Connect with us

EUROPE

Turkey’s energy ‘hub’ dream and Russia’s proposal

Published

on

The pandemic, war, geopolitical competition, and political preferences resulted in inefficient use of available resources and thus created the gas crisis. After the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 sabotage, the idea that Turkey could play a more effective role in the energy market has been discussed. Due to sanctions restricting the import of Russian gas into the European market, the transport of it to Europe via Turkey is only one aspect of the issue.

In a broader sense, could the energy crisis that broke out with the Russia-Ukraine war have opened a new window of opportunity for Turkey to become a global player in energy? When alternative sources such as Central Asian gas and Iranian gas are added to the equation, it seems to be a serious possibility for Turkey to turn into an energy vein for Europe, at least on paper. The fact that Turkey is the most suitable route for the transport of potential gas in the Eastern Mediterranean to Europe in the medium and long term can be considered as one of the advantages of the “geographical location”, which is frequently mentioned.

Remarks from the leaders

As for the choice of Turkey as the energy hub, Russian President Vladimir Putin said in October “It’s because direct engagement with European partners is very difficult. We can establish a gas center in Turkey very quickly.” and drew great attention. According to Putin, Europe will be willing to buy Russian gas through the transfer center to be established in Turkey.

Speaking at the capacity increase ceremony of Silivri Natural Gas Storage Facility owned by BOTAS in Silivri, President Erdoğan said, “We had important meetings with my dear friend Mr. Putin on this subject. We have taken and are taking our steps and thus Thrace will become a hub in natural gas. We carry out our work on this together with our energy partners in our region,” he said.

These statements do not include technical details. Are the conditions for Turkey to become the main player in the gas market, which is a direct part of geopolitical competition, as convenient as it seems? According to experts; ‘Yes…’ However, the definition of “hub” here needs to be clarified by decisionmakers. Because being a “transit country” where gas comes and goes from Turkey and being one of the international centers such as TTF, NBP or Henry Hub where the price is determined are completely different.

Former BOTAS General Manager Gökhan Yardım, evaluating the issue to Harici, said, “Turkey can be a gas hub. But with current thinking, it’s very challenging. The legal infrastructure is crucial. Both the Westerners and the Easterners will come,” he said, pointing out both the potential and the shortcomings he sees.

What do we know?

Turkey reinforced its transit position with the TurkStream, which came into play in 2018. However, Russia did not provide the parameters necessary for Turkey to be a “hub” based on this project. One of the main factors of being a hub is that the price of gas is determined in the market to be established in Turkey and Turkey being a commercial beneficiary.

“The electronic platform for trading in the natural gas center may be established in the coming months. The price of natural gas for European consumers will be largely determined at the center. It’s crazy what’s happening in Europe’s own centers,” Russian leader Putin said. Would it be wrong to assume that he no longer considers Turkey as a transit country?

“I don’t know the details of the offer,” former BOTAS General Manager Yardım said, “In regard to Putin’s statement, I believe they are thinking of a system like the electronic sales platform they made earlier. As for the possible plan in Moscow’s mind, I believe the Russians are thinking of a system in which they will buy gas, choose the companies themselves, collect the offers themselves and say, ‘You won this much, the average price was this much at the end of the month.’

“It is not an issue to be solved in 3-5 months”

The schedule of the project is another matter. Minister of Energy and Natural Resources Fatih Dönmez has announced that their goal is to start the project to establish gas hub in Thrace within a year. Dönmez noted, “It is not an issue to be dealt with in 3-5 months. Perhaps we can start with a more limited number of markets in the transition period before a permanent market. Then the schedule will be pushed forward a little more” emphasizing the need for time.

Commenting on Dönmez’s prediction of a “one year” period, Yardım believes that the upcoming elections and the balances that the government looks after between the West and Russia are also decisive in this project. “I think this will cool down a bit before the elections,” he said, assessing that Ankara would not want to “get in wrong with the U.S. directly.”

How can it work?

Turkey already has a gas exchange. Its name is Energy Exchange Istanbul (EXIST) or Enerji Piyasaları İşletme A.Ş. (EPİAŞ) by its Turkish name. The website of the institution states that EXIST, which was established on March 18, 2015, works in harmony with Turkey’s goal of “becoming a central country in energy trade” and is on the way to become an energy exchange that is referenced on a global scale.

