What's Coming Down the Pipe
speculation on the future of the Ukrainian oil and gas industry
Yuliya Tymoshenko is back and (I find the pun leaping to my typing fingers with the speed of inevitability) she's been cooking with gas. In addition to a whole raft of proposed economic reforms (including the TTI--Tymoshenko Transparency Index--which contains some admirable goals, but is ever-so amusingly self-absorbed) she's been promoting big-time gas and industry changes.
RosUkrEnergo and UkrHazEnergo
The new news is her statement that Yushchenko and the National Security and Defence Council have agreed to eliminate the RosUkrEnergo intermediary from Ukrainian-Russian natural gas trade. If true, this will be a victory for her, as she has long opposed the intermediary (for solid economic reasons, as described in detail in this article, though the article does get embarrassingly laudatory at times). At another conference on the plans for her visit to Russia (Feb 21-22), Tymoshenko repeated that should be no intermediary. This despite the overall " harmony and understand" theme she was working on to try to put a diplomatic face on things (the Russian government has on occasion attempted to distance itself from RosUkrEnergo, likely because its lack of transparency makes it highly suspicious to the kind of energy investors Russia would like to woo, but has also never showed itself eager to eliminate the company from trade relations; Yushchenko has certainly couched his support for continuing the intermediary in "keep Russia happy" terms).
Moreover, Russia itself seems to be helping her. I thought I was going to be the first to make this connection and bring you some real news instead of bloggy conglomerations, but then I found this article at the Eurasia Heritage Foundation (anyone know something about this source?). The writer, John Marone, also noticed with interest the arrest of Seyon Mogilevich by the Russian government. The Eurasia Daily Monitor article details two prevailing theories on the arrest (that it was done by opponents of Medvedev to show they're still relevant or by Putin to put Mogilevich where he won't be talking to reporters), but Marone was more interested in how Tymoshenko might be able to use the arrest, since Mogilevich happened to be the major Russian participant in that very same RosUkrEnergo scheme.
He reports her statement on the arrest:
“The presence of additional middlemen is a sign of specific corrupt activities. The recent arrests demonstrate that the international community is following events and will not allow the development of any shadow models, including among states bordering the EU. Therefore, my position remains unchanged: all shadowy middlemen will be shut down.”
Nothing surprising there, but her discussions with them at the end of February should be fun to watch.
The White Line
Simultaneously, she's kick-started discussion of another gas pipeline route, one that would bypass Russia but travel through Ukraine on its way to Europe. This comes at a time when another Russian-bypass pipe project proposed by EU countries themselves (Nabucco) has been foundering. (In an article called Pipedreams published the week before her announcement, Economist described the situation.)
How seriously should we take this? To put things bluntly: this sounds a lot like another Odesa-Brody pipeline and we don't hear much about that these days. Before Tymoshenko's White Line, it was the big pipeline project that was going to get Central Asian oil to Europe without Russia. As the linked RFE-RL article points out, though, Ukraine failed to find the oil to pump under Kuchma, and it's been pumping Russian oil the opposite way since 2004. While there is a prospective extension of that pipeline to Plock, there are still a lot of questions. To create another line to meet whatever unknown demand is left over with as-yet unknown supply does not seem particularly promising.
Nevertheless, even having the option on the table is a bargaining chip. And a reasonable argument can be made that a major reason for the failure of Odesa-Brody was a lack of government will to push it through and risk Russian retaliation (in forms such as raising the then-bargain natural gas rates), a lack Tymoshenko has never felt.
So throwing this idea sounds like fun to me, though I can't see why she called it the White Line and not something more like, say, TymoTunnel.
WTO and, Why Not?, the EU
Ukraine finished WTO bilateral negotiations this January (this was not a Tymoshenko thing; rather it was a steady if obscenely slow process pushed along by the last four government formations). Should the WTO officially welcome in Ukraine at its Feb 5 meeting, as Yushchenko has predicted, there will definitely need to be further reform and efforts to harmonize standards (referred to by the Ukrainian agriculture minister and indirectly by Yushchenko in his call for Tymoshenko to oversee the transition process for the grain sector). Nevertheless, Russian Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin makes his government look rather spiteful and self-absorbed for saying Ukraine (after fourteen years of negotiation; the first ten of which were a wash) has recklessly rushed in "on unfavorable terms just to get in ahead of Russia."
