Reþat Arým
The Evolution of the International System
Introduction
When we consider the major trends in the international system since the September 11 attacks, we cannot escape the impression that the international conjuncture which started to be formed at that point in time is slowly coming to fruition. Its basic components are the United States and Europe. US-European relations which suffered at the beginning of the Iraq crisis later on improved and have taken a new dimension within the NATO-EU cooperation. Of the other two big powers the Russian Federation is recovering its lost stature mainly with the support of its oil and gas resources, China has been on the rise The focus of world attention is on the Middle East There Iraq is the main issue. Together with it goes the Palestinian-Israeli problem. These problems and their ramifications, be it religion, ethnicity, oil or struggle for power stretch as far as Afghanistan.
There is nothing in this picture that resembles a Bi-polar or Multi-polar World. It is a Uni-polar World: the United States is the dominant power.[1] Still it needs Europe. Europe in the last fifty years has come a long way. But it has to make another leap forward to face the challenges of the World together with the US and be a global power. One of the challenges is coming from within Europe. The Western Balkans can be seen to contain a ticking bomb: Kosovo. The other force they have to come to terms is in a distant place but is fast approaching: China. In this paper these two issues will be handled to see to what extend they may influence the development of the international system. Between these two regions lies a vast area from which the world energy needs are supplied. So, energy will be third issue of major concern to the international system.
The Balkans
The European Union has always felt a responsibility for Western Balkans. The end of the Cold War created a new constellation of forces which affected the European Union and the Western Balkans. The reunification of Germany, the dismemberment of the Soviet Union were major developments of this period. The dismemberment of Yugoslavia is, if not a direct, at least the indirect result of the end of the Cold War. When Slovenia and Croatia were recognized by Germany, the chain of events started to unfold. The independence of Bosnia and Herzegovina brought about an atrocious war that lasted many years. European Union or individual European countries could not cope with the situation. United Nations and OSCE could not either. It was thanks to the US action that the Bosnians could be saved from extermination. The next tragedy was going to be in Kosovo. Despite all efforts to prevent it the war came to Kosovo. Milosevic government attacked the Kosovars, again causing a human tragedy. Again, Europe could not do anything about it and the US had to take action within NATO context.
In the meantime, EU’s Foreign and Security Policy was developing. 1998 Saint-Malo was realized following the crises in the Balkans. In 1999 Petersburg tasks were designed for the same purpose. Kosovo crisis was a turning point.
EU took a fundamental decision in 1999 to give the Western Balkan countries the prospect of integration into EU. The Stabilization and Association Process (SAP) was the first step. Then in 2000 the Feira European Council stated that all the countries covered by SAP are potential candidates for EU membership. The Thessaloniki EU-Western Balkans Summit in June 2003 had confirmed the EU’s support for European perspective of the Western Balkan countries. In June 2005 the European Council reaffirmed this position.
The European Commission in its communication of 27.01.2006 said that three years after that Thessaloniki Summit, the Western Balkans region has further stabilized and advanced towards the European Union. [2] The European perspective provided a powerful incentive for political and economic reform and encouraged reconciliation among the peoples of the region. It was in the interest of the EU as a whole, as well as the countries concerned, that this process should be stepped up.
The Austrian Presidency held a substantive discussion on the Western Balkans during the informal meeting of foreign ministers on 10-11 March 2006 in Salzburg. They adopted the EU-Western Balkans Joint Statement where they said preserving peace, and enhancing stability and security in the Western Balkans remained a common European interest.
With Croatia, accession negotiations began on 30 October 2005. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia obtained the status of candidate country in December 2005. Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro are potential candidate countries.
Kosovo
Kosovo is administered according to the UN Security Council Resolution 1244. Final status talks on Kosovo have started in 2006. Kosovo is probably going to affect the future developments in the Western Balkans. Therefore, it may be useful to take a closer look at it.
UN interim international administration (UNMIK) was created by UN Res 1244 in 1999. The UN Secretary General appointed a special envoy, Kai Eide, to undertake a comprehensive overview of the situation in Kosovo. On the basis of his report, the Secretary General recommended that the process of settling Kosovo’s status should commence. Soren Jessen-Petersen, the head of UNMIK, said that the status quo was not sustainable. [3] The Security Council in October 2005 authorized the Secretary General to appoint former Finnish President Martti Ahtisaari to start a political process to determine Kosovo’s future status. Martti Ahtisaari started its mission on 20 February 2006. The key issue is the creation of a Kosovo that will have the greatest chance of lasting stability and development.
