Blog

“We Will Not Let Our People Go Cold,” Says Turkish Energy Minister

“We Will Not Let Our People Go Cold,” Says Turkish Energy Minister

Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 4

January 8, 2009 04:20 PM

By: Saban Kardas

The dispute between Russia and Ukraine over natural gas prices continues to threaten the energy supply to Europe in the midst of plunging temperatures (EDM, January 5). The disruptions caused by the row between the Russian gas company Gazprom and Ukraine’s Naftohaz has already led to the halting of deliveries to many European countries that are dependent on Russian gas. Amid mutual accusations and contradictory claims by both parties, several European leaders and European Union officials have asked those involved to relax tensions (BBC News, January 7).

As a country that depends heavily on natural gas for electricity production and household heating, Turkey is also discussing the implications of the crisis. Turkey’s gas imports from Russia amount to 65 percent of its total needs of 135 million cubic meters (MCM) per day. Turkey imports 40 MCM of gas from Russia a day via the West pipeline passing through Ukraine and Bulgaria and another 35 MCM through the Blue Stream pipeline underneath the Black Sea. Turkey also imports around 15 MCM of gas from Iran and 17 MCM from Azerbaijan per day. The state-owned Petroleum Pipeline Corporation (BOTAS) has signed various contracts to secure the import of the following amounts annually: 16 billion cubic meters (BCM) via Blue Stream, 14 BCM through the West pipeline, 10 BCM from Iran, and 6.6 BCM from Azerbaijan. Moreover, BOTAS has also signed agreements with Nigeria and Algeria for 1.2 BCM and 4 BCM, respectively, of liquefied natural gas (LNG) (Cumhuriyet, January 7).

The International Energy Agency (IEA) maintains that if the gas supply and winter conditions remain unchanged, Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, and Greece may face problems (www.ntvmsnbc.com.tr, January7). Since Turkey already confronted a similar crisis in 2006, it has had greater experience in learning how to deal with these types of shortages.

At the beginning of the crisis, representatives from BOTAS and the Energy Ministry announced that the Ukrainian crisis was not affecting Turkey and the gas flow from both West line and Blue Stream, as well as from Iran, was continuing. They also noted that Turkey did not expect a cutoff in the West line but that there were contingency plans in case this did happen. BOTAS officials noted that the underground tanks were full and Turkey could increase the capacity of Blue Stream up to 50 MCM by activating a compressor station in Corum (www.ntvmsnbc.com.tr, January 2).

When the news about Russia’s decision to cut off gas to Ukraine arrived, Energy Minister Hilmi Guler told reporters that gas supplies from the West pipeline had been completely halted. Guler also noted that the gas supplies from Blue Stream would soon be increased to 48 MCM per day. He assured the Turkish public, “We will not let our people go cold” (Anadolu Ajansi, January 6).

Guler announced that Turkey had already started to implement some precautions. First, the ministry asked the power stations producing electricity from natural gas to switch to secondary fuels. Although Reuters reported that in three stations electricity production had been halted (Hurriyet Daily News, January 8), energy officials have denied these claims, saying that production was continuing normally (Cihan Haber Ajansi, January 8).

Moreover, if the supply shortages continue, the ministry plans to cut gas delivery to industrial facilities producing their own electricity from natural gas that is sold at subsidized prices. Since falling industrial production due to the global economic crisis has already reduced Turkey’s energy consumption, such reductions would probably not create major power supply problems. Nonetheless, experts note that using alternative sources such as fuel oil to produce electricity is likely to increase production costs by up to 20 percent (www.ntvmsnbc.com.tr, January 7).

Furthermore, like other countries, Turkey has started tapping strategic reserves and using LNG. Guler noted that six ships were scheduled to bring additional LNG in January; and, if need arose, Turkey would seek additional deliveries. According to official sources, if deliveries arrive as scheduled, Turkey will be unlikely to experience major shortages. At the same time, Turkey is working to expand the daily supply capacity of its underground reserve depots.

