Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Gazprom simply wants to get paid

It would appear to be an annual event: At the end of each year and the
start of the next, Russia and Ukraine have a nasty natural-gas
dispute.
Moscow is adamant that it will not resume gas supplies to Kiev until
arrears are paid and a new contract reflecting world gas prices is
signed. Kiev remains defiant, hoping the European Union will
eventually step in to mediate.
This is the last thing Brussels wants at this point, but there is a
sense of urgency that the EU must admit that its energy security is
threatened by Ukraine. In the meantime, gas supplies to Europe are
being interrupted.
As of January 1, Russia had no contract to sell natural gas to
Ukraine. Without a contract, the export gas monopoly Gazprom is not
only under no obligation to continue supplies, it also has no legal
basis to do so. Thus, Gazprom was given no choice -- it had to cut
supplies (and lose revenues in the process).
The energy giant has made it clear that it will honour its contracts
with European consumers and there is no evidence that it has failed to
do so. As Ukraine is the transit country for 80 percent of Gazprom's
natural gas to Europe, it is Kiev that must shoulder complete
responsibility for any shortages experienced by Gazprom's consumers.
A great deal of the commentary on the current dispute -- as has been
the case for the past few years -- has focused on the tense relations
between Moscow and Kiev. There can be no doubt there are political
undertones to the current dispute. Russia has made it clear that NATO
membership for Ukraine would pose an existential threat to Russia. The
fact that Kiev sold arms to Tbilisi at discounted prices definitely
heightened tensions. But at the end of the day, these gas disputes are
all about commercial relations and irrefutable energy realities:
Gazprom simply wants to be paid.
Ukraine continues to purchase subsidized gas from Gazprom. Last year
the price for 1,000 cubic meters was $179.50. In contrast, Gazprom's
European customers pay up to $500 for the same amount of gas. Before
Ukraine's 2008 contract with Gazprom expired, Kiev was offered a new
price for 2009 -- $250 per 1,000 cubic meters.
By any standard this was a very generous offer. To top this off, the
transit fees Gazprom must pay Ukraine to get its product to market in
Europe would also have been increased.
Kiev rejected this deal. And it owes Gazprom hundreds of millions of
dollars for gas supplies and penalties. In response, Gazprom made a
new offer: Kiev would have to pay $481 per 1,000 cubic meters in any
future contract.
Getting tough with Kiev
The facts of this energy dispute speak volumes about Gazprom's
determination to force Kiev to act responsibly.
First, the volumes: Gazprom sells about 55 billion cubic meters (bcm)
of natural gas to Ukraine annually. This is compared to the 155 bcm
sold to Gazprom's European customers. Gazprom's yearly production is
about 610 bcm, and the Russian energy flagship purchases about 50 bcm
annually from Central Asia.
Now for the dollars and cents of this dispute: In 2008, Gazprom sold
Ukraine gas at a price of $179.50 per 1,000 cubic meters, totalling
around $10 billion. Then consider the average price of about $400 to
the rest of Europe. At this price, Gazprom's annual revenue from the
155 bcm sold is about $65 billion.
Do the math: Gazprom earns more than six times the revenues for only
three times the volume of gas by selling to Europe. This is an
incredible shortfall in revenues for Gazprom and unfair to its other
customers who pay market prices. Selling Ukraine gas at the same price
paid by the rest of Europe would raise Gazprom's revenues by about $12
billion annually, based on the 2008 sales volume. This figure would
probably diminish slightly when factoring in the higher transit fees
Gazprom is expected to pay Ukraine in any new contract. Nonetheless,
Gazprom has a strong, compelling argument for its get-tough policy
with Kiev.
I have been covering the Russia-Ukraine gas disputes closely for
years, and it is obvious to me that Kiev is conducting a "the-worse-
the-better" strategy. Ukraine is in dire economic straits and has been
kept afloat by a $16 billion loan from the International Monetary
Fund. Under these conditions, Kiev desperately hopes Brussels will
negotiate a better deal with Moscow on its behalf. Brussels should do
just the opposite -- demand Kiev transit Russian gas purchased by
European countries without hindrance or delay.
In the meantime, Brussels simply must get serious about developing a
long-term and integrated energy policy for the entire bloc. This is
what Gazprom has repeatedly requested -- a European energy partner
with whom it can speak with one voice and negotiate with without
troublesome in-betweens like Ukraine.
Also, instead of fearing the "Russian energy bully," Brussels should
help Russia build the Nord Stream and other new pipelines. Ukraine is
a thorn in Gazprom's side. If Brussels isn't careful, Ukraine will
become a thorn for the EU as well.
http://www.rferl.org/content/Gazprom_Simply_Wants_To_Get_Paid/1367322.html

 'Sti cachi, a te
è roba di RFE, pirla russofobo dimostrato

 Minchia
sì, e bella grossa. Adesso vai pure a farti ricostruire il retto da
quel dottore che ti avevo detto