Why the launch of Nord Stream 2 is the least evil for Europeans

A month after the start of the certification procedure, Nord Stream 2 received from the Ministry economics and the German energy industry concluded that the gas pipeline does not pose a hazard during operation. Reportedly, such EU countries as Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Hungary, Slovakia, Czech Republic and Italy were able to express their opinion on this issue. As can be concluded, no meaningful objections were raised on the merits of the issue. Why are even ardent opponents of Russian-German energy cooperation forced to give credit to this project?

Note that the issued opinion is not final for the fate of Nord Stream 2. This is only the first stage of a long, months-long bureaucratic procedure. It is emphasized that the discussion of the independence of the Nord Stream 2 operator from the gas supplier has not yet been the subject of substantive consideration. In addition to the German regulator, it will still have to obtain permits from the Ministries of Energy of all EU countries, as well as from the European Commission, where Gazprom does not have many fans. Despite this, there is reason to believe that the pipeline will still be successfully certified.



The reason, of course, is the unheard-of energy crisis that the Old World unexpectedly faced. Gas prices are stable at over a thousand dollars per thousand cubic meters, which makes electricity prices sky-high. It is estimated that in a number of EU countries the annual electricity costs of the population have already increased by 1-500 euros. And it hasn't even started the winter cold yet! In the case of industry, the situation is even worse, since the cost of electricity is in some places higher than the selling price of the goods produced. This has already led to the closure of a number of businesses. The main question is what to do?

By and large, the European Union is faced with a choice between two unpleasant options for it: to change itself or "bend over" to Gazprom.

Rejection of the ideas of liberalism?

As we have told earlier, the European Union was built on the basis of the principle of economic liberalism: freedom of competition, trade, movement of goods, services, etc. However, practice has shown that all these wonderful principles do not always work for the good of the cause. Taking advantage of its right to freedom of trade and movement of goods, Gazprom does not increase the volume of gas supplies in excess of the volumes stipulated in the existing contracts. Also, within the framework of freedom of doing business, US suppliers preferred to sell their raw materials not to European, but to Asian consumers who are willing to pay more for it. This is how an acute gas shortage in the EU was formed. And who is to blame? It's nobody's fault. But there is something to think about.

Here in Europe they have already thought about whether it is worth abandoning the principle of complete liberalism in the economy. Interestingly, the initiative comes mainly from the Eastern European countries, led by the main fronder Poland. It is proposed to introduce a mechanism for joint purchases and storage of gas for all EU countries. Sounds reasonable, moreover, there is a positive example of such a practice. Before the complete liberalization of the market in Germany, there was a company Ruhrgas AG, which, as a monopoly, determined the volume of supplies it needed, purchased gas from Russia and set the required prices on the domestic market. But now all this is in the past.

The idea of ​​introducing some kind of regulator, which centrally controls the purchase and distribution of energy resources within the EU, which is absolutely sensible in its essence, is perceived with hostility by adherents of liberal economic ideology. So, you see, even before the planned economy will agree. Smells like some kind of communism, fi. If traders see that they want to take away and divide gas from them, they will simply leave the European market. In addition, the problem is posed by the large heterogeneity of the European Union, where countries have different economic potential and often conflicting interests.
In general, the idea of ​​joint purchases is, of course, interesting, but difficult to implement in practice.

"They will hang up later"

In this context, granting permission to Gazprom to start operation of Nord Stream 2 seems to be much less evil than encroaching on the liberal economic foundations of the European Union. It has already been calculated that if gas starts to flow steadily from Russia through at least one line of the pipeline, then the cost of 1 cubic meters of "blue fuel" in the Old World will drop to $ 600. If both lines start working, the price tag can drop to $ 500 per 1 cubic meters. This, of course, is not last year's 30-40 dollars, but the energy crisis will at least move from the stage of economic collapse to a controlled decline.

The question is what will happen next. Already now, the voices of economic experts and political scientists can be heard from Europe, calling Gazprom the main culprit in the crisis. The Russian company is accused of showing itself to be an unreliable supplier by hanging all the dogs on it. And this is despite the fact that the domestic monopolist acts strictly within the framework of the European liberal economic paradigm and flawlessly fulfills its contractual obligations.
It is obvious that a further trend will be a steady decline in dependence on gas supplies from Russia. All leading policy EU. Implementation of these plans will mean a decrease in Gazprom's export revenues.

A tactical victory with the certification of Nord Stream 2 could lead to a strategic defeat in the form of a faster reduction in the share of the EU energy market.