Former BOTAS General Manager Yardım explains the operation of the system that will be the center as follows:

“In EXIST, the names of the gas suppliers and buyers are not disclosed. Neither the seller nor the buyer is known in the transactions in EXIST. Gases are nationalized to be traded in EXIST. Both seller companies and buyer companies need to establish a company in Turkey and obtain a license in accordance with the legislation of EMRA.”

After this process, buyers and sellers create supply and demand just like in the stock market by trading on EXIST’s Continuous Trade Platform. The price is determined through this mechanism. Buyer and seller bids meet each other without the bidders being known and the price is formed. EXIST guarantees the payments through TAKASBANK.

“Gazprom wants to make the electronic sales platform transactions it has stopped in Europe in Turkey.” Gökhan Yardım clarifies the difference between being a ‘transit’ and a ‘center’ as follows:

“Gazprom will sell gas within its sales platform. Buyers will receive the gas transmitted through Turkey. This does not make Turkey a gas hub as the gas is only transferred through Turkey. Gas should be sold in Turkey. All trading transactions of liquidity should be made in Turkey and the money should remain in Turkey. Turkey has all kinds of infrastructures. All procedures and rules of EXIST are suitable for these steps. If Gazprom desires, it can buy a certain share from EXIST. Other European companies can also do the same. The important thing is to perform these transactions through EXIST.”

Why would Europe buy Russian gas from the Turkish stock market?

Gökhan Yardım explains:

“Europe may take a negative stance at first, but if more gas comes to Turkey, the gas transmitted through TANAP can also be traded here. LNG that is coming from America can be traded here. The bigger the market, the more eager Europe becomes. But if there’s only one player, Russia, then they won’t be willing. If too many players and too much gas come to Turkey, then a different picture will emerge.”

‘Atlantic Council’ analyses

According to Atlantic Council analysis, by Yevgeniya Gaber in December, “Turkey’s desire to play a major role in regional energy infrastructure is not only geopolitically driven but also economically and technically feasible.”

The analysis also highlights Turkey’s gas storage capacity and the advantages of having pipelines at the intersection. However, in the analysis it is advocated that, for Turkey to be an energy hub, “Russian gas can’t be a key part of the plan.”

According to Yevgeniya Gaber, the Ukrainian Foreign Policy Expert; “diversification of existing routes and suppliers, independence in decision-making through an independent institution, market demand and supply that determine prices, and political will of potential partners to get involved in the projects…” are the basic conditions for establishing an energy hub.

Putin’s project to make Turkey a gas hub could increase Ankara’s dependence on Russian fossil fuels and Moscow in strategic issues, and further endanger Ankara’s complex relations with the West, the author says.

Similar views are echoed in another analysis of Atlantic Council on December 20. It is emphasized that Turkey’s dream of becoming a gas hub will not be realized without adopting liberal market principles. In his article, Eser Özdil claims that BOTAS’s dominant role in the Turkish energy market is the most important obstacle to Turkey becoming a gas hub. According to the author, BOTAS’s dominant role should be restricted, its dominance on the market with mass subsidization should end, in short, Turkey’s gas market should be completely liberalized…

Of course, in such a scenario, it is not possible to predict the future of gas price to be consumed by the household in times of crisis.

Available capacities

The Blue Stream has a capacity of 15.75 billion cubic meters. TurkStream’s total capacity is 31.25 billion cubic meters (bcm). Currently, TANAP has a capacity of 16 billion bcm. These pipelines, which meet Turkey’s gas needs, also transfer some gas to Europe. Nord Stream 1 and 2 have a total annual gas transport capacity of 110 billion cubic meters (bcm). From this point of view, it seems inevitable to increase capacity and build a new pipeline.

The European Union (EU) needs around 400 bcm of gas per year. It is impossible for the lines passing through Turkey to respond to this need in its current form. Therefore, the construction of a new gas pipeline or capacity-building opportunities need to be evaluated. Building new pipelines from Russia amidst war environment in the Black Sea is another question. On the other hand, the need for the project in case peace is restored is another point.

Currently, although the seller is different, Europe may not be eager to buy Russian gas from the Turkish stock market. The EU, which imported 43.5 percent of its gas from Russia in 2021, uses 7.5 percent of Russian gas this year. The pressure put by the U.S. on Nord Stream 2 should be considered as well.

In summary, “being a hub” covers Turkey’s right to be a commercial beneficiary of the natural gas that passes through it. Gases from various sources will be traded on EXIST’s stock exchange and will bring buyers and sellers together. The greater the market depth, the greater the hub quality. First, a regional consensus at the initial stage, especially between the EU and Russia, seems essential to becoming a hub.

