Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Aug 24 2008

Is it Georgia or more?

by DOGU ERGIL

After trying to mediate between contending sides regarding the
conflicts in the surrounding regions, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdo?Ä?an flew to Moscow to have talks with Russian
authorities — President Dmitry Medvedev, Prime Minister Vladimir
Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov — and then to Tbilisi to
speak with President Mikhail Saakashvili about a proposition for a
possible Caucasus Alliance deal. My expectation is that Russia will
say yes and proceed with an agenda of establishing its authority in
the region and over Georgia, while Georgians will grope for any
possible way out of the quagmire they have fallen into. Mr. Putin has
always been very disturbed by Mr. Saakashvili’s passion for potential
NATO membership for his country. The Russian leadership sees potential
NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine as a serious block on its
influence in the Caucasus and Black Sea regions. On the other hand,
most European countries were never keen on Georgia’s membership in the
alliance, at least under the existing circumstances. Outside Poland
and the Baltic states that have experienced Soviet (read this as
Russian) domination, the United States is the only country that has
enthusiastically supported Georgia’s NATO membership.

This overall reluctance was confirmed during Russia’s punishment of
Georgia. Following an early statement condemning Russia’s aggression,
the North Atlantic Council met and called on Russia to respect
Georgia’s territorial integrity. But there was little support beyond
words, demonstrating the members’ reluctance to deepening ties with
Georgia for the time being. Given the current circumstances,
Mr. Saakashvili will not receive substantial help from his Western
friends either in holding onto his presidential seat or in NATO
membership for his country. The invasion and devastation of his
country as well as loss of control over Abkhazia and South Ossetia
will soon be billed to his leadership. It is dubious that he will be
able to pay the price. When the anxiety and awe of Russian occupation
dissipates, the Georgians — who seem united now — will begin asking
how and why they were driven into such a mess. The foresight of their
leader will be seriously questioned.

Alternative energy routes?

For a long time Western and especially American policymakers hoped
that diverting oil around Russia would help them assert control over
Central Asia and its enormous oil and gas wealth and would provide a
safer alternative to Moscow’s control over export routes. This would
also help prevent Russia’s resurgence as a post-Soviet empire based on
its control of energy sources and lines. Isn’t this what the so-called
"Great Game" was about, anyway? It was a game of establishing
dominance over the enormous natural resources of Central Asia and the
Caucasus. After the Cold War, the matter turned into an economic and
diplomatic tug-of-war, occasionally backed by military might. Chechnya
has been crushed and Georgia has been subdued. So now that the two
regional states that challenged post-Soviet Russian power and
dominance have been checked, multinational energy conglomerates and
Central Asian and Caucasian/Caspian governments will be forced to
build new lines through this unstable corridor. They may even
reconsider transporting existing volumes of oil and gas, given the
reliability of existing conditions and degree of safety in this
corridor. One thing is certain: Russia, encouraged by its military
clout and empowered in recent years by petro dollars, will be much
more assertive in shaping the region’s energy future.

Much has changed since before the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline (BTC)
was built. The Western powers tried their best to find routes that
would avoid potential trouble spots. They failed because there was no
"safe and stable spot" in the Caucasus. One thing was obvious, though:
The United States did not want energy lines to pass through
Iran. Turkey suffered much from this insistence, but it had limited
options other than trying to convince its foremost ally of its dire
need for energy.

In the final analysis the US government and other private investors,
together with British Petroleum – which operates the BTC pipeline —
decided on the present route that passes through Georgia, the ardent
pro-Western country of the Caucasus. However, the BTC is far from
being a safe route. Turkey is still struggling with separatist Kurdish
elements. These elements recently delivered a blow to the pipeline,
just before the Russian invasion of Georgia, driving the point home
that the line is not safe enough for the West and for Turkey. It will
not be safe as long as there are forces in the region that do not want
it to be safe.

Georgia was also struggling with its separatist forces that ignited
the recent war. Azerbaijan is always in a state of alert for a
possible showdown over its territories occupied by Armenia. Hence,
even before the outbreak of hostilities between Russia and Georgia,
the BTC pipeline was pretty precarious to be called the "safest energy
route" connecting the East and the West.

Is there an alternative? Not in sight yet!

24.08.2008