Estonian Foreign Minister wants Russia-Germany gas pipeline to run on land

Urmas Paet expresses surprise at Russian decision to use naval forces to guard project

print this

Estonia says that it is opposed to Russia's plans to build an undersea gas pipeline through the Baltic Sea to Germany - primarily for environmental reasons, as the Baltic has been declared an especially sensitive sea area. The underwater pipeline is to be built by the company Nordstream.
      "Our clear hope is that the pipeline would run along the land", Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet said in an interview with Helsingin Sanomat on Saturday.
      Paet has a number of questions concerning the pipeline project. "Why didn't Nordstream want to investigate a real alternative - the overland option? Why do they want a pipeline which could affect the Baltic in an unpredictable manner?"
     
There are already several pipelines running overland from Russia to Europe, and Paet points out that it would be possible to build a new one to run parallel with the existing pipelines.
      The prevailing view in Estonia is that the only reason why the pipeline has been planned to run underwater is to avoid cooperation with certain European countries, such as Poland, Lithuania, and the other Baltic states.
      Paet is also critical of the manner in which the pipeline was planned for many years.
      "Routing plans were made for so long among few states. The Baltic countries and Poland were kept outside the negotiations for a long time, even though they are coastal states on the Baltic Sea."
     
Russia's announcement that it plans to use its naval forces to secure the construction of the pipeline is what really turned public opinion in Estonia against the pipeline.
      Paet notes that the Russian Navy can move freely in the area in any case, and asks: "Why did Russia have to make such an announcement? Why did the economic project have to be tied down militarily and politically?"
      According to the Estonian Foreign Minister, the pipeline is constantly discussed at every meeting of Baltic Sea countries.
      However, Paet has not discussed the matter with the German Foreign Minister. When Estonia refused to grant permission for an environmental impact study, there was an "exchange of information" on the matter.
     
Estonia refused permission for studies in the waters of its economic zone under considerable domestic pressure. Public opinion tended to see that giving permission to perform such a survey was tantamount to granting permission to build the pipeline.
      The refusal was based on three legal arguments: the survey would have involved drilling of the sea bottom, the company might have learned information about natural resources in Estonian territory, and the application for permission also involved some areas within Estonia's territorial waters.
      The economic ministers of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland have prepared an appeal against the gas pipeline to be brought before the European Commission. However, submitting the appeal has been left to wait for the appointment of a new economic minister for Latvia.
     
Finland sees the pipeline issue as primarily an environmental question, with no security implications.
      "Significant large EU and NATO countries are buying gas from Russia. It is difficult to see that there would be some kind of a threat to Finland", says Matti Anttonen, an official of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
      He notes that Finland shares a border 1,300 kilometres long with Russia, and that a gas pipeline running along the bottom of the Baltic Sea does not significantly change Finland's strategic position.
      Anttonen also sees no reason for using the Russian Navy to guard the welding of pipes on a ship.
     
Nordstream, the builder of the pipeline also sees no particular need to protect the construction.
      "We don't need special protection", says Sebastian Sass, who is responsible for Nordstream public relations.
     
But how does Germany, the country which is at the other end of the planned pipeline, feel about the decision of Estonia, another EU country, to refuse to allow an environmental impact study of the pipeline in its own waters?
      "The gas pipeline is a project that has been approved by the European Commission, and if the Estonians have changed their mind about it, they should take it up in the proper forum", notes Pamela Preusche, a representative of the German Chancellor.
     
The Foreign Affairs Committee of the Finnish Parliament feels that environmental factors should be decisive in deciding whether or not the pipeline should be built. "If a reason is found to say no to the pipeline, the reasons have to be environmental",says Pekka Haavisto (Green), a member of the committee.
      One possible environmental hazard linked with the pipeline are the heavy metals in the sediments on the sea bottom. It is not known if the construction work might stir them up.


Previously in HS International Edition:
  Planned Baltic Sea gas pipeline poses a political challenge to Estonia (20.9.2007)
  Sweden and Lithuania do not accept planned routing of gas pipeline (20.2.2007)
  Environmental impact of Baltic Sea pipeline greatest in building phase (15.11.2006)

Links:
  Nord Stream (Wikipedia)

Helsingin Sanomat