A source from the Iranian Embassy in Ankara said that Iran was ready to increase its gas exports to Turkey to offset the shortfall, as long as Iran’s domestic consumption did not prevent it (Today’s Zaman, January 7). Minister Guler said, however, that additional supplies from Blue Stream would be enough to maintain the supply balance and that Turkey would not take up the Iranian offer. Last winter, when Iran cut exports to Turkey due to its own domestic needs, Gazprom helped avoid shortages by increasing its supplies to Turkey. Given this experience, Turkey’s reluctance to rely on the Iranian option is understandable.

Overall, the goal of these measures is to reduce the impact of the crisis on households. Since major metropolitan areas rely on natural gas for heating, the public has become increasingly worried about these developments. In response to this concern, the IGDAS gas distribution company in Istanbul issued a statement maintaining that the gas and LNG depots supplying the city had sufficient reserves and that there were no grounds for anxiety about shortages in Istanbul (www.nethaber.com, January 6). The precautions in place have already reduced Turkey’s daily consumption from 130 MCM to 107 MCM (www.cnnturk.com, January 7).

Despite the optimistic statements from official sources, energy expert Necdet Pamir maintains that Turkey’s reserve capacity is too limited, which makes it vulnerable to such supply shocks. Moreover, Pamir notes that switching to secondary sources for electricity production by buying LNG on spot markets incurs additional costs (www.cnnturk.com, January 7). Some experts claim, however, that under the contract between Turkey and Russia, Gazprom will have to compensate Turkey for its losses (Cihan Haber Ajansi, January 6).

Other experts refer to the positive implications of the crisis for Turkey. Bahadir Kaleagasi, the Turkish Industry and Business Association Representative to the EU, notes that the row once again demonstrates the vulnerability of Europe’s energy supplies. The EU will come under pressure to diversify transportation routes, which will strengthen Turkey’s position in negotiations over the Nabucco project for supplying Europe with gas by means of pipelines going through Turkey (ANKA, January 7).

https://jamestown.org/program/we-will-not-let-our-people-go-cold-says-turkish-energy-minister/

January 9, 2009
Sabir Rustamkhanly: “Opening of Armenian TV channel in Turkey will split the Turkish people”

“It would be better for the Turkish state television and radio corporation to carry out work for opening of the Azerbaijani TV channel before opening a new Armenian channel”, said chairman of the Civil Solidarity Party Sabir Rustamkhanly.

He said opening of the Armenian channel in Turkey will split the Turkish people. (more…)

January 8, 2009
DALOGLU: Hamas and Turkey

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/07/hamas-and-turkey/

Ankara tips Mideast scales

Tulin Daloglu
Wednesday, January 7, 2009

OP-ED:

Israel‘s operation into Gaza has brought disunity in both Europe and the Arab world. Even in this electrified environment, however, each country has its reasons and differences as to how it relates and plays its role in this conflict. And every decision has consequences. For that matter, here is a look into how Turkey plays its role.

Turkey is reacting to the developments as an interested neighbor in the region with ambitions to lead in the Muslim Middle East. Under the leadership of the Islamic-rooted Justice and Development Party (AKP), Turkey has developed relationships in the region, become a candidate for full European Union membership, and is a strategic partner to the United States. Also, Ankara and Washington agreed on a strategic vision document in July 2006. In part, the agreement stated that “Turkey and the United States pledge themselves to work together … supporting international efforts toward a permanent settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, including … two-state solution.” At the time, I wrote the “shared vision document will be seen as part of an agreement between the United States and the AKP, which is likely to fuel the perception among Turks that Washington is backing the Islamists.” I also said “the debate in Turkey will focus on the document’s impact on domestic politics, not bilateral relationship.”

As skeptical as I am of the AKP’s vision, which leans toward making the country a more Islamic one, Turkey has much to offer to regional peace and stability. But for that to happen, its leadership must be able to keep a balanced approach toward both its Muslim allies and its U.S. and European ones.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his party have lost an enormous opportunity over the last week. Mr. Erdogan has been hammering Israeli actions as a “crime against humanity,” and “disrespect to Turkey”; his fellow party members have called Israel “leading provocateur of global terror,” nearly shutting down the inter-parliamentary Israeli-Turkish friendship group in protest. They have almost completely ignored Hamas‘ daily rocket attacks targeting Israeli civilians. They chose silence where Israel was blamed to wage a war on Muslims. In fact, Mr. Erdogan believes Allah will punish Israel.

