Comments on: Sweden Says No

By: giustino

giustino — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 09:06:10 +0000

I think the Finns, or at least Paavo Lipponen, think that the project will inevitably be built. They also passed the buck to Estonia, who passed it back to Finland, who passed it on to Sweden. So they are probably in silent mode.

By: Michael

Michael — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 18:33:16 +0000

Non-rhetorical question: Why is Finland not opposed to this project? Is it just because a Finnish company is a partner on the deal, or is something else going on?

By: fabius_maximus_cunctator

fabius_maximus_cunctator — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 13:56:04 +0000

Dear Sirs,

I fully agree with Dan that this is good news indeed.

Two things may be added from the Central-European perspective of this blogger:

While Herr Schröder was still chancellor he rode roughshod over certain of his EU partners – Poland, the Baltic reps – to force this project through.
He has since taken a highy visible and lucrative management position with the consortium – controlled by GASPROM - which was set up to build the pipeline. This has caused some considerable controversy, of course.
(Just one source, there s more: http://www.faz.net/s/Rub7FC5BF30C45B402F96E964EF8CE790E1/Doc~EED305047B7DC4F97AF7979770375134B~ATpl~Ecommon~Sspezial.html)

By: IJ

IJ — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 11:45:29 +0000

The big powers within the EU will likely win this resource war. However the next one will be less clear cut: who get the gas once the pipelines are built – the nearer to the source the better? This is bad news for Britain.

By: ramjet

ramjet — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 11:08:12 +0000

I apologize for the douplicate post…

By: ramjet

ramjet — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 11:00:58 +0000

Hyipotesis: the true reason could be some sort of alliance by baltic states, trying to avoid that baltic sea become a “russian lake”. Could not be about intelligence gathering neither any kind of russian ship; could be about not giving too much economic and strategic russian influence over that sea, cosequently over nations on its shores. “Using” the most “outsider” in to do this. Only assumpions, of course.
Other routes are available, but they could be too close to Lituania Latvia Estonia Poland wich are not so well inclined to Russia. Terrain routes would give many troubles to Russia, more costs for Eestern Europe but more political weight to its (EU) actual and future allies.

By: ramjet

ramjet — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 10:59:24 +0000

By: IJ

IJ — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 10:24:41 +0000

Resource wars within the European Union?
Nord stream will supply gas to Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, France and Britain. The project is additionally supported by the European Commission who assigned it ‘Trans-European status’. Opposition comes from Sweden, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.

By: Chirol

Chirol — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 09:00:40 +0000

I would far from count this as killed. At the moment, it’s just delayed and even if Sweden were to completely reject the pipeline, they would likely find another route. But who knows, pipeline politics are notoriously difficult to predict.

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 00:24:32 +0000

Very good news. The Germany-Russian pipeline would have given Moscow far too much power over the eastern European states. Good to see this be killed.