Northern flow 2: Germany receives a request for a building permit, President Biden falls into a ‘dilemma’. (Source: The Brussels Times)

The website Tagesspiegel.de recently published an article titled “A guaranteed gas supply even without the Northern Stream 2 project”.

Accordingly, the Northern Flow 2 gas pipeline project not only supplies gas to Germany and the European Union (EU) but also has strategic implications for the transition of energy, the environment and political geography.

Once again, this has become a central issue in the context of Russia increasing its military forces on the Ukrainian border and US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin making his first visit to Germany.

The question is, is this piping system really necessary? What would the consequences be if the pipeline didn’t go into service?

The opinions are mixed

Experts have many different opinions. Some people, like Jens Hobohm from Prognos Institute for Economic Research (Germany), believe that Northern Flow 2 from an energy point of view is necessary and meaningful.

In contrast, expert Claudia Kemfert from the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW) argues that the answer is “definitely not”.

According to Kemfert, it is not necessary to have any additional infrastructure for the transportation of natural gas from Russia. In addition, the plan to increase natural gas consumption will conflict with the discussed and agreed climate protection goals.

This expert said that there would be no serious problems if the Northern Flow 2 could not be completed and put into operation. If gas from Russia cannot reach Germany through this pipeline system, Germany and Europe will find other energy solutions.

In this regard, new US President Joe Biden has stated that, like his predecessor, Donald Trump, he wants to prevent the completion of the project through the threat of punishing companies involved in the project. .

Still many EU partners believe that, with the assistance of the Northern Flow 2, Germany is acting against the common interests of Europe.

Chairman of the European People’s Party (EPP) group at the European Parliament Manfred Weber said that the Northern Flow 2 project “will definitely not be feasible” if Russian President Vladimir Putin lets the conflict in the region. East Ukraine escalated.

Will the gas supply be at risk then? To answer this question, the forecasts of the amount of gas that Germany and Europe will need in the coming years are central.

From the outset, critics accused the conglomerates that built the pipeline project “inflated” the data on German and European gas demand, making the project indispensable. and completely overwhelmed the opposition.

However, Jens Hobohm believes that this criticism holds true only in previous years, but in recent years, gas consumption in Germany and Europe has increased more than expected due to the need for natural gas. as a bridge for energy transitions.

When countries like Germany give up nuclear power, Poland reduces its dependence on coal, while solar and wind energy are still unable to meet demand, gas is the optimal solution.

According to a study by the Prognos Research Institute, in 2014, the EU consumed 400 billion cubic meters of gas; in 2015, the figure was 419 billion cubic meters and in 2019 it was 470 billion cubic meters.

Consumption figures for 2020 have not been specifically calculated, but according to expert Hobohm, this number is expected to decrease due to the impact of the epidemic of acute respiratory infections Covid-19.

In Germany alone, gas consumption will also increase from 77 billion cubic meters in 2015 to 89 billion cubic meters in 2019, while in 2020 this figure will decrease by about 2.5 percent.

Is that a compelling argument for the construction of the Northern Flow 2 project or would the existing pipes be enough to meet demand?

Is the project really necessary?

If we compare the gas consumption figures for 2019 to 2006, when the first Northern Flow system was planned to be constructed, it can be seen that the consumption volume has never been as high as it was before. Meanwhile, the project construction consortium insists that pipelines are needed as gas consumption will increase continuously. In fact, in 2006, Germany consumed 92 billion cubic meters of gas, while in the EU it was 511 billion cubic meters.

Hobohm adds that Europe’s gas imports from outside Europe depend on how much the continent can produce and to what extent can it meet its own demand?

Currently, the amount of gas produced internally has decreased, partly due to the Netherlands cutting production share faster than planned.

The key point now, experts say, is that the Northern Flow 2 project is still under construction. And Europe has no problems with gas supplies. Whether this project can go into operation or not and never work is an open question.

The later this pipeline is completed, the less necessary it is to be, as the role of natural gas will decline more and more.

Along with that, security policy risks are also very concerned.

First, it is due to the dependence of Europe and Germany on gas from a Russia.

Second, additional risks come from this project because the pipeline runs from Russia through the Baltic Sea and then directly to Germany, not through intermediate states such as Ukraine, Belarus and Poland.

Critics of the project raise two questionable issues.