Simply, Turkish leadership lost the balance in rhetoric and in action that Ankara has worked for many years to achieve. Mr. Erdogan met with the leaders of Syria, Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia – excluding Israel. His chief adviser, Ahmet Davudoglu, also met with exiled Hamas leader Khaled Meshal. The speakers of the Turkish and Iranian parliaments held at least three telephone conversations in one week. But Turkish leadership had no such conversations with Washington.

While Turkey has officially taken its U.N. Security Council non-permanent member seat, Mr. Erdogan said, “We can deliver Hamas’ demands and conditions for a ceasefire to the U.N. Security Council, because Hamas has lost its trust to the Palestinian Authority and Egypt. They, however, have full trust in Turkey.” The point is, Turkey’s lack of coordination with the U.S. and Israel brings it no leverage to broker any kind of agreement in the region. “There is no Turkish mediation in this regard,” Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Abu-al-Ghayt said on Egyptian TV Saturday. Nonetheless, Mr. Erdogan went to the Middle East with a two-step plan calling for an immediate cease-fire and unity among Palestinian leaders. It’s fair to say that Ankara’s efforts failed. Solutions are easy to discuss but difficult to accomplish in the Middle East – and Ankara should have taken that into account.

So how does Mr. Erdogan’s latest stand serve Turkey’s national interests? U.S. sources, who ask to remain anonymous, believe that Turkey will face enormous challenges in the near future.

First, there is an understanding that “its leaders are playing a dangerous game.” Turkey’s effort in trying to mediate a peace between Israel and Syria is a different issue. But Hamas is an existential matter for Israel. Today, Egypt is more worried about Hamas than Turkey. Turkey chose a side. Turks have presented the Armenian genocide issue as an existential matter for them, as well. Israel and the Jewish lobby have supported Turkey’s efforts to defeat the numerous Armenian genocide resolutions that have been brought up in Congress over the last 30 years.

But after this recent episode, they may not be so eager to support Turkey’s efforts opposing the next resolution. In addition, although some EU countries are sending conflicting messages about Israel’s actions, Hamas is still seen as a terrorist organization. It could mean trouble for a country aspiring to join the EU to be seen as an ally of a group the EU sees as terrorists.

As these conflicts go on and these issues evolve, it’s crucial for everyone to think about how Turkey’s identity is transforming. Fatih Altayli, executive editor of Haberturk, argues that Mr. Erdogan has adopted harsh rhetoric on this matter to please his base (mahalle). But Turks must ask how big that base is. Evidently, pictures are radicalizing people in Turkey. If that is the case, if this conflict turns ordinary Turks away from a Western orientation, the repercussions will be felt in Tel Aviv, Europe and Washington.

Tulin Daloglu is a free-lance writer.

January 8, 2009
UN security council debates Gaza – VIDEO

https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2009/jan/07/un-security-council

The UN security council meets in New York following the deaths of 40 people in attacks on two schools

January 7, 2009
Hamas and Turkey, Ankara Tips Mideast Scales,

Tulin Daloglu, January 7, 2009

Palestinian firefighters work Thursday at Hamas leader Nizar Rayan’s bombed home in a refugee camp in the Gaza Strip. Britain’s Guardian newspaper praised him in an obituary, earning the rebuke of a Weekly Standard blogger.

Israel’s operation into Gaza has brought disunity in both Europe and the Arab world. Even in this electrified environment, however, each country has its reasons and differences as to how it relates and plays its role in this conflict. And every decision has consequences. For that matter, here is a look into how Turkey plays its role.

