Turkish Stream pipeline: News

GarryB wrote:A better question might be... Is the US shooting the EU in the foot or in the head...

GarryB wrote:A better question might be... Is the US shooting the EU in the foot or in the head...

sepheronx wrote:Between the "Turkish Stream" and Armenian genocide: Turkey's double game

Russia will have to be careful.  One Turkish politician said that Crimean Tatars were being treated well and what not, then another a couple days later says there are human rights abuses but mentions nothing.  Then condemns Russia's taking of Crimea.

I think Russia should be careful in dealing with Turkey.  Turkey is not to be trusted it seems.

kvs wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Between the "Turkish Stream" and Armenian genocide: Turkey's double game

Russia will have to be careful.  One Turkish politician said that Crimean Tatars were being treated well and what not, then another a couple days later says there are human rights abuses but mentions nothing.  Then condemns Russia's taking of Crimea.

I think Russia should be careful in dealing with Turkey.  Turkey is not to be trusted it seems.

The best solution is just to restrict gas shipments to the EU via Nord Stream and let the EU find the rest by itself.
Russia would lost about $28 billion per year until the pipelines to China are built.   But it would actually be less since
there is already a pipeline to the Pacific coast.  

All the grotesque games by the US, EU and NATO-member Turkey are not worth Russia's time and money.   They
can all go and eat cake.

kvs wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Between the "Turkish Stream" and Armenian genocide: Turkey's double game

Russia will have to be careful.  One Turkish politician said that Crimean Tatars were being treated well and what not, then another a couple days later says there are human rights abuses but mentions nothing.  Then condemns Russia's taking of Crimea.

I think Russia should be careful in dealing with Turkey.  Turkey is not to be trusted it seems.

The best solution is just to restrict gas shipments to the EU via Nord Stream and let the EU find the rest by itself.
Russia would lost about $28 billion per year until the pipelines to China are built.   But it would actually be less since
there is already a pipeline to the Pacific coast.  

All the grotesque games by the US, EU and NATO-member Turkey are not worth Russia's time and money.   They
can all go and eat cake.

KoTeMoRe wrote:

kvs wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Between the "Turkish Stream" and Armenian genocide: Turkey's double game

Russia will have to be careful.  One Turkish politician said that Crimean Tatars were being treated well and what not, then another a couple days later says there are human rights abuses but mentions nothing.  Then condemns Russia's taking of Crimea.

I think Russia should be careful in dealing with Turkey.  Turkey is not to be trusted it seems.

The best solution is just to restrict gas shipments to the EU via Nord Stream and let the EU find the rest by itself.
Russia would lost about $28 billion per year until the pipelines to China are built.   But it would actually be less since
there is already a pipeline to the Pacific coast.  

All the grotesque games by the US, EU and NATO-member Turkey are not worth Russia's time and money.   They
can all go and eat cake.

That's not thinking. If you cut now, the EU WILL try and find alternatives...while staying put and selling (cheaper) gas makes the EU think twice about you know what. The game is that the pusher will cut the supply when the addict will be the most fragile, and the EU currently isn't.

If you think the European Businesses are happy that the Political wing is dealing with a state like Ukraine, you are dead wrong. They can't wait to drop the whole gas saga and bury it.