FirstlyMr. Putin wants free hands to implement his policies with neighboring countries without being afraid to depend on them (when gas exports no longer have to pass through these countries).

Monday, the operation of the Northern Flow 2 system leads to a decrease in the amount of gas flowing through the existing pipes, thereby reducing Ukraine’s income from allowing gas from Russia to transit through its territory. .

The national budget of Kiev will be more than 2 billion euros. Then, the pressure on the EU to increase its aid to Ukraine will grow.

80,000 Russian soldiers in border areas

Ukrainian President Iuliia Mendel’s spokesman on April 12 said Russia sent more than 40,000 troops to Ukraine’s eastern border and another 40,000 to Crimea – which was declared Russian since 2014. “Van Our presidential room has asked to speak with Russian President Vladimir Putin. We have not received an answer and hope that this is not a refusal to talk, “Ms. Iuliia Mendel told Interfax and added that the request for negotiations was sent on March 26, after when four Ukrainian soldiers were killed by bombardment in the East.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited troops in the eastern Donbass region on April 9, amid escalating tensions.

Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry asked Russia to end what it called “military rhetoric and misinformation.” In mid-April, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy traveled to Paris to speak with European leaders about Russia’s actions and the growing conflict in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine. Volodymyr Zelenskiyy is scheduled to meet with his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan – an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Meanwhile, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said he “has not seen any requests for the past few days”. Confirming that Russia’s military forces are free to move within the country as appropriate and that the movement of troops near the Ukrainian border and the exercises pose no threat, the Kremlin reiterated that Their support for the separatists is limited to political and humanitarian support.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visits the army in the Donbass region east.

Last week, President Vladimir Putin accused Ukraine of “dangerous provocations” in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine and said Russian-Ukrainian political advisers were trying to organize a new round of talks. may take place in Normandy format – a multilateral dialogue involving French and German leaders. German Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer on April 12 also urged Moscow to announce its intentions in the region, saying that if Vladimir Putin’s government “has nothing to hide it can be easily explained. the reason why the army is moving “.

And Manfred Weber, a prominent member of the European Parliament, calls Russia’s military build-up a limited test of the West, warning that if the situation continues to escalate, Moscow will face off. with new sanctions.

Close to the risk of conflict

The fighting in eastern Ukraine had calmed down since July last year but has now heated up and has seen violence erupt. The question now is whether Russia’s beginning to gather troops along the Ukrainian border is a prelude to war? In fact, last year, Moscow and Kiev agreed to better enforce a prolonged ceasefire in eastern Ukraine, namely the Donetsk and Luhansk separatist regions.

However, President Volodymyr Zelenskiyy was unable to fulfill his promise while running for office. Violence in the Donbass began to increase in early February when Ukraine dispatched new forces and weapons to the border line; at the same time announced the joint exercise plan with NATO member countries in this country’s territory.

In this regard, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that Ukraine’s membership in NATO could lead to a large-scale escalation in the separatist republics of southeastern Ukraine and cause cooperation. action is irreversible for Ukraine. According to the Russian side, Ukraine’s accession to NATO is just an illusion, because one of the principles for a country to join this organization is that there is no internal conflict, otherwise, it will turn NATO into a war party. . Russia also responded by increasing its border controls with Ukraine.

Soldiers of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) during a training exercise near Donetsk city in August 2020. Photo: EPA.

“Obviously, Ukraine wants to show its toughness to Russia, wants to resolve the internal conflict by means of strength. At the same time, if Ukraine joins NATO, Ukraine can expect the support of its allies to confront Russia directly in resolving disputes, ”commented AP firm.

In addition, with the new administration of the United States, President Volodymyr Zelenskiyy began to make decisions to allow Washington to participate more directly in the deadlock in the East. However, according to NATO officials, Russia is unlikely to escalate the problem for Ukraine because they are also worried about bogged down in a costly conflict without a clear exit strategy. , especially the conflict that has the potential to disappoint Western countries. Furthermore, the element of military intervention on behalf of Donetsk and Luhansk does not have the same political appeal to the Russian public as the conflicts in Georgia and Crimea were.

On the Ukraine side, observers also said that the country did not want to engage in a protracted war with its larger neighbor. “Kiev understands that if they take any offensive action against Russia, they risk losing the existing support of the West,” the Times article stated. Also according to the Times magazine, the current Russian – Ukraine tensions are also a challenge to NATO and a test for the US President Joe Biden administration.