At a time when Russia has often come under intense international criticism over its handling of disputes with neighbours and partners, it is worth noting that Moscow is behaving in an exemplary way in its current gas row with Belarus.
For a start, Gazprom, the Russian gas monopoly exporter, gave Minsk plenty of warning about the price increase at the heart of the dispute. It doubled prices on January 1 to US$100 per 1,000 cubic metres but gave Belarus until the end of June before it started trying to collect the increased revenues.
Moscow then spent a month negotiating with Minsk before this week threatening to halve gas exports. Knowing the possible impact on European Union customers supplied via Belarus, Russia notified its downstream customers and the European Commission. Gazprom even organised a special telephone conference for foreign journalists to explain its actions.
Russia has also been careful to avoid bringing politics overtly into the dispute and has even brought matters to a head in summer. It is all a far cry from the last time Russia turned off the taps – in its dispute with Ukraine in the winter of 2005-06, when Moscow ran into a storm of criticism from the EU for giving no warning to its customers and for acting in a provocative way.
Of course, Belarus is not Ukraine. While President Vladimir Putin is often irritated by the maverick policies of Alexander Lukashenko, the Belarusan leader, he does not see him as a serious threat to the Kremlin’s efforts to re-impose political dominance on the former Soviet Union. By contrast, Viktor Yushchenko, Ukraine’s president, is openly working to reduce Russian influence in his country by increasing links with the EU and Nato. So, Mr Putin has much less cause to lose his temper over Minsk.
What seems to have provoked the Kremlin’s wrath is the sense that Mr Lukashenko is taking advantage of Russia. Even after the price increase, Belarus receives the cheapest gas in the former Soviet Union. In general, Russia is right to end Soviet-era subsidies and charge its customers market prices for gas. Countries that want better terms face demands for a quid-pro-quo, usually in the form of selling energy assets to Russian companies.
Given the Kremlin’s penchant for political meddling, these processes are often more complicated than they should be. Handling disputes in a predictable manner will not solve every problem, but, as the case of Belarus shows, it certainly reduces tensions. Transparency in gas supply is in the interests of both Russia and its customers.
"The Financial Times"
