Ukraine unrest: the energy connection

Ukrainian protesters seized an administrative building in Kiev Friday, before President Viktor Yanukovych appeared to offer concessions to ease growing unrest. Ukraine's energy challenges – dependent on fickle Russia for natural gas and unable to yet develop its own resources – make a difficult situation worse. 

Efrem Lukatsky/AP
Riot police officers block a street in front of barricades of protesters at the monument to Viacheslav Chornovil, a prominent politician in Ukraine and a former Soviet political prisoner, in central Kiev, Ukraine, Friday.

Ukraine President Viktor Yanukovych pledged a reshuffling of his embattled government Friday to ease the protests and violence rocking Kiev. The tentative deal may bring some temporary calm to Ukraine's capital, but it does little to relax the underlying tension between antigovernment protesters and Mr. Yanukovych's administration.

A continued wave of violence threatens Ukraine's role as a critical transit route for moving Russian natural gas into Europe. It could also scare off foreign investors interested in developing Ukraine's domestic supply of natural gas.

The unrest stems from disappointment with the government's inability to reach a deal to join the European Union. More recently, the ire is aimed at government corruption and strict laws aimed at curbing dissent.

But Ukraine's energy challenges underpin past instability and make a bad situation worse. By cutting a deal for discount gas with Russian President Vladimir Putin last November, Ukraine infuriated its pro-Europe contingent and entrusted its energy security to a fickle ally. 

"Putin’s pledges to lower energy prices can be removed just as easily as they can be implemented," Lee Feinstein, former US ambassador to Poland, says in a telephone interview. 

"It was at most a short-term benefit, but in the long run served only to deepen Ukraine’s reliance on Russia," adds Ambassador Feinstein, now a senior fellow at The German Marshall Fund of the United States, a transatlantic think tank based in Washington.   

There were few good options. Ukraine gets about 70 percent of its natural gas from Russia, which says it owes its state-owned gas company, Gazprom, $2.7 billion in unpaid bills from last year. That debt plays a major role in the economic woes driving unrest in the streets of Kiev.

While the former Soviet satellite is largely dependent on Russia, the reverse is also true. Much of Gazprom's pipelines run through Ukraine and onward to Europe, where Russia dominates natural gas markets. And Mr. Putin sees Ukraine as a key component of the Eurasian Union, a proposed economic collaboration between post-Soviet states. It might explain why last November Putin was willing to cut by 33 percent the price Ukraine pays for natural gas imports.

Moscow is also concerned Ukraine will develop its own natural gas. Royal Dutch Shell and Chevron have signed multibillion-dollar deals with Ukraine to invest in what are believed to be significant shale gas resources – similar to those that unlocked a boom in US energy production.

But replicating US success in Eastern Europe is difficult, and prolonged instability in the country would make it harder.

"One of the problems that has impeded shale development in ... a lot of Europe isn’t an absence of the rock formations, but things above ground – the structure of industry, the legal environment," says Jeffrey Mankoff, deputy director and fellow of the Russia and Eurasia program at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. "Companies are wary of sinking a lot of money not knowing if they’ll get a return."

Gazprom reported this week that its profits slumped 10.5 percent in the third quarter of 2013. Many factors contribute to the gas giant's slide, but Ukraine's backlogged payments certainly play a role.

When Putin visits China this coming May, he is expected to sign a major gas supply deal with China National Petroleum Corp. If Russia can tap growing Asian markets to the east, it may lose some interest in cutting deals with its neighbors to the west. 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.