Since we will be revisiting this discussion, let’s end it here for now with the following questions:

Is the ‘active neutrality’ policy or being in the ‘right place’ geopolitically, being a member of NATO and simultaneously following the ‘Asia Anew Initiative’ policy sufficient to become an ‘energy hub’?

Can Turkey create a different alternative center between Russia’s proposal and the current market regulations?

Or are all these foreign policy orientations opposites that cancel each other out?

EUROPE

Operationsplan Deutschland: The debate over ‘planned economy’ in Germany

Published

on

As Ukraine fires U.S.-made long-range missiles at Russia for the first time and Russian leader Vladimir Putin updates his country’s nuclear doctrine, European countries are preparing for an all-out war on the continent.

According to a 1,000-page document drawn up by the German armed forces called ‘Operationsplan Deutschland’, Germany will host hundreds of thousands of troops from NATO countries and act as a logistics hub to send huge amounts of military equipment, food and medicine to the front line.

The German military is also instructing businesses and civilians on how to protect key infrastructure and mobilize for national defense in the event of Russia expanding drone flights, espionage and sabotage across Europe.

Businesses have been advised to draw up contingency plans detailing the responsibilities of employees in the event of an emergency, and told to stockpile diesel generators or install wind turbines to ensure energy independence.

More state intervention in the economy under discussion

In this context, state intervention in the economy and in companies is being discussed more intensively.

The German state has far-reaching rights in crisis situations. The energy crisis showed how quickly the state can intervene: At the time, the German government filled gas storage facilities by law, nationalized the gas importer Uniper and supplied floating LNG terminals.

According to Bertram Brossardt, CEO of the Bavarian Business Association, even a “transition to a planned economy” could be possible in an emergency.

This ‘planned economy’ could involve the state issuing food vouchers or even forcing people to work in certain sectors, such as water or transport companies.

Companies could also benefit if they have employees who volunteer for disaster relief, the Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW) or the fire brigade.

Lieutenant Colonel Jörn Plischke, who conducted the company training in Hamburg, said: “It costs you a few days a year to support this. But in a crisis, you have a direct link to the people who protect people and infrastructure,” he said.

Hamburg: The intersection of civil and military economy

Hamburg, where Lieutenant Colonel Plischke attended the event, is a central hub for the transport of goods and troops.

“If our infrastructure is used for military purposes, the risk of cyber-attacks and sabotage increases significantly,” the mayor of the Hanseatic city, Peter Tschentscher, told the Faz newspaper.

The Hamburg Senate has therefore created additional staff to strengthen civil defense. A third ‘home defense corps’ has been introduced, made up of volunteers who do not fight in the troops but work to ensure protection and security.

Exercises are currently being held in the Hanseatic city with the German armed forces and civilian forces.

According to the report, this exercise, called ‘Red Storm Alpha’, is training in the protection of port facilities.

The next exercise, ‘Red Storm Bravo’, will start soon and will be on a larger scale.

The lessons learnt from these exercises will then be incorporated into the ‘Operationsplan Deutschland’. This plan is intended to be a ‘living document’, constantly evolving and adapting to new information and threats.

Continue Reading

EUROPE

The era of the ‘right-wing majority’ in the European Parliament

Published

on

Under Ursula von der Leyen’s second presidency, the European Commission will abandon its previous ‘cordon sanitaire’ policy towards the ‘far right’.

Leyen’s new Commission will include two members from the ‘far right’. Raffaele Fitto of Fratelli d’Italia (Brothers of Italy – FdI), the party of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, and Olivér Várhelyi, who is close to Fidesz, the party of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.

Fratelli d’Italia is part of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group in the EP, while Fidesz is part of the Patriots for Europe (PfE) group, which also includes the French National Rally (RN) and the Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ).

The conservative European People’s Party (EPP), led by German CSU politician Manfred Weber, has repeatedly cooperated with the ECR in the past legislature and explicitly reserves the right to do so in the future.

The cordon sanitaire against the right is practically non-existent

More recently, it has voted with the PfE and sometimes even with the Europe of Sovereign Nations (ESN), of which the German AfD is a member. The traditional border against the ‘extreme right’ (the so-called ‘security cordon’) is thus continuing to crumble.

