Skip to main content

The Oil Game and the Georgian Pipeline

I wrote a post earlier today suggesting that the Georgian government had it within its control to make the west sit up and listen to its claims in Ossetia by shutting the oil pipeline running through their country.

I am leaving that post up, but following the suggestion, I went and had a look at what the pipeline, which has been being repaired for a long time, actually meant strategically. I have put a map from the excellent oildrum site at the top of this post to visualise my points.

It turns out that there is not much in terms of supply at the minute, but that the pipeline is of vital importance to several major interests. The last time much of this was discussed was in 2002, and I have been snarfling through the archives tonight.

Last week, it was mysteriously attacked in Turkey by 'kurdish dissidents'. This meant that when the war broke out, it could not be used to put pressure on the west, since it had already been neutered.

Moreover, the pipeline itself has become something of a burden to oil companies, who would prefer to move pipelines through either Pakistan or Iran, both of which eventualities would be opposed by Israel, and the United States of America.

The Washington report on Middle East Affairs--a report associated with an old power structure in the USA--noted in 2002 that a Georgian pipeline was required for a Turkish port and that Israeli and American groups were prepared to back that wish with strategic commitments.

At the time, the Iranians, who were the big losers along with the Russians from the Georgia-Azeri-Turkish option which won out were not best pleased. By 2005, the Turks had emerged as the big winners.

Kazakhstan, which left to itself would have had to send all its oil through Russian pipelines, is the source of most of the oil the pipeline carries. 'Islamic militant' groups, apparently, took to blowing up the Russian feeder pipelines the Kazakhs were developing, which might have swayed their mind. Russia's recent actions may have as an incidental consequence swayed Kazakh minds back.

Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan have also recently been flirting with ideas of switching their exports from Russia to a new independent pipeline. This may have involved expanding their Georgian operation.

A Russian pipeline would be subject to Russian control and Russian taxes. It would be a source of strategic power for the Russian Federation.

By invading Ossetia to protect its citizens from an attack which may have been encouraged by the United States, Russia has underlined the sense, from the Kazakh point of view, of moving its increasing oil supply through Russia. From there, Russia could play off Greece and Turkey as final ports.

So, if Georgia had been genuinely determined to fight off Russian aggression, and had the United States been in any way likely to intervene if pushed, cutting the pipeline would have pushed the USA over the edge into support.

Yet if Georgia had not wanted a real war--if it had merely been caught out trying to crush Russian influence in Ossetia, as some suggest it was--then keeping the pipeline at all costs under Georgian and therefore American control, even by ceding Ossetia, is going to be the name of the game.

Vladimir Putin is a cold eyed clear headed man who knows the strategic oil game intimately and who has a steel spine in playing it. Watch out for accidental attacks on the oil pipeline in the next few days. An Anschluss and oil would be a big prize indeed for Russia, and Kazakh dependence would be the icing on the cake. Well done, Washington--another foreign policy 'blinder'.

The President of the United States has been playing beach volleyball in Beijing. Websites do not seem to list Dick Cheney's schedule, which I therefore have to report as undisclosed.

Comments

Anonymous said…
This one isn't about oil, it plays a part but only a minor one. This is a resurgent Russia and about time too. Russia is a fantastic nation and Putin has made it believe in itself once again, and who would have thought it would have been so far to the right.
bob said…
And I though Neil Clark was a rabid Russophile, I had yet to encounter the odyssey...

Popular posts from this blog

I resign from the Labour Party The likes of Andy Burnham, Hazel Blears, Mary Honeyball and Luke Akehurst are now representative of the Labour Party. They have at least given me a clear mind in recent days, and for that, I suppose, I should be grateful. I have been a Labour member since I was 16, in a steeltown. I can just about accept that student union hacks with no proper job experience can spend their time undercutting unions and selling public administration to their mates, because something could arise that may be better. I can also accept that some immigrants, because of a misplaced desire to avoid the appearance of racism, are more 'acceptable' to the Left than others, so my own family's Irish Catholicism can be something to be sneered at by the ranks of Labour activists. I can accept that there may be a fiscal case for not taxing the super rich with capital gains, but not for truckling to them or sucking up to the likes of Rupert Murdoch. I can accept that there mig...
A Jacksonian Republican Party Democrats in the United States frequently lay claim to the heritage of Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson. They present the two as tribunes of the revolutionary people, and Jefferson-Jackson dinners are often occasions at which aspiring candidates can strut their demotic stuff, as it were. Both Presidents were opposed to coalitions made up of those they saw as 'elitists' and federal empire-builders, in the Federalist or Whig Parties. J-J (to employ a short and composite form, a bit like the creators of San Trovaso in Venice) were nationalists, tough on foreign crime, sure of their often violent support, and ferocious in the support of presidents who protected the republic. They upheld gun rights and, those of the traditional holders of property, emphasised the rights of States, and an armed citzenry, and in general thought all opposed to them belonged to some conspiracy, probably associated with Europe, to take away their Scots-Irish and democrat...
In Defence of The Pope In recent days, wild allegations, and frankly mad chains of causation, have been constructed around Pope Benedict. I don't think that I have anything to prove on my attitude to the disgusting things that were done by men breaking their vows, who were often protected by Bishops who were also in a deranged relationship with their duty. However, I do intensely dislike the stupidity of some of the assault. England seems particularly gripped by antipapist feeling. This has been true in its past, when the country is under pressure, and has been a strand in its identity since 1533. It emerges at times of great pressure, like the 1850s or 1730s, often when the English people realise that someone is undermining and impoverishing them and fail to see that the culprits are their own elites. However, it now seems clear that Josef Ratzinger, when a cardinal, was involved in a process that extended the time in which victims of sexual violence could bring clai ms beyond tha...