Russian arm-twisting has consequences
Russia may have scored a gas victory over Belarus a few minutes to midnight on New Year’s Eve, but its use of similar blackmail tactics in getting its hands on the huge Sakhalin-II gas project in eastern Russia is earning the country a financial slap on the wrist. In mid-December, Russia strong-armed Shell into selling ...
Russia may have scored a gas victory over Belarus a few minutes to midnight on New Year's Eve, but its use of similar blackmail tactics in getting its hands on the huge Sakhalin-II gas project in eastern Russia is earning the country a financial slap on the wrist. In mid-December, Russia strong-armed Shell into selling its majority stake in Sakhalin, where two major fields under development are estimated to hold more than 1 billion barrels of crude and 500 billion cubic meters of natural gas, to Gazprom, the state-owned energy giant.
But Russia's fondness for re-nationalization means the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development will likely reject a $300 million loan to the Sakhalin project. From the FT:
[F]ormally walking away from the largest energy project in Russia would be considered a snub to the Kremlin and its policy of taking control over private sector assets.
Russia may have scored a gas victory over Belarus a few minutes to midnight on New Year’s Eve, but its use of similar blackmail tactics in getting its hands on the huge Sakhalin-II gas project in eastern Russia is earning the country a financial slap on the wrist. In mid-December, Russia strong-armed Shell into selling its majority stake in Sakhalin, where two major fields under development are estimated to hold more than 1 billion barrels of crude and 500 billion cubic meters of natural gas, to Gazprom, the state-owned energy giant.
But Russia’s fondness for re-nationalization means the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development will likely reject a $300 million loan to the Sakhalin project. From the FT:
[F]ormally walking away from the largest energy project in Russia would be considered a snub to the Kremlin and its policy of taking control over private sector assets.
Still, the FT admits that the loan would have been of mostly “symbolic” value given that much of the development on the project is already complete. So it’s not a complete loss for the Russians, even if it is bad for business.
The biggest losers? Environmentalists, who relied on the bank to keep standards on the project in check. Russia cynically played the environmental card when it wanted Shell to hand over its controlling interest last year, threatening the company with a shut-down over alleged environmental damage, which the government had previously ignored. Now, as the Russian saying goes, the goats are guarding the cabbage.
More from Foreign Policy
Lessons for the Next War
Twelve experts weigh in on how to prevent, deter, and—if necessary—fight the next conflict.
It’s High Time to Prepare for Russia’s Collapse
Not planning for the possibility of disintegration betrays a dangerous lack of imagination.
Turkey Is Sending Cold War-Era Cluster Bombs to Ukraine
The artillery-fired cluster munitions could be lethal to Russian troops—and Ukrainian civilians.
Congrats, You’re a Member of Congress. Now Listen Up.
Some brief foreign-policy advice for the newest members of the U.S. legislature.
Sign up for Morning Brief
Foreign Policy’s flagship daily newsletter with what’s coming up around the world today. Delivered weekdays.
By submitting your email, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use and to receive email correspondence from us. You may opt out at any time.
