|
THE GEORGIAN TIMES: RUSSIA’S NEW ENERGY GEOPOLITICS: WAY TO HEAL ECONOMICS OR POLITICS?
Recently President of RussiaDmitry Medvedev, who is thought to be Gazprom’s key lobbyist, announced the Kremlin’s decision to join the OPEC cartel and become a vital component of that organization. By doing so, Russia reluctantly and belatedly has agreed to decrease the volume of its oil extraction to the quota set down by the member states of OPEC.
This decision has not been easily made by the Kremlin and Russian lobby groups on energy as it implies the country losing its “energy sovereignty” and ceasing to be an “energy independent power.” It is not an easy game to play for a Kremlin Administration which is seeking to avoid confrontation with the USA in world politics on the one hand whilst dominating Western Europe with “energy power” leverages in the near future. The decision has however had a great influence on the energy market, as price of oil has increased by up to $10 and approaches $47 per barrel (mostly for the Russian light “Ural” type of oil).
Certainly Russia joining OPEC will be detrimental to world consumers, including Georgia, and the “enlargement” of the world’s most powerful energy club will transform it into a purely political institution with the ability to fully dominate not only international economic development but the world political system. Russia’s desire to monopolize energy delivery means and thereby implement the so-called “Liberal Imperialism” foreign policy doctrine introduced by Anatoly Chubaiss, a leader of the pro-Kremlin-oriented political movement Right Business, has became an increasingly more important factor in the thinking of Kremlin decision makers.
It is interesting to point out that Moscow has been opting for the elaboration of “soft power” instruments (like energy delivery as a political instrument for pursuing national interests) rather than “hard power” instruments (like military technologies and armaments, although the invasion of Georgia indicated absolutely the opposite) in order to “clamp down” on Western society’s engagement with the “vitally important privileged zones” of the Russian Federation, which was how Medvedev introduced this special foreign policy jargon in one of his official presentations. Oil price regulation is very important for the Kremlin administration’s internal political considerations because it has made three-year-long federal budget calculations on the basis of a lower world oil price, $65 per barrel. Hence official Moscow decided not to undertake a risky gamble with key players in the world energy market and accepted their invitation to join them in order to participate directly in price-fixing.
By doing this, the Kremlin could be pursuing the following strategic missions and goals to strengthen Russia’s geopolitical ambitions in the nearest future:
-
To rid itself of dependence on other world energy producers’ policies i.e. those of OPEC member states, who are able to counterweight Russia’s oil geopolitics at any time;
-
To balance and reduce US domination of OPEC member states, specifically destroying the so-called “linkage” between Saudi Arabia and the USA;
-
To try to prevent the financial crisis having an influence on the Russian energy industry and thus improve its local investment image at international level;
-
To regulate oil extraction volume at national level and thereby give itself additional leverage to impose Government restrictions on private energy companies, like ROSNEFT, LUKoil etc.
-
To indicate a monopolization privilege course in world economic affairs and change its geopolitical missions into geoconomical ones
Certainly the Kremlin is not only seeking to construct a new “oil diplomacy” to achieve its foreign policy goals but also to achieve a “success story” for another energy frontline, gas geopolitics. Next month Medvedev is to pay a visit to Tehran to arrange for the creation of a new Gas OPEC with the involvement of Qatar, Iran and Russia, and soon Algeria, one of the main suppliers of gas to Western European markets. The monopolization strivings of the Kremlin Administration mean that energy deliveries are no longer treated as simple economic instruments but very credible political mechanisms or “energy weapons” to successfully use for world domination.
If the Gas OPEC is set up, the situation in international politics would drastically change and new forms of international pressure and domination would emerge (like “energy wars”, “energy diplomacy”, “energy geopolitics”, etc.) to develop a new type of relations between nation states. The 21st century is truly thought to be a “power-shifting” epoch in which the geopolitical agenda of international relations changes. The dilemma of “politics versus economics” is to be laid down as a basis for developing contemporary world politics.
Dr. Vakhtang MAISAIA, Tbilisi
The Georgian Times, December 15, 2008
|
