Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:

Which raises the issue of why Ukraine cannot void the contract using the same rationale asserted by the Russians when they cut the gas.

Well, because there is no gas contract for 2006 between Naftogas and Gazrprom and this one is commercial contract, whereas fleet agreement is a package international treaty which includes Russia's recognition of Ukraine's borders.


The Russians, if inclined, could cut that supply off as well, though at the price of forcing a confrontation with the United States.

There is no Turkmen gas for the first quarter of 2006 for Ukraine: this gas is all bought out by Gazprom.

by blackhawk on Mon Jan 2nd, 2006 at 09:05:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Then makes the squeeze play.

I think that just about kills the optimistic scenario.

The Russians are going for the jugular, here.

Have Keyboard. Will Travel. :)

by cskendrick (cs ke nd ri c k @h ot m ail dot c om) on Mon Jan 2nd, 2006 at 09:38:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
There is no competing sources and never were: Gazprom controls gas and the pipeline.
by blackhawk on Mon Jan 2nd, 2006 at 10:33:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I agree on that. But the "Turkmen" gas creates a convenient fiction as it is more difficult for Ukrainians to justify stealing transit gas from Gazprom when they are not paying "Turkmens".

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Mon Jan 2nd, 2006 at 10:38:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series