Since it was unlikely that any Serbian government would acquiesce to an independent Kosovo, many people thought that Mr. Ahtisaari should impose an independence package for Kosovo. The International Crisis Group in this report of 17 February 2006 made recommendations to all the parties concerned. [4] Kosovo since 1999 was a UN protectorate under UNMIK. Since 2002 UNMIK has been following a policy of “standards before status” to defer pressures within Kosovo for independence. In March 2004 tensions exploded in Kosovo with Albanian riots targeting the Serb population and UNMIK. From the historical point of view, Serbs argue their historical right to Kosovo, Albanians claim they are the descendants of the Illyrians, whose presence pre-dated the Serbs’ arrival in the Balkans by several centuries.
The EU is determined to play an active role in Kosovo’s status process. It has appointed a representative to support the UN Status Envoy. EU will use its influence to help reach a balanced and sustainable settlement. It will also play its part in the international presence that will be required.
The negotiations continued for some time. At the beginning the issues addressed were the building blocks of the future such as: What municipal arrangements will exist to give minorities in Kosovo protection? What protection will exist for churches? What economic framework will a Kosovar entity deal with? The nature of the final status was supposed to be addressed later in 2006 and it seemed that the international community was determined to settle this matter soon. The intention is to get agreement on whatever the outcome to have a stable, functioning society with appropriate protections of minorities and a structure of acceptance inside the international community for a future security force, a future civilian presence.[5]
The first high level meeting was held in Vienna on 24 July 2006. The President and the Prime Minister of Serbia and the President and the Prime Minister of Kosovo headed the two delegations. Before and after this meeting also direct talks took place between the parties on the decentralization of governmental and administrative function of Kosovo.
The UN Secretary General reported to the Security Council on 1 September 2006 that the positions of Serbian and Kosovo delegations remain committed to “substantial autonomy” and “full independence” respectively, with minimal space for negotiation. He said that they should show flexibility. [6] Thereupon, the Security Council held a meeting on 22 September 2006 on Kosovo. There was a call from interested states for Ahtisaari to prepare a comprehensive proposal for a settlement and for all possible efforts to be made to achieve a negotiated settlement in 2006. The Contact Group (US, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Russia) met Ahtisaari.
However, the proposal of Mr. Ahtisaari was postponed to 2007 and it came on 2 February 2007. The proposal does not contain any reference to Serbian sovereignty over Kosovo; also it does not mention “independence” for Kosovo. It creates an international envoy mandated by UN and EU with power to intervene in government. This gives the impression that the formation of a sui generis state is being contemplated. Kosovo will have the right to use national symbols including flag and anthem: It will be able to join international organizations such as UN and IMF NATO and EU forces in military and policing roles will be kept. The non-Albanian minority will be protected. Kosovo will not be able to join Albania; the Serb areas will not split off and join Serbia.
Kosovo is a test case for the European Union. The struggle between the West and Russia will determine the solution on Kosovo. On 2 February, when the Kosovo status proposals were presented to the two parties in Belgrade and Pristina, the German Presidency of the EU urged the two parties to approach the upcoming negotiations in a serious manner and without reservations. There was a need for a realistic compromise. The US State Department, on its part, said the Proposal was fair and balanced and called on the two parties to engage constructively with the Special Envoy in a period of consultations to finalize the settlement. The Russian side said there should not be a time limit for negotiations; already the Russians had said, before the Proposals were submitted, that if independence is required for Kosovo the same would be applied to other conflicts in the Caucasus.
Ahtisaari Plan was tabled by US before the Security Concil. Russia not only rejected the resolution calling for UN endorsement of the Ahtisaari Plan, but has warned it might exercise its veto if there is a vote. Russia was circulating its own counter proposal for Kosovo that would keep it within the “General Sovereignty” claimed by Belgrade and put off the question of Kosovo’s final status.
A troika of Ambassadors from Russia, America and the EU is holding talks with Kosovo and Serbia which is due to end on Dec. 10. After that date Kosovo want to declare independence. The Kosovars fear that, once the UN mission is replaced by an EU one, the Big Powers might pressure them to accept that, even if Kosova begins acting as an independent state, Serbia should retain sovereignty as least for a few years.[7]
The final chance before December 10 dead line to reconcile Kosovo Albanian’s desire for full independence and Serbia’s insistence that it remains part of Serbia were the negotiations in Brussels involving a troika. The EU’s envoy, the German diplomat Wolfgang Ischinger, backed by Washington, was offering a “status- neutral” pact, in which Belgrade and Pristina agree on practical measures such as trade ties without addressing independence. Serbia presented a new formula, a high degree of autonomy under Serbian sovereignty like Finland’s Aland islands.
