Nabucco Pipeline and the Opportunities We Miss
Interview with Elahe Koulayee on Iran’s likely role in Nabucco Pipeline project
Nabucco Pipeline project has turned into a security issue for Europe after the struggle between Moscow and Kiev. Caspian Sea countries fear Russia’s anger, while willing to stand against it with Europe’s support. But where does Iran stand in this story? Iranian Diplomacy has interview Dr. Elahe Koulayee, university professor and Central Asia and Caucasia expert.
Considering Russia’s stance, is constructing the Nabucco Pipeline feasible?
The pipeline is intended to decrease Europe’s dependence on Russia. Naturally Russia doesn’t favor an end to its energy monopoly. We know that more than 30 percent –and at times more than 90 percent- of European countries’ energy is provided by Russia. So clearly Russians are against this project. However, let’s not forget that Russians also opposed the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline but the project was executed with Americans’ generous budget and solid financial and economic support of hosting countries (Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey) though it wasn’t cost-effective. So in Caucasia and for Nabucco the main issue is power and strategic competition. Europeans can run the project if they cooperate with Caucasian countries, especially Iran.
Despite all opportunities we have missed, this plan is a new chance for our country to correctly use its geopolitical advantages and natural resources. Iran should step in, raise the cost-effectiveness of the project and increase its viability.
Of course we should keep in mind that Iran’s joining the project equals an encounter with Russia and entering a competitive field. It is not clear if Iran tends to enter a competition with Russia in the current circumstances. But if we don’t use this chance, we have lost an ideal opportunity.
On the other hand, Russians do not want to lose their energy monopoly, neither in Caucasia, nor in Central Asia or Caspian Sea. Just like any other country, the try to retain their privileges.
Will the Nabucco Pipeline change political equations of the region?
After the cold war era pipelines’ strategic and security functions have become more important than their economic function. Now although Iran has lost many opportunities in its foreign relations, joining the Nabucco Pipeline project can be its golden chance.
Construction of a new pipeline is inevitably a threat for Russia’s monopoly. When we analyze the conflict between Russia and Georgia this summer, we shouldn’t overlook Georgia’s role in transferring Azerbaijan’s energy to Europe. Nabucco and other alternative pipelines will have an impact on political equilibrium in the region. Every country is seeking its own interests in this project. Iran should also do the same before entering the game.
Why hasn’t Iran contributed to this project yet? Iran did not even attend the recent Budapest meeting.
With regard to our situation in the international community, any project related to Iran will be a function of our relations with global powers, especially the United States, European Union, their allies, and even Russia. The UN resolutions and sanctions imposed on Iran have a direct impact on our regional interactions.
However, despite all I said and with all the restrictions, Iran’s position, its resources and capabilities are so substantial that all countries which benefit are inclined to collaborate with Iran. Unfortunately, the stances we have taken in our foreign relations have made regional and international actors cautious in cooperating with us. They elaborate on the interests and threats which result from interaction with Iran.
Countries involved in the Nabucco Pipeline project will naturally welcome Iran’s presence if we adopt a cooperative approach based on constructive interaction and fulfillment of mutual interests. Our geopolitical weight and diverse capacities have turned us into an undeniable actor even for the United States. Therefore, Iran’s collaboration will be extremely helpful, since we have a significant position in the field of energy.
So you hope that Iran will enter the project?
As I said it’s a necessity that origins from a geopolitical fact. But this depends on our decision-makers and policy-makers. We should see if they pay attention to this opportunity or decide to impose their own attitude to our foreign relations. It all depends on the mindset of our diplomatic apparatus.
Considering Russia’s stance, is constructing the Nabucco Pipeline feasible?
The pipeline is intended to decrease Europe’s dependence on Russia. Naturally Russia doesn’t favor an end to its energy monopoly. We know that more than 30 percent –and at times more than 90 percent- of European countries’ energy is provided by Russia. So clearly Russians are against this project. However, let’s not forget that Russians also opposed the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline but the project was executed with Americans’ generous budget and solid financial and economic support of hosting countries (Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey) though it wasn’t cost-effective. So in Caucasia and for Nabucco the main issue is power and strategic competition. Europeans can run the project if they cooperate with Caucasian countries, especially Iran.
Despite all opportunities we have missed, this plan is a new chance for our country to correctly use its geopolitical advantages and natural resources. Iran should step in, raise the cost-effectiveness of the project and increase its viability.
Of course we should keep in mind that Iran’s joining the project equals an encounter with Russia and entering a competitive field. It is not clear if Iran tends to enter a competition with Russia in the current circumstances. But if we don’t use this chance, we have lost an ideal opportunity.
On the other hand, Russians do not want to lose their energy monopoly, neither in Caucasia, nor in Central Asia or Caspian Sea. Just like any other country, the try to retain their privileges.
Will the Nabucco Pipeline change political equations of the region?
After the cold war era pipelines’ strategic and security functions have become more important than their economic function. Now although Iran has lost many opportunities in its foreign relations, joining the Nabucco Pipeline project can be its golden chance.
Construction of a new pipeline is inevitably a threat for Russia’s monopoly. When we analyze the conflict between Russia and Georgia this summer, we shouldn’t overlook Georgia’s role in transferring Azerbaijan’s energy to Europe. Nabucco and other alternative pipelines will have an impact on political equilibrium in the region. Every country is seeking its own interests in this project. Iran should also do the same before entering the game.
Why hasn’t Iran contributed to this project yet? Iran did not even attend the recent Budapest meeting.
With regard to our situation in the international community, any project related to Iran will be a function of our relations with global powers, especially the United States, European Union, their allies, and even Russia. The UN resolutions and sanctions imposed on Iran have a direct impact on our regional interactions.
However, despite all I said and with all the restrictions, Iran’s position, its resources and capabilities are so substantial that all countries which benefit are inclined to collaborate with Iran. Unfortunately, the stances we have taken in our foreign relations have made regional and international actors cautious in cooperating with us. They elaborate on the interests and threats which result from interaction with Iran.
Countries involved in the Nabucco Pipeline project will naturally welcome Iran’s presence if we adopt a cooperative approach based on constructive interaction and fulfillment of mutual interests. Our geopolitical weight and diverse capacities have turned us into an undeniable actor even for the United States. Therefore, Iran’s collaboration will be extremely helpful, since we have a significant position in the field of energy.
So you hope that Iran will enter the project?
As I said it’s a necessity that origins from a geopolitical fact. But this depends on our decision-makers and policy-makers. We should see if they pay attention to this opportunity or decide to impose their own attitude to our foreign relations. It all depends on the mindset of our diplomatic apparatus.