Turkey is reacting to the developments as an interested neighbor in the region with ambitions to lead in the Muslim Middle East. Under the leadership of the Islamic-rooted Justice and Development Party (AKP), Turkey has developed relationships in the region, become a candidate for full European Union membership, and is a strategic partner to the United States. Also, Ankara and Washington agreed on a strategic vision document in July 2006. In part, the agreement stated that “Turkey and the United States pledge themselves to work together … supporting international efforts toward a permanent settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, including … two-state solution.” At the time, I wrote the “shared vision document will be seen as part of an agreement between the United States and the AKP, which is likely to fuel the perception among Turks that Washington is backing the Islamists.” I also said “the debate in Turkey will focus on the document’s impact on domestic politics, not bilateral relationship.”

As skeptical as I am of the AKP’s vision, which leans toward making the country a more Islamic one, Turkey has much to offer to regional peace and stability. But for that to happen, its leadership must be able to keep a balanced approach toward both its Muslim allies and its U.S. and European ones.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his party have lost an enormous opportunity over the last week. Mr. Erdogan has been hammering Israeli actions as a “crime against humanity,” and “disrespect to Turkey”; his fellow party members have called Israel “leading provocateur of global terror,” nearly shutting down the inter-parliamentary Israeli-Turkish friendship group in protest. They have almost completely ignored Hamas’ daily rocket attacks targeting Israeli civilians. They chose silence where Israel was blamed to wage a war on Muslims. In fact, Mr. Erdogan believes Allah will punish Israel.

Simply, Turkish leadership lost the balance in rhetoric and in action that Ankara has worked for many years to achieve. Mr. Erdogan met with the leaders of Syria, Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia – excluding Israel. His chief adviser, Ahmet Davudoglu, also met with exiled Hamas leader Khaled Meshal. The speakers of the Turkish and Iranian parliaments held at least three telephone conversations in one week. But Turkish leadership had no such conversations with Washington.

While Turkey has officially taken its U.N. Security Council non-permanent member seat, Mr. Erdogan said, “We can deliver Hamas’ demands and conditions for a ceasefire to the U.N. Security Council, because Hamas has lost its trust to the Palestinian Authority and Egypt. They, however, have full trust in Turkey.” The point is, Turkey’s lack of coordination with the U.S. and Israel brings it no leverage to broker any kind of agreement in the region. “There is no Turkish mediation in this regard,” Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Abu-al-Ghayt said on Egyptian TV Saturday. Nonetheless, Mr. Erdogan went to the Middle East with a two-step plan calling for an immediate cease-fire and unity among Palestinian leaders. It’s fair to say that Ankara’s efforts failed. Solutions are easy to discuss but difficult to accomplish in the Middle East – and Ankara should have taken that into account.

So how does Mr. Erdogan’s latest stand serve Turkey’s national interests? U.S. sources, who ask to remain anonymous, believe that Turkey will face enormous challenges in the near future.

First, there is an understanding that “its leaders are playing a dangerous game.” Turkey’s effort in trying to mediate a peace between Israel and Syria is a different issue. But Hamas is an existential matter for Israel. Today, Egypt is more worried about Hamas than Turkey. Turkey chose a side. Turks have presented the Armenian genocide issue as an existential matter for them, as well. Israel and the Jewish lobby have supported Turkey’s efforts to defeat the numerous Armenian genocide resolutions that have been brought up in Congress over the last 30 years.

But after this recent episode, they may not be so eager to support Turkey’s efforts opposing the next resolution. In addition, although some EU countries are sending conflicting messages about Israel’s actions, Hamas is still seen as a terrorist organization. It could mean trouble for a country aspiring to join the EU to be seen as an ally of a group the EU sees as terrorists.

As these conflicts go on and these issues evolve, it’s crucial for everyone to think about how Turkey’s identity is transforming. Fatih Altayli, executive editor of Haberturk, argues that Mr. Erdogan has adopted harsh rhetoric on this matter to please his base (mahalle). But Turks must ask how big that base is. Evidently, pictures are radicalizing people in Turkey. If that is the case, if this conflict turns ordinary Turks away from a Western orientation, the repercussions will be felt in Tel Aviv, Europe and Washington.

Tulin Daloglu is a free-lance writer.
washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jan/07/hamas-and-turkey/
Copyright 2009 The Washington Times

January 7, 2009
MAKING AMERICAN UNIVERSITIES AFFORDABLE -2-

My last LETTER titled “Making American Universities Affordable” stirred a great deal of interest. I received four good comments. Because I want this subject better thought and researched, I decided to publish them in this issue, together with my responses.