Europeans are divided. Cyprus, Slovakia, Spain and Greece are dissenters. The big EU governments appear resigned to prompt recognition of independence.[8]
China
China is a major candidate to influence the evolution of the international system. Historically, that was also the case. In the 18th century, the Chinese considered themselves to be the center of the World. Their decline in the 19th century witnessed the Opium War and the colonization of parts of China. In the 20th century from 1949 to 1979, the People’s Republic of China had many ups and downs. The opening of China to the outside World under Deng Xiaoping has started to transform China to a Great Power status; Hence, its role in the making of the World Order.
When a new conjuncture started to take shape following the September 11 attacks, the triangle of US-Russia-China was there. However, it was not sure which way it would go. China was supporting US on the fight against terrorism. But many commentators were saying that in the long run US struggle against terrorism might threaten Chinese interests, leading to a tightening of the chain of containment around China[9]. On the other hand, Chinese- Russian relations were developing in a satisfactory manner, but September 11 prompted the question of whether this cooperation would be put aside for a while, or was this cooperation really so important as to forsake the benefit that may accrue from the military action in Afghanistan.
The six years that elapsed since September 11 gives us some idea about where things stand. The US continues to be the main factor in Chinese Foreign Policy[10]. Some scholars suggest that the country’s strategy over the next 30-50 years could involve “band-wagoning.[11] It is also said that one should not think of China’s rise mainly in military terms, that China is challenging the international system: to replace the status quo with the “tian xia” –under the heavens, the places all the nations of the world in a rules-based system, negating global hegemony[12]. The European Union is very much aware of the rising China [13].
In May 2006, as a Turkish Foreign Policy Institute delegation, we made a trip to China as guests of the Chinese People’s Institute of Foreign Affairs. During our discussions with our counterpart Institute, the Chinese officials and the Professors at the China Foreign Affairs University as well as the Shanghai Institute for International Studies, we have taken up questions related to the international system. We have observed that the idea of multi-polar system was no more the focus of attention. Rather, it was only one of the theses, which was supported by some scholars. Another idea that was in the minds of the Chinese thinkers was multilateralism, where the United Nations and International Law would play the major role. They were also concentrating their studies on big economic groups in the World, such as the European Union, NAFTA and on transnational organizations such as the United Nations. The relationship between China and the US definitely had a priority. When it comes to Chinese-Russian relations, it was said that they were developing at their own pace; there was cooperation on the Palestinian-Israeli, Iranian and North Korean questions.
China- US
The phenomenal economic development of China makes it a natural competitor for the US. The most visible aspect of it, is the rapid growth of China’s energy demand. China increases not only its oil and gas imports, but also forges close relations with major producers all over the World. Chinese demand has risen to six million barrels per day, with 40 percent coming from imports. The relationship that China established in the 1990s with the major Middle East countries continued and even strengthened after Sept 11. In Iraq, the 1997 agreement’s status is unknown, but the Chinese companies wait for Iraq to open up[14]. In Iran, China is the main importer of oil; it also makes investments there. This also benefits Iran from the political point of view[15][16]. Saudi Arabia is also targeted by China; by 2002 the Kingdom had become China’s leading foreign supplier of crude oil. Saudi investments in China are also increasing. This certainly may annoy the US. On the whole, the US will have to think about finding ways to manage the Chinese challenge in the Middle East. It was therefore, expected that the question of oil would be an important item during the visit of President Hu to the United States. Both sides were trying to avoid a conflict in the coming decades [17].
China-Russia
Chinese-Russian relations have received important boosts during the period since Sept 11. Energy cooperation seems to be the center piece in this relationship. President Putin in his last visit to China in March 2006 signed a very big natural gas deal. There would be two pipelines to carry 30 to 40 billion cubic meters of gas each to China. The cost of the pipelines is 10 billion dollars. In oil, however, the Russian side only agreed to a feasibility study of a pipeline; today Russia exports 55 million barrels of oil each year by railroad tankers [18].
China-EU
The last EU- China Summit in Beijing on November 28, 2007 has clearly shown the importance of China for the European Union. There was also a EU- China Business Summit. The two sides even talked of a strategic partnership.