However long we've been waiting for this move, that Ukraine will be getting into the WTO soon is a reason for a little bit of celebrating. Tymoshenko did so by proposing that the EU join Ukraine in a free trade zone and share joint visas with it.
The strategy reminds me of an old Calvin and Hobbes comic I once read:
"Mom, can I set fire to my bed mattress?"
"No, Calvin."
"Can I ride my tricycle on the roof?"
"No, Calvin."
"Then can I have a cookie?"
"No, Calvin."
"She's on to me."
Who knows, maybe the EU reps will be squishier than Mrs., uh... Mrs. Calvin's Mom. (Then can we have an EU *action plan*?...)

Reader Comments (13)
"Yuri Melnik, the Minister of Agrarian Policy admits the possibility of problems in Ukrainian sugar, milk and vegetable industries of agriculture after Ukraine enters World Trade Organization. He told about this fact during Thursday press conference, "Ukrainian News" informs. "There are surely risks for some industries (after Ukraine enters WTO), they are sugar industry, milk production, vegetable industry", he said.
He explained that these industries are based on very small farms which are not always able to correspond to WTO requirements to the quality standards. The Minister emphasized, the requirements to the candidates to WTO members are more rigid than to the organization members. He added that nobody was going to make any rebates for Ukraine to enter this organization. There are two major parameters, quality and competitiveness of the products, if Ukraine meets them, the country will be able to normally work in WTO framework.
"Ukraine has agricultural potential; if this potential is implemented by means of the industries which products are the most demanded on the global markets, the country will donate the problematic industries due to the successful ones", he observed.
The Minister stresses: it will be possible if there is relevant sensible and balanced state policy. According to the provided information, working group on Ukraine's entrance to WTO approved the report of our country.
The meeting of WTO General Council is planned for February 5th. The President Yuschenko is sure that the decision about Ukraine's entrance to WTO will be made on this meeting. The participation in WTO let national products get free access to the markets of other countries, and foreign products will enter Ukrainian market. WTO unites more than 150 countries."
http://www.freshplaza.com/news_detail.asp?id=15678
The link for the UA agriculture minister goes to a story about getting rid of gas intermediaries.
Do I think that this is a good idea? Absolutely but I do hope that other items have not been neglected while the fight was going on in a battle which will be resolved perhaps next year? when contracts are signed again. In the meantime here comes WTO and alot of changes for which UA farmers are not ready either regarding rules/regs nor for how much this is going to cost them.
http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/pres08_e/pr511_e.htm
The lies that are being revealed by PoR are intense. PoR stated to both EU and US lawmakers that yes, they too wanted to become part of NATO but not so quickly as Our Ukraine - revealed as complete untruth.
PoR stated that they wanted for Ukraine to become part of WTO - and yet they perpetrated the 'fraud' regarding the talks with the Kyrgyz and they certainly are not going to unblock the blockade to ratify Ukraine's entrance into WTO.
They stated that they were concerned about Ukrainians and interested in humanitarian issues - none of which they seem concerned about currently as they keep Parliament paralyzed.
They said they too wanted to get rid of deputy privilege and immunity but are unwilling to let it be voted on.
They stated they wanted to work with NUNS in a broad coalition and yet have shown they have no interest in compromise or talks but only want power and are willing to do everything necessary to get it and retain it.
It gives new meaning to the phrase "fighting for legislation" - or "fighting for control."
At least they are not boxing, as before.
"Come let us reason together."
Big scrum (that's a rugby term) photos here:
http://unian.net/eng/news/news-234594.html
Cool source esp. as John Marone posts his articles there. About the site - based in RF which means that they are ruled by RF's libel laws but I guess it does not affect what u write about Ukraine and very interesting the site has posted writings in english from Ukraine's political analyst pool. Who is funding them or why? Good question. Very good question.
http://www.eurasianhome.org/xml/t/opinion.xml?lang=en&nic=opinion&pid=982
btw just wondering --- we know who does not stand in the sunshine of your approval :) but would like to know whom you DO support? Tx.