A Color Revolution for Macedonia

Paul Craig Roberts

During the Cold War Washington was concerned about communists fomenting street protests that they could turn into revolutions, with groomed politicians waiting in the wings to take over the new government, thus expanding the Soviet empire. Today this is precisely what Washington does.
We recently witnessed this operation in Ukraine and now it seems to be underway in Macedonia.
The National Endowment for Democracy was established in 1983. The official purpose is to promote democracy abroad. The real purpose was to create dissension in Soviet Eastern Europe. Today the NED uses our tax money to overthrow governments not aligned with Washington.
The NED funds non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in countries targeted by Washington for political destabilization. These NGOs operate under such rubrics as “teaching democracy” and “human rights.” The NGOs develop cadres consisting of idealistic students and disgruntled politicians and set them against the existing government whose independence Washington wishes to curtail.
The idealistic students are simply dupes, and the disgruntled politicians simply desire power in office and will serve Washington in order to get it.
According to Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, Washington spent $5 billion in Ukraine grooming politicians and creating NGOs as Washington’s Fifth Columns. When Ukraine’s president Viktor Yanukovich refused to align Ukraine with Washington’s interests, Washington unleashed its Fifth Columns, and Yanukovich’s government was overthrown with violence. Despite Washington’s talk about democracy, the fact that Yanukovich’s government was democratically elected and a new election was only a few months away did not stop Washington from overthrowing Yanukovich.
Now the same fate seems in store for Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kyrgystan, and Macedonia. Most Americans don’t know where these places are. Armenia and Azerbaijan are east of the Caspian Sea and are former provinces of the Soviet Union. Kyrgystan is a former Soviet province that borders China. Macedonia, birthplace of Alexander the Great, is a part of northern Greece, but in the 20th century portions of Macedonia became parts of Bulgaria, Serbia, and Albania before becoming a province in Yugoslavia. When Washington destroyed Yugoslavia, Macedonia became an independent republic of two million people. Macedonia is landlocked and surrounded by Greece on the south, Bulgaria on the east, Albania on the west, and by Serbia and Washington-created Kosovo on the north.
Why is Washington interested in controlling Macedonia?
The Macedonian government refused to participate in Washington’s sanctions against Russia and supports the Russian Turkish Stream natural gas pipeline that will deliver Russian natural gas to Europe via Turkey to the Greek border.
Greece is being looted by the European Union, the IMF, and the German and Dutch banks. Consequently, Greece is being pushed into Russia’s arms as Russian support is Greece’s only alternative to the crippling austerity that the EU is forcing upon the Greek people. Macedonia sits between Greece and Serbia, a country with no love lost for Washington and the EU as a result of Serbia’s dismemberment by Washington and NATO aggression. Washington fears the flow of Russian energy, over which Washington would have no control, into its European vassal states via Russian allies in Europe.
If Washington can grab Macedonia, Washington can stand between Greece and Serbia and perhaps persuade Greece to align with a Washington-supported natural gas pipeline that would supply Europe from Azerbaijan, thus reducing Russia’s influence in Europe.
Macedonia has an Albanian minority population. Albania is a Washington vassal and NATO member. Washington has aligned with the dissident Albanians, demonstrators are in the streets, the Macedonian government is accused of corruption as was the Ukrainian government, and the US State Department is expressing its concerns about the Macedonian political crisis that Washington has orchestrated.
Washington is forever talking about democracy and human rights but has no respect for either. Washington uses these words as assertions of their absence in governments Washington intends to overthrow.
The Russian government understands the unfolding events. Whether the Russian government has learned its lesson from standing aside while the Ukrainian government was overthrown remains to be seen.
From an American perspective, as contrasted with Washington’s perspective, the question is whether the reckless pursuit of US hegemony is worth the risk of war with Russia and China. The neoconservatives, who have an iron grip on US foreign policy, believe that hegemony is worth any risk. But do Americans derive sufficient vicarious pleasure from a handful of neocons lording it over the world to accept the risk of nuclear war?
The naked aggression that Washington is displaying toward Russia should alarm not only the American people but also the entire world. War is in the making. War with Russia means war also with China. This is not a war that Washington and its vassals or human life can win.

A Color Revolution for Macedonia

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/05/22/color-revolution-macedonia-paul-craig-roberts/

July 17, 2015 Alexei Lossan, RBTH

Gazprom is halving capacity for its Turkish Stream pipeline, which extends from Russia to Turkey and then to southern Europe. The Russian natural gas monopoly has cancelled a deal with an Italian contractor to lay Black Sea pipelines. Experts believe that the Turkish Stream is now destined to be a local project.

Gazprom, the Russian gas monopolist, is halving the transit capacity of the Turkish Stream pipeline, which extends from Russia to Turkey and then to southern Europe, cutting to 32 billion cubic meters the volume of gas it can carry. Business daily Kommersant says the company has frozen its investments in the South Corridor project, which was supposed to take gas to the future pipeline. Market observers say that the Turkish Stream may turn into a local Russian-Turkish project, and that Gazprom will instead expand its North Stream pipeline in the Baltic Sea.