Energy in the Central Asia, Caucasus and the Middle East
The region.
The region surrounding the Caspian Sea is very important as far as energy requirements of the European Union is concerned. Let us see how the EU considers the energy situation. The Commission Green Paper in November 2000 on security of energy supply predicted that, if no action was taken, the EU’s energy dependency would climb from 50% in 2000 to 70% in 2030.
The debate on the need for a European energy policy started again in 2006, because of the rising oil and gas prices and Europe’s increasing dependency on a few external suppliers. (They are mainly OPEC and Russia) The Ukraine-Russia gas dispute in January 2006 has certainly gave an urgency to the problem. That is how the EU Commission opened the debate with the publication of a Green Paper in March 2006. The debate culminated when the Commission presented a Strategic Energy Review in January 2007 and the EU heads of states and governments adopted an Action Plan in March 2007. The Commission Green Paper lists six key priority areas, mainly on technical issues, but also emphasizes the need for a common external energy policy.
In May 2006, the Commission and the Secretary General/High Representative issued a joint paper on “an external policy to serve Europe’s energy interests”. The paper considered how EU external relations, including CFSP, can be used more effectively to secure reliable, affordable and environmentally sustainable energy. The guiding principles they adopt mainly relate to what can be done in the third countries. As to practical means they propose two building blocks: functioning markets and diversification. To diversify energy sources, geographical origin and transit routes, the EU should facilitate the maintenance and upgrade of existing energy infrastructure in neighboring countries of key importance to the EU. The attention is drawn to the gas projects in North Africa, Middle East, Caspian region, Russia and Norway which will create new energy corridors. To obtain the desired results, it was proposed to engage with producer, transit and consumer countries. Bilateral, regional and multilateral initiatives are considered. At bilateral level, a comprehensive agreement with Russia, partnerships with Norway and A lgeria cooperation with other producer and consumer countries are foreseen. For Turkey the proposal is the following: “Help Turkey to make full use of its potential to become a major energy transit hub.”
It was quiet clear that the energy pipelines in Turkey would find their place in the energy security of the EU.
Finally, the European Council in March 2007 adopted a comprehensive Action Plan for the period 2007-2009 based on the Commission’s Communication entitled “ An Energy Policy for Europe”. The Communication emphasizes that it is imperative to facilitate the transport of the Caspian energy resources to the EU. The Action Plan underlines the need to enhance security of supply for the EU through effective diversification of energy sources and transport routes.
The producers.
The regions neighboring Turkey are rich in oil and gas. To have a proper perspective, we may look at the developments in those regions during the last 10 years. Indeed it was almost ten years ago that the phrase “ New Great Game” was coined to describe the politics of energy in the Caspian region
In Azerbaijan in 1994 a group of western and Russian companies in a joint venture with the Azeri company SOCAR formed the Azerbaijan International Operating Company (AIOC) and signed an agreement with the Azeri government to develop the fields of Chiraq, Guneshli and Azeri. in the Caspian Their production would reach one million barrels per day by 2009. To transport that oil there were three possibilities, either the Baku-Novorossisk pipeline or the Baku- Tbilissi-Ceyhan pipeline or the Afghanistan,Pakistan route. As is known the second pipeline materialized.
In Kazakstan, the area to be developed was Tengiz oil field. The reserves were estimated up to 19 billion barrels. American Chevron Company is developing the field.. The transportation is through Tengiz-Novorossisk pipeline, which is 1.5oo km long and connects Tengiz Oil field to Noverossisk at the Russian Black Sea coast. A new area was discovered in Kashagan. Total oil reserves of Kazakhstan are estimated at 29 billion. Turkmenistan is rich in natural gas and oil with 88 billion of oil reserves and 22 trillion cubic metres of gas. Turkmenistan negotiated improved payment terms for its natural gas exports with Russia and Ukraine. Turkmenistan signed a 25-year agreement with Russia in the spring of 2003, and a 30-year agreement with China in the spring of 2006 for natural gas exports
The other littoral country in the Caspian is Iran. Iran is a member of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), and ranks amongst the world’s top three holders of proven oil and natural gas reserves. Iran is OPEC’s second-largest exporter after Saudi Arabia The continued exploration and production of the offshore South Pars natural gas field in the Persian Gulf is a key part of Iran’s energy sector development plan. National Iranian Oil Co. claims production capacities of 3.8 million b/d of crude oil and 66 billion cu m/year of natural gas. It estimates Iran's crude oil reserves at 92 billion bbl. The majority of the producing oil fields are concentrated in southwest Iran.