The security cordon was systematically relaxed by the EPP in the last legislative period. As early as January 2022, the EPP made it possible for an MEP from the right-wing ECR to be elected as one of the vice-presidents of the EP.

A study by the Greens shows that the European Commission under Ursula von der Leyen has relied on MEPs from the ECR and even the more right-wing ID (Identity and Democracy) group in around 340 votes to secure a majority.

According to the study, these demands often included a reduction in the CO2 price for the car industry or the approval of subsidies for fossil fuels.

With the votes of the EPP, ECR and ID, the EPP also managed to block a motion in April 2024 proposing measures to prevent parliamentary staff from being harassed by MEPs.

So, one small step after another, the security cordon was broken.

Breaking point: European right united against Maduro

In September, one of the first votes of the newly elected EP attracted more attention. The resolution under discussion would have recognised Edmundo González, the defeated candidate in the presidential elections in Venezuela on 28 July 2024, as the real winner of the elections.

The resolution in favour of González was tabled jointly by the EPP and the ECR, in which the party of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni is the largest group.

The resolution was finally adopted with the votes of Orbán’s Fidez, Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) and PfE, which includes the FPÖ, and the ESN, which includes the AfD.

The ‘Venezuelan majority’ at work in the EP: EPP support for the AfD

The so-called ‘Venezuelan majority’ – the large voting majority of conservative and right-wing parties in the EP – has since come into play on several occasions.

This was the case in October, for example, when the European Parliament decided on the procedure for presenting and voting on future EU commissioners. Also in October, the EPP voted in favour of an AfD budget motion proposing the erection of extensive barriers at the EU’s external borders.

The EPP, ECR and PfE also voted to award this year’s European Parliament Sakharov Prize to González and right-wing Venezuelan opposition politician María Corina Machado.

Finally, last week the EPP joined with other MEPs on the right to amend a bill aimed at halting global deforestation.

Sparking outrage on the left, several rebel MEPs from the ECR, PfE, ESN and the liberal Renew group backed the EPP on key amendments.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen was elected in July on the basis of an alliance between the EPP, Liberals, Socialists and Greens.

In its second term, the European Commission is abandoning its previous ‘cordon sanitaire’ policy against the ‘far right’.

Leyen’s new Commission will include two members from the ‘far right’. Raffaele Fitto of Fratelli d’Italia (Brothers of Italy – FdI), the party of Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, and Olivér Várhelyi, who is close to Fidesz, the party of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.

Fratelli d’Italia is part of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group in the EP, while Fidesz is part of the Patriots for Europe (PfE) group, which also includes the French National Rally (RN) and the Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ).

The conservative European People’s Party (EPP), led by German CSU politician Manfred Weber, has repeatedly cooperated with the ECR in the past legislature and explicitly reserves the right to do so in the future.

New Commissioners from the right

Raffaele Fitto, a member of Giorgia Meloni’s FdI party, is known as one of Meloni’s closest friends and will be appointed by Leyen as one of the vice-presidents of the EU Commission ‘responsible for cohesion and reforms’.

Hungary, on the other hand, has appointed former Enlargement Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi as a commissioner in Brussels, with future responsibility for health. Várhelyi is very close to Prime Minister Orbán’s Fidesz party.

There is strong protest against Fitto and Várhelyi in the Socialist and Green parliamentary groups, which support the Leyen Commission. It is rumoured that both groups will not support the appointment of the two politicians.

The invisible architect of the right-wing alliance: Manfred Weber of the CSU

The row over future commissioners has come to a head in recent days.

EPP President Manfred Weber (CSU), who is seen as the main architect of his group’s alliance with the ECR and the EPP, could theoretically get two right-wing commissioners approved with a “Venezuelan majority”.

However, if CDU or CSU politicians in the EP vote with the AfD on a key decision, this could be seen as an unwelcome signal shortly before the early German elections.

But as former Italian prime ministers Romano Prodi and Mario Monti said on Tuesday, pressure is growing for the EU to act ‘as one’ at a time when it faces ‘major challenges both in the East and in the West’.

We have a responsibility to make sure that something changes after this election… The majority will very often include the ECR,” German EPP MEP Peter Liese of the CSU also told reporters on Monday.

Liese said he had no “firewall” against the ECR and claimed that Fitto’s senior position had been negotiated as part of an agreement between the main political families in the European Council at the beginning of the summer.

Continued support for Ukraine in return for right-wing MEPs

On Wednesday (20 November), however, the leaders of the European Parliament’s political groups, meeting in Brussels, reached an agreement.

