nothing to diversify Europe's energy supply, according to the New York Times.

Reuters also reported that European Union officials are pushing for a merger of Nabucco and ITGI to help secure supplies from Azerbaijan. The European Commission is urging representatives of both projects to merge their operations to keep costs down, and make the project technically and commercially viable. Christian Dolezal, head of communications for Nabucco, acknowledged that talks were taking place at the political level, but denied discussions within the consortium itself. BPmay also be supporting a merger. It's chief of refining and marketing supported ITGI and Nabucco at the same time. "We are going to build a 10 bcm line into Europe that's expandable," reports Fox News. "We've got to stop being preoccupied by the word Nabucco."


If the two pipelines merged, the project would be built in two phases, according to Eurasianet. Southern Corridor Phase I would take the pipeline to Greece and Italy, and Southern Corridor Phase II would include a spur north to Austria.

There are also indications that the Russians may be softening their stand on Nabucco. Gazprom chief Alexi Miller told Der Spiegel that diversification was a good strategy for European energy. When asked about the rival Nabucco pipeline, he said "If the Europeans want a Nabucco pipeline, they should build it. We have nothing against the idea. Nabucco is their problem. Our job is to deliver our gas to our customers as stipulated in our contracts," according to UPI. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin told Austrian President Heinz Fischer that South Stream was important, but that Nabucco was also important, according to ITAR-TASS.

Conclusion: while there is still much support for an independent Nabucco pipeline, the number of government officials, businessmen and independent analysts who have criticized the viability of the project is telling. More and more, the indications are that before construction begins in 2015 Nabucco may merge with another pipeline.

No Green Light for NABUCCO

On January 13, 2011 the President of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, and the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, signed the "Joint Declaration on the Establishment of the Southern Corridor." In it, Azerbaijan committed to supplying "substantial volumes" of natural gas to the European Union once the Southern Corridor is built. It is the first time that Azerbaijan has committed in writing to supply natural gas to Europe.

The declaration is being hailed as a major step toward the construction of the Nabucco pipeline. Commission President Barroso declared "This is a major breakthrough. This agreement confirms Europe's direct access to gas from the Caspian Basin, thus enabling the realization of the Southern Corridor. This new supply route will enhance the energy security of European consumers and businesses."http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/11/30 Separately, he said "From a political perspective, it's clear that the European Commission supports Nabucco and from the discussions with the President of Azerbaijan, I understood that Azerbaijan also supports the project." http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5grhOEEWBY8lkzY5BsKck3_uxLc0Q?docId=CNG.cf47aa2fba1edb73982e4c0e962bed14.721

Alexander Rahr, the director of the German Council on Foreign Relations' Russia-Eurasia Center, commented "Despite all the risks, today we can say that Nabucco has passed from the stage of mythical conversations to the stage of realization. This is a clear signal to investors that the project will be realized." http://en.trend.az/1811752.html

Reinhard Mitschek, managing director of the Nabucco pipeline consortium, issued a statement from his office in Vienna, calling the agreement a milestone for his project. The declaration "serves to pave the way to the full implementation of Nabucco by providing a firm political basis for gas supply from Azerbaijan." http://www.upi.com/Science_News/Resource-Wars/2011/01/14/Nabucco-welcomes-EU-Azeri-gas-declaration/UPI-66251295023380/

Such optimism would appear warranted, as both European and Azerbaijani officials see the benefits of the project. Alexander Rahr said the EU considers the implementtion of Nabucco as its most important foreign-policy priority. Not only is it a new supply of gas for the continent, but Rahr cites a political context, as well. "This is a way to reduce Russia's influence in the South Caucasus and Central Asia, and weaken the influence of China in this region," he said. http://en.trend.az/1811752.html

Azerbaijani parliamentarian Ali Masimi, a member of the committee of economic policy, said that Nabucco is forming a new stage in political, economic and humantiarian cooperation between Azerbaijan, Turkey and Georgia, strengthening stability and a strategic alliance among the three countries. He said Nabucco must be built, and alluded to Caspian energy sources as a strategic asset: "Oil and gas are attributed not only to economy. These energy sources have no less geopolitical meaning...(C)old wars in the 21st century will differ from the cold wars of the 20th century. Cold wars in our century will be characterized with combat for oil and gas routes." http://www.news.az/articles/29741 Recognizing the strategic importance of Nabucco, Armenian political scientist Levon Shirinyan said his government must declare the Nabucco gas pipeline an Armenian priority, to overcome Armenia's estrangement from Europe. http://news.am/eng/44948.html

Despite all the hype, however, the Joint Declaration does NOT guarantee gas deliveries to Nabucco. Baku has the choice of any number of pipelines to use: Nabucco, South Stream, AGRI, TAP, and ITGI. All of them can be considered a part of the Southern Corridor, and all of them are counting on the gas coming from the Shah Deniz 2 project. The problem is that, as prolific as Shah Deniz is hoped to be, there are no estimates that there is enough gas to fill multiple pipelines. This is compounded by present Azerbaijani commitments, including a promise to the Russians to sell them two billion cubic meters of natural gas in 2011, and eventually doubling that amount thereafter.

Nabucco has a major problem: lack of financial commitments."Sluggishness is observed in the implementation of the Nabucco project. Therefore, Azerbaijan synchronizes its steps with these processes," said the otherwise hopeful Parliamentarian Masimli. http://www.news/az/articles/29741.

Russian Director of the National Energy Institute Sergei Pravosudov was dismissive of the Joint Declaration: "Mr. Barroso's visit did not actually add anything significant to the Nabucco project. Azerbaijan was initially prepared to supply gas to any consuming country for an adequate sum of money. The sides also did not sign any breakthrough agreements binding upon Azerbaijan in terms of prices and volumes of gas supplies. That visit resulted in just another memorandum of intent." http://english/ruvr.ru/39936848.html.

As reported in this blog earlier, the strength of support for Nabucco among Europeans and the US appears to be wavering. We previously reported on Ambassador Morningstar's comment that while a Southern Corridor was necessary, that did not necessarily mean Nabucco. These thoughts were echoed by Marlene Holzner, spokeswoman for the EU Energy Commissioner Guenther Oettinger: "For the EU it's decisive that a European project and a European firm gets awarded this contract," she said, omitting any mention of which pipeline would receive the business. http://www.today.az/news/business/79403.html

Azerbaijan promises to make its decision this year.

Dr. James J. Coyle is available to speak to your organization or at your event. Please contact him at jimcoyle@verizon.net.