Dear Orhan,

Sorry for the delay in responding to this important essay. The most hurtful aspect of what you write is that you are absolutely correct in your assessment but no hope for the solution you suggest.

Except for the middle class (not the middle earners that have been improperly identified as middle class) who understand the importance of schooling at all levels, our country is woefully deficient in educational issues. The day this country allowed REMEDIAL READNG at the college level (30 years ago) I understood that we had dangerously downsized educational standards to accommodate minorities. That did not help minorities who for the next thirty years failed by 50 % to take real advantage (or graduate) from institutions of higher learning.

Then there is the daily deluge of empty rhetoric sent over the TV airways and published in popular magazines: celebrity information that in no way fosters learning. Consumerism became the God of our country and now we are facing the consequences of second rate leadership, mindless greed and careless citizenry. Perhaps the new economic reality will force even the empty heads to take other paths than that of the department store, inane concerts posing as art and all the other endeavors they have substituted for living in purposeful life. Immediate gratification, day-to-day fulfillment like children in a candy store has exposed dire consequences at all levels, from those whose jobs are lost to the millionaires who thought Mr.Madoff was Jesus of Wall Street. Enough ranting. Thank you for writing. Merry Christmas and a Healthy New Year.

Joan Salemi

Good Morning Orhan,

Two thoughts as I read your letter, first, in my mind, the current problem in U.S. Education begins before high school. The education process seems to have degenerated into a “day care” system, with kids being put into ”Pre kindergarten” as soon as they are out of diapers. Young people are passed along grade to grade, and enter high school without being able to read adequately, have little or no math skills and virtually no knowledge of the country or the world they live in.

As you point out, the college/university system may be the make-up for high school today; I would submit that high school has become the make up for elementary school.

Second, as a product of the Depression, I always heard at home that not everyone was supposed to, nor necessarily entitled to, go to college. A lot had to do with money. Not everyone could afford to go. It was not a frivolous follow-on to high school but serious preparation for professional career fields

Colleges today are nothing to be admired, they are just another profit-making enterprise.

Robert Dickie.

Orhan bey;

Thank you. Excellent. This article reflects also many of my thoughts. I have found only very few books and articles on the subject, but not as powerful as yours. Unfortunately the government will continue to pride itself with improving the school buildings, student populations in classes, and all other peripheral issues, it will never address the main issue of course contents, claiming that it is a matter for the local education board and for teachers.

Universities also would refuse to change claiming that their last 200 years of experience proves that they are doing the right thing, like the auto industry. Success makes them arrogant to accept that there may be better methods of doing things, especially after 200 years.

Metin Camcigil.

You are making an assumption about professors and colleges. Professors seek positions in American universities to do research, not to teach. American universities hire and (more importantly) retain/promote professors who are able to bring in research grants or recognition to the university. Teaching is a wonderful

Side-benefit for those who are lucky to be able to afford tuitions to these schools.

Which brings me to sports. I’ll announce my bias up front. I am a big sports fan. College athletes are divided into three categories:

1. Men’s college football

2. Men’s college basketball

3. Everything else

#1 and #2 are massive revenue streams for universities. #3 is not. However, the number of scholarships awarded to athletes is something to also consider. In many cases the students receiving scholarships would never be able to otherwise afford tuition or have grades strong enough to earn academic scholarships.

K. Hayri Tarhan, Jr.

W R I T E R’ S R E S P O N S E S

I thank all my four readers for their comments. Joan Salemi’s complaints about the weakening educational level in this country are of course very true. They are a part of the greater picture in education. However, I had chosen a narrower subject :How to cut costs in higher education to make it affordable. From that narrower view point I did answer the question. I suggested several means of cutting costs that would actually make the colleges affordable. However, as Joan Salemi points out, I did not attempt to answer the “greater picture”.

Bob Dickie’s contention that the problem of Education starts before high school is absolutely correct. Bob

January 7, 2009