According to this, Fitto and Várhelyi will be allowed to take up the positions in the European Commission that Leyen has envisaged for them, and the Socialists will agree to this.

In return, the EPP promises to cooperate only with ‘pro-Ukrainian’ parties that support the EU and the rule of law.

This means that the old ‘cordon sanitaire’, i.e. the border against the ‘extreme right’, has been replaced primarily by foreign policy conditions.

According to the EPP’s interpretation, there are no longer any obstacles to cooperation with the ECR.

Continue Reading

EUROPE

Turmoil in the SPD: Pistorius vs. Scholz

Published

on

Pressure is mounting on German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to relinquish leadership of his party, the Social Democrats (SPD), ahead of the upcoming snap elections. This move is seen as a potential lifeline for the party, currently polling in third place, to regain electoral momentum.

The SPD leadership has thus far supported Scholz’s bid for a second term in the federal elections, now rescheduled for 23 February 2025 following the collapse of the three-party coalition on 6 November. However, internal dissent is growing.

In two heated party meetings last week, SPD MPs deliberated over whether Defence Minister Boris Pistorius should replace Scholz as the party’s candidate. According to Der Spiegel and POLITICO, one meeting included the conservative wing of the SPD, while the other involved its left wing. Both groups reportedly had significant support for replacing Scholz with Pistorius.

Calls for Scholz to step aside reached a crescendo on Monday, with prominent SPD politicians from North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany’s most populous state, leading the charge.

Pistorius’ voices rise within the party

Dirk Wiese and Wiebke Esdar stated: “The focus is on finding the best political line-up for this election. We hear a lot of praise for Boris Pistorius. It is clear that the final decision on the chancellor candidacy will rest with the party committees, as it should.”

Markus Töns, a long-time SPD member, echoed this sentiment in Stern: “The chancellor has done a good job in difficult circumstances, but the coalition’s end signals a need for a fresh start. Boris Pistorius would make this easier than Olaf Scholz.”

Former SPD leader Sigmar Gabriel was even more critical. Writing on X (formerly Twitter), Gabriel warned of “growing resistance” within the SPD to Scholz’s leadership. “The SPD leadership’s only response is appeasement and loyalty pledges. What we need is bold political leadership. Without it, the SPD risks falling below 15 percent,” he cautioned.

Scholz confident of ‘support from the leadership’

The SPD leadership had planned to finalize the chancellor candidacy decision at its party conference on 30 November. However, the timeline may accelerate to quell the escalating debate.

Speaking from the G20 Summit in Brazil, Scholz dismissed questions about his candidacy, expressing confidence in party support. “The SPD and I aim to win this election together,” he told Die Welt. Secretary-General Lars Klingbeil reinforced this stance, stating on ARD television: “We are committed to continuing with Olaf Scholz—there’s no wavering.”

Chancellor returns without stopping in Mexico

Despite these reassurances, Scholz abruptly canceled his planned trip to Mexico, returning to Berlin after the G20 Summit amid rumors of party infighting. While the SPD leadership held a conference call on Tuesday to discuss the campaign strategy, no decisions were reached.

Recent opinion polls paint a bleak picture for both Scholz and the SPD. The party is polling at 16 percent, far behind the CDU and the far-right AfD, marking a steep decline of 10 points since the 2021 elections.

Yet, Boris Pistorius remains Germany’s most popular politician, consistently outpacing CDU leader Friedrich Merz in approval ratings. This has fueled hopes within the SPD that Pistorius could revitalize their electoral prospects.

Pistorius’ rising profile is not without controversy. Known for his hawkish stance on military issues, he advocates for making the German military “fit for war” and has pushed for increased defense spending to meet NATO’s 2 percent of GDP target. Critics argue that these positions clash with the SPD’s traditional skepticism toward military intervention and ties with Moscow.

Nonetheless, many within the SPD believe Pistorius offers the best chance to avoid a crushing defeat in February’s elections. Pistorius has championed investments to rebuild the Bundeswehr after decades of neglect and launched initiatives to recruit for Germany’s depleted armed forces. His restructuring of the army earlier this year emphasized regional defense over external missions.

Internationally, Pistorius’ assertive approach has earned respect from Western allies, positioning him as a strong contender for the chancellorship despite his public denials. “We already have a candidate, and he is the sitting chancellor,” Pistorius recently told German state television.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey