Steve LeVine covers foreign affairs for BusinessWeek. He previously was correspondent for Central Asia and the Caucasus for The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times for 11 years. His first book, The Oil and the Glory, a history of the former Soviet Union through the lens of oil, was published in October 2007. Putin’s Labyrinth, his new book, profiles Russia through the lives and deaths of six Russians. It was released this week.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



A Blog on Russia, Central Asia and
the Caucasus

Friday, September 7, 2007

Turkmenistan Casino

Turkmenistan is getting much attention for its ostensible new attitude toward Big Oil with the death of President Saparmurat Niyazov. Much of the attention focuses on the new Turkmen leadership's deals with competing geopolitical interests -- China, Russia, the U.S. But it remains to be seen whether the country's new leadership has the vision or skill to carve out genuine sovereignty after Niyazov's delusive and false policy of "neutrality."

Here is an interesting piece a week ago from Guy Chazan at The Wall Street Journal. And here is one this week on Eurasianet.org. Here is a key quote from an unidentified Pentagon official in the latter piece: "If there is a new Great Game being played in Central Asia, the most important part is Turkmenistan."

Steve's comment: The lofty "Great Game" similes make one suspicious. Is Gurbanguly Berdymukhammedov truly playing a new Great Game, or is he simply in over his head with so many suitors at his door?

We'll have to wait a year or two for an answer. One thing is clear -- the U.S. has been out-classed in terms of reviving a trans-Caspian natural gas pipeline. That simply is not going to happen any time soon.

The idea of a Chinese pipeline is the most interesting, in my view. It meets the U.S. requirement of evading both Russian and Iranian turf, and provides the region some balance in terms of export.


One whopper in the Eurasianet.org piece is worth visiting: the western diplomat who asserts that, unlike its competitors, Washington is not playing a "zero-sum game." For all parties the game is zero-sum.

Labels: , , , , ,

posted by Steve at

4 Comments:

Anonymous Victor said...

Steve: The Eurasianet piece you mention says Berdymukhamedova is rolling back his predecessor's neutrality policies and moving closer to Russia.

Not to sound anti-Russian, but generally isn't it better to retain whatever independence one has instead of losing it? Especially, if there is no pressure to do so. One can understand why Kyrgyzstan would chose closer ties with Russia: the poverty-stricken country needs any support it can get from any quarter. Kazakhstan is forced to do so similarly as it has to balance the interests of its large Russian majority as it charts a course for true independence. The Uzbek president needs Russia to maintain his grip on the country and deal with Western criticism.

Turkmenistan's situation is totally different. Its trade with Russia is minuscule as is the size of its Russian minority. Gas exports, even at the low Gazprom prices, bring in enough cash to keep the economy going. Plus, an alternative pipeline is being built to China. Domestic opposition, both secular and religions kind, is non-existent.
What's the point?

P.S. It's interesting to see that Tajikistan seems to be distancing itself from Russia, according to Eurasianet:
http://eurasianet.org/departments/insight/
articles/eav090707aa.shtml

September 7, 2007 5:17 PM  
Blogger Steve said...

Hi Victor, one point I tried to make was that Niyazov's official "neutrality" was a sham. It was Niyazov hiding his gross incompetence and insecurity behind a mask of morality. The result of Niyazov's not having engaged is national weakness -- Turkmenistan for instance entirely missed the boat on the East-West energy corridor when Russia was on its heels; at least for now Russia is sufficiently revived to make former colonies like Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan hesitate before challenging it geopolitically.

I wrote in an earlier posting that Berdymukhamedov and Kazakhstan's Nazarbayev appeared to be taking the path of least resistance by signing on to the northern pipeline. I still don't see anything more complex than that afoot there.

But it absolutely behooves Turkmenistan to establish at least two alternative export routes. Gazprom's exertion of monopsony power makes both it -- and Kazakhstan for that matter -- beholden to Moscow.

September 8, 2007 3:08 PM  
Anonymous Victor said...

Steve: Thanks. In other words, Turkmenbashi's neutrality was a mere disengagement which didn't bring about any appreciable level of independence. Unlike Shevadnadze's and Aliev's engagement which strengthened their respective countries' positions vis-a-vis their neighbors. Would that be a fair reading of your opinion?

September 8, 2007 6:49 PM  
Blogger Steve said...

Hi Victor, yes that is correct. I'm especially interested as I've said in how Berdymukhamedov brings China into the picture. I see China as complementary to Western policy. Best Steve

September 9, 2007 6:32 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home