With over 20 trillion cubic meters of gas reserves Iran is the second richest country in term of gas reserves in the world Major onshore and offshore gas fields are North and South Pars, Khangiran, Nar and Kangan, Aghar Dallan and Sarkhoon.
Finally, we come to Russia which is rich both in oil and gas. In 2006 the oil production was 4 million barrels a day and it was totally exported. Roughly 1.3 bbl/d exported via the Druzhba pipeline to Belarus, Ukraine, Germany, Poland and other destinations in Central and Eastern Europe. Russia holds the world’s largest natural gas reserves, with 1,680 trillion cubic feet. The following countries are supplied with Russian gas: Belarus, Ukraine, Finland, Georgia, Turkey, Poland, Germany, Italy and UK.
The Middle East has an estimated 62% of the world oil reserves. Saudi Arabia 261 billion barrels, Iran 106,Iraq 67,Kuwait50 and United Arab Emirates 44..The major producing countries are all exporting oil through international market mechanisms. In the area, proven gas reserves have risen sharply since 1970’s. Most of the recent growth in reserves has come from Qatar’s North Field. The biggest increases in production will occur in Qatar,Iran, and Saudi Arabia. At present, most gas exports from the Middle Easr move eastwards. According to the analysis of the World Energy Outlook in its report of 2005,, this situation could be reversed in 2010. Europe is becoming the largest market for Middle East gas.from 2 billion cubic meters in 2003 to 35 bcm in 2010 and 117 bcm in 2030.
Energy in the World.
To appreciate the richess in the region, we can have a look at the general energy situation in the World. First the energy demand: OPEC’s World Energy Model projects growth of around 2 percent a year up to 2020, from 9 billion tonnes of oil equivalent in 2000 to more than 13 billion in 2020. 95% of the additional demand is expected to be met by fossil fuels, of which 2/3 from petroleum, oil and gas. OPEC possesses 4/5 of world’s proven crude reserves, it has also sufficient supply of natural gas (2. HE Dr. Alvaro Silva Calderon,Secretary General of OPEC. World Energy Outlook for the year 2020. Eight International Energy Forum,September 26, 2002.Osaka,Japan)
Oil demand: US Energy Information Administration estimates that world oil demand grows from 80 million barrels per day in 2003 to 98 million in 2015 and 118 million in 2030.( 3. Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook 2006)
Gas demand: Consumption of natural gas worldwide increases from 95 trillion cubic feet in 2003 to 182 trillion in 2030. (4. idem) OECD Europe’s gas demand will grow very fast, from 17.8 trillion cubic feet in 2003, to 23.9 trillion in 2015, and 30,8 trillion in 2030.
Now, we can consider whether such demand will be met by energy supply:
Proven oil reserves: In 2006 world oil reserves were estimated at 1.293 billion barrels. Of these, 71 percent is located in the Middle East or Canada. Among the top 20 oil reserve holders, 8 are OPEC members that together account for 65 percent of the World’s total reserves.
Oil supply: It is expected that the total oil supply in 2030 will exceed the 2003 level by 38 million barrels per day. It is generally acknowledged that OPEC members with large reserves and relatively low costs for expanding production capacity can accommodate sizable increases in petroleum demand. Non-OPEC supply also increased during the recent years. (5. idem)
Gas supply: As of January 1, 2007, proved world natural gas reserves, as reported by Oil & Gas Journal were estimated at 6,183 trillion cubic feet. The largest revisions to natural gas reserve estimates were reported for Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and China. Almost three-quarters of the world’s natural gas reserves are located in the Middle East and Eurasia . Russia, Iran, and Qatar combined accounted for about 58 percent of the world’s natural gas reserves as of January 1, 2007.