And do hope the following is TRUE but the rostrum needs to be unblockaded first - "believes the agreement will be ratified, as it's popular in the coalition and Regions Party."
http://www.nrcu.gov.ua/index.php?id=148&listid=60086
Keeping fingers crossed.
I've fixed them now. I'm going to try to go back and answer some of your previous questions, too...
anon: You think he was being unbalanced? I don't know, he didn't opine on much to say that it was good or bad, at least it didn't seem that to me. I mean, particularly if you compare him:
http://www.eurasianhome.org/xml/t/opinion.xml?lang=en&nic=opinion&pid=982
to Tammy Lynch:
http://www.unian.net/eng/news/news-233905.html
She's got some great points, but her tone is so overwhelmingly admiring that it gives one that feeling that things can't be that one sided...
What seemed out of place? She's never liked the intermediary. She's riding high, and if she pushes this through, it will make her look good and other government officials would probably look backwards-looking. He wasn't saying they were, he was telling you about the positive PR it would constitute. Seems a pretty even tone to me. What were you referring to in specific?
As for her getting a cut somewhere. To me the stand to take here is simple: the fewer intermediaries, the fewer ways there are for influential people to siphon off a little for themselves. So since she's pretty much said "no intermediaries" so many times I think she's preempted any possibility of inserting one of her own, the overall number of opportunities for graft should go down.
Thoughts anyone?
http://www.ukraine-observer.com/?p=114&c=11&PHPSESSID=e52c15cae62b9394d81d5f8a0fb27bec
And he has an updated article relating to the Gas spat
http://www.eurasianhome.org/xml/t/opinion.xml?lang=en&nic=opinion&pid=991
"Apart from that, no large-scale information campaign on Ukraine’s joining the WTO was conducted in the country. Therefore, the Ukrainians do not understand very well what is in store for them and which advantages and disadvantages for Ukraine the entry conceals. Nevertheless, the campaign should be conducted. Here President Viktor Yushchenko, his Secretariat and Prime Minister Yuliya Tymoshenko have interests in common.
In the course of the campaign Yushchenko will try to ascribe all the entry’s merits to himself. Tymoshenko, who is looking to become the next President, will have to join that campaign too.
It is another matter that the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, whose work is still barely plodding along, is to ratify the WTO entry. It is possibly that during the voting the President and the Prime Minister’s opinions will coincide again. The ratification may begin the information campaign.
But the opponents, who can seek to become more popular speaking about the negative aspects of the entry, have no trump cards. For example, leader of the Party of Regions Viktor Yanukovych says that Ukraine’s agriculture will suffer as a result of Ukraine’s joining the WTO. But he has no forcible arguments to substantiate his position since the five-year transition period extends to Ukraine’s agriculture.
As regards the WTO factor in the negotiations with Russia (the visits of President Yushchenko and Prime Minister Tymoshenko to Moscow are scheduled for February), Yushchenko has stated that Ukraine would not put obstacles in Russia’s way to the WTO. I believe that the use of this factor by the Ukrainian politicians would be a strategic mistake for them."
http://www.eurasianhome.org/xml/t/expert.xml?lang=en&nic=expert&pid=1426
"The analyst believes Ukraine's accession will primarily require a more effective demarcation of its border with Russia.
But demarcating the land will be different from delineating territories on the map: it is bound to arouse numerous disputes over "historic" hills, hollows and forests, fraught with armed clashes. Essentially, an artificially created "conflict belt" will emerge right in the center of Europe, which could fuel tensions for decades to come.
The strict delineation between Moscow and Kiev will effectively consolidate the positions of those few in Russia that supported the split and instability in Ukraine. It will also motivate Russia to support any opponents of the West in the most sensitive issues. The area for possible and useful cooperation will therefore be drastically reduced.
Ukraine will certainly be the one who suffers the most. It may turn into "cannon fodder" in a new political or even military crisis. It will be torn apart, its economy greatly weakened, maintained Karaganov."
Rosiiskaya Gazeta: NATO eastward expansion to hit Ukraine hardest - analyst
http://www.eurasianhome.org/xml/t/digest.xml?lang=en&nic=digest&pid=2603
In his "instability" forecast, he should face up to this fact: With Ukraine in NATO, the Kremlin’s Ukesploitation will be history.