The South Corridor project was planned to supply gas to the South Stream pipeline, which was supposed to run along the Black Sea seabed from Russia to Bulgaria, and after the South Stream was cancelled, to the Turkish Stream. Kommersant says Gazprom halted work on the eastern - the longest and most expensive - branch and now plans on finishing the western branch. The length of the western branch is 547 miles and the eastern - 1,010 miles. At the start of 2015 Gazprom invested almost 300 billion rubles (£3.3 billion/$5.2 billion). Gazprom has declined to comment.
Italian contractor Saipem says that it has received a notice from Gazprom stopping their collaboration. A vessel belonging to the Italian company had been moored in Russian waters, waiting to start laying the pipeline on the seabed of the Black Sea. Gazprom has agreed to pay all penalties associated with the six months it had kept Saipem waiting, which Kommersant says amounts $300 million.
The Russian government denies there is any relation between the annulment of the contract and the possible reduction of the Turkish Stream's capacity. "The cancellation of the contract between Gazprom and the Italian contractor Saipem will not influence the Turkish Stream project," Alexander Novak, Russia's energy minister, claims.

"The South Corridor project is a priority for Gazprom. It is actively being carried out and no one plans on 'freezing' it," Dmitri Baranov of consultants Finam Holding says. "Furthermore, a significant amount of work has already been done on the project." If the Turkish Stream project is cut back, it will be transformed into a local project that will supply gas only to Turkey, he adds. "As of today no agreements on gas transit through Turkish territory have been signed," Baranov says. "If the agreement on transit is signed, then it will be yet another direction for Russian gas supplies to Europe. But it will only add to the existing directions, not replace them."
In June 2015 Gazprom, Shell, OMV and E. On signed a memorandum on the construction of a second North Stream gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea with an annual capacity of 55 billion cubic meters. "The signed memorandum, in essence, is only an agreement of intent, it is not binding," says UFS IC chief analyst Ilya Balakirev. The existing two branches of the North Stream are only half loaded due to regulations of the EU's Third Energy Package, he says. EU anti-monopoly rules forbid one company from supplying gas and controlling its transit. Ideally, Gazprom would like to have both projects, but it is important for the company to show its partners that it can effectively renounce one project for the other, as it helps strengthen a company's negotiating position, Balakirev adds.

Karl Haushofer wrote:Lenta.ru reports that Russia and Turkey have put the Turkish Stream pipeline on hold because of disagreement of the discount for Turkey.

Turkey is a strong geopolitical player. They realize that Russia is in a tough spot now so they want to milk as much money from Russia as possible.

Project Canada wrote:

Karl Haushofer wrote:Lenta.ru reports that Russia and Turkey have put the Turkish Stream pipeline on hold because of disagreement of the discount for Turkey.

Turkey is a strong geopolitical player. They realize that Russia is in a tough spot now so they want to milk as much money from Russia as possible.

The Russian empire should have conquered the Ottomans as far as the Bosphorus strait and liberated Constantinople

Karl Haushofer wrote:Lenta.ru reports that Russia and Turkey have put the Turkish Stream pipeline on hold because of disagreement of the discount for Turkey.

Turkey is a strong geopolitical player. They realize that Russia is in a tough spot now so they want to milk as much money from Russia as possible.

(Reuters) - Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak said on Wednesday there was a risk construction of an underwater pipeline to Turkey could be delayed if a related intergovernmental agreement was not signed soon, the Interfax news agency reported.

Russia's Gazprom is yet to start laying pipes beneath the Black Sea for the first line of the TurkStream pipeline, which was expected to start operations by 2017 and bring 15.75 billion cubic metres (bcm) to Turkey annually.

"If construction does not start, it is obvious that the schedule is moving," Novak was quoted as saying.

TurkStream is supposed to bring a total of 63 bcm of gas per year to Turkey and to southern Europe via Greece by 2020 -- a project aimed at bypassing Ukraine as a key transit country for Russian gas flowing to Europe.

Earlier in July, Gazprom cancelled a contract with Italy's Saipem to build a link to Turkey but Russian officials have said Moscow was continuing to work on the project.

On Tuesday, a Russian Energy Ministry official said Moscow had offered to sign an intergovernmental agreement on the first line only and Ankara was yet to reply.

Turkey wanted a bigger gas discount before agreeing to sign an intergovernmental deal, sources previously told Reuters.

Separately, Novak said on Wednesday Moscow had no plans to discuss oil production cuts with OPEC during Secretary-General Abdullah al-Badri's visit to Moscow on Thursday. (Reporting by Vladimir Soldatkin, Katya Golubkova and Denis Pinchuk, Editing by Jason Bush and Mark Potter)