It is to be noted that we are witnessing a change in the international oil market. The Minister of Energy of the United Arab Emirates last year said some argue that China, India and the United States will form the triangle of energy consumer nations in the next few decades; some have begun to argue that global supplies cannot keep pace with the increasing world demand, thus deepening the fears over worsening crises. ( 6.Twelfth Annual Energy Conference, The Emirates Center for strategic Studies and Research, 19-21 November 2006) Other studies suggest that projections of oil demand and supply in the coming decades imply that major consumer countries must increasingly compete for the same oil flows. Therefore security of oil supply matters. The international oil market has changed from a buyer’s into a seller’s market. This renews fears of the use of oil( and gas) in power politics. ( 7.Coby van der Linde, Wilbur Perlot,Femke Hoogereen. Tomorrow’s Mores. The future of geopolitical system and the structure of the international oil Market, Clingendael Energy Programme)
I should also point out that the study undertaken recently by CERA “ Dawn of a new Age: Global Energy Scenarios” will probably be useful in assessing the energy situation in the World. Already at CERA yearly Conference in June 2007 Ýn Ýstanbul one of the main questions discussed was the impact of growing competition for energy resources and markets on global politics at a time of high prices
The role of Turkey.
Finally we can see the role to be played by of Turkey.Situated at the proximity of the Caspian Sea and enjoying very close relations with many countries of that region, particularly Azerbaijan and Georgia, it was only natural for Turkey to assume a prominent role in the building of the East- West Energy Corridor. This Corridor was developed as one of the pillar of Turkey’s energy strategy. The Baku- Tbilisi- Ceyhan (BTC) crude oil pipeline, the Shah- Deniz natural gas pipeline (Baku – Tbilisi- Erzurum) are the two components of this corridor.
As is known the British Petroleum has spearheaded the BTC Pipeline with the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan (SOCAR), UnocAL, Statoil, Turkish Petroleum Company, Agip, Totalfine Elf, Itochu, Inpex, Conoco-Philips, Delta Hess, BTC delivers oil from Azeri- Chirac- Guneshli Oil field of the Caspian coast of Baku to the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan traversing 1.760 km through Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey.
The BTC oil pipeline has a capacity of 50 million tons per annum ( 1 million barrel per day). The BTC is the main export route for oil resources of the landloched Caspian region. Recent developments have made the BTC pipeline even more effective with the signing of an agreement between Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan to extend the pipeline to Kazakhstan on 16 June 2006. The BTC has become opertative on 4 June 2006.
Then, the Baku- Tbilisi- Erzurum Gas Pipeline is added to the Corridor. The Baku- Tbilisi- Erzurum natural gas pipeline (BTE) project entails shipping Azeri natural gas from the Shah deniz field to Turkey.. BTE, which will have capacity of transporting 16bcm per annum, it became operational on 3 July 2007.
These two major pipelines constitute the infrastructure for oil and gas in Turkey that may also help Europe diversify its energy needs. Turkey is determined to become Europe’s fourth natural gas artery after Norway, Russia and North Africa, and thus to become integrated into the European energy network.
Turkey’s energy needs already in 1987, made it necessary to buy Russian Natural Gas. This gas was coming through Ukraine, Romania, Bulgaria. This prompted Turkey to have direct access to Russian Gas, which was the reason why the Blue Stream Gas Pipeline going under the Black Sea was built.
Let us have a look at the projects under consideration:
a) The Nabucco Gas pipeline will bring the natural gas originating from the region around Turkey, will go through Turkey and then to Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary and Austria. It was identified as one of the priority projects of common interest under the guidelines for Trans- European energy network, by Decision No 1229/2003/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2003. Later it was again identified as one of the priorities for securing and diversifying of the EU energy supplies by the Commission’s Green Paper and highlighted by the European Council of Heads of States and Governments of 23 and 24 May 2006.
On 26 June 2006 a Ministerial Conference on Nabucco took place in Vienna. Eu EnergyComissioner Andris Piebalgs and Energy Ministers of Austria, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey agreed to accelerate commercial, regulatory and legal work to build the Nabucco pipeline in the shortest possible time.
b) Turkey has also been developing specific transport projects for Europe such as the Turkish- Greek- Italian Inter-connector Project which became operational on 18 November 2007. The purpose is to transport natural gas of the Caspian through the Turkish national grid to Europe. The Turkish- Greek Inter- connector Project was turned into the Turkish- Greek- Italy Inter-Connector on 4 November 2005. The pipeline will have a capacity of 16 bcm per annum, the Turkish- Greek part of which became operational on 18 November 2007.
c) Turkey is involved in projects to bring Iraqi natural gas which are mostly located in Norhern Iraq. Iraqi natural gas could easily be connected to the Turkish national grid through a pipeline constructed parallel to the Kirkük- Ceyhan oil pipeline using the right of way of the latter.
d) Turkey is receiving Iranian natural gas through Tebriz- Erzurum pipeline.