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

Monday, February 11, 2008

Try That in Russia, Exxon

One lesson of recent years in Big Oil is that while most of the industry zigs, Exxon zags.

So it was last week, as the company won attention for court victories that froze some $12 billion in Venezuelan state assets abroad. This involves its dispute with Hugo Chavez over his demand for control over oilfields in the country. Exxon also got a judge to seize hundreds of millions of dollars due to Venezuela in a bond deal.

Is such confrontation wise corporate strategy? The rest of the industry – sitting conspicuously on the sidelines as spectators in this rumble – wants to know, too.

Some analysts have read the news as a warning to all the petro-nationalists out there that Exxon at least won’t be pushed around. And if Exxon is successful, the others might follow suit.

One sign that Exxon’s muscle-flexing is a limited tactic, and not a strategy, however, is its experience with its giant natural gas project in Russia, called Sakhalin-I.

Over the last year, the other big companies working in Russia – Shell, Total, BP – have all caved in to Russia’s demand for a controlling share of their projects. (In Venezuela, too, the other companies involved – Chevron, BP, France’s Total and Norway's Statoil – went along with the state demands and are still operating there)

So far Exxon alone hasn’t been forced to compromise. Specifically, the company is insisting on allegiance to an entirely reasonable contractual clause allowing it to sell Sakhalin’s gas to whomever it wants. It has seemed to want that customer to be China.

Russia’s behemoth Gazprom, however, has other ideas – it wants the gas. And according to a report by Reuters’ Denis Dyomkin, Gazprom at least believes it will get its way. The article quotes Gazprom's deputy head, Alexander Ananenkov, as reporting to Russia’s next president – Gazprom Chairman Dmitri Medvedev – that he expects to sign the deal with Exxon in April or May. In case there was any doubt previously, that means Exxon would be going head-to-head with the Kremlin.

Exxon knows the history of companies going to court to get their way in the former Soviet Union – despite “victories,” they mainly end up empty handed. The FSU states simply don’t honor the courts’ rulings, and leave it to the companies to figure out what to do next.

The distinction is that Russia is not Venezuela, and Vladimir Putin (and probably Medvedev) is not Hugo Chavez. Indeed, Putin and Exxon are fairly similar – both have been disagreeable about being pushed around.

Photo: ynskjen
Rights: Creative Commons

Labels: , , , , , , ,

posted by Steve at

2 Comments:

Anonymous James said...

Excellent post, Steve - I think Bob has one in the pipes also about the Venezuelan asset freeze.

Another outcome to consider is that Gazprom and regulatory authorities will put as much pressure as possible on Exxon over the sale of Sakhalin gas to China, then relent at the last moment in dramatic negotiations in exchange for a concession elsewhere. As your colleague Bret Stephens of the Journal has pointed out, the Kremlin has become adept at creating problems and then offering solutions.

More credit should be given to Rex Tillerson for his willingness to stand up for the company's contract rights. Let's recall that just last year at this time, there was speculation that Exxon could be squeezed out of a stake in Sakhalin -1, just like Shell. In this context, what other energy executive is willing to say something like this?

"Over the long term, such isolationism and resource nationalism is counterproductive, hurts those who have the greatest need for energy to support economic progress, and undermines our shared goals of economic development, supply security and environmental protection."

http://www.energyintel.com/DocumentDetail.asp?Try=Yes&document_id=216738&publication_id=31

February 11, 2008 6:45 PM  
Blogger Steve said...

Hi James. I don't expect Gazprom to pull back on Sakhalin-I sales. For now, it has decided not to press for a Russian majority stake; instead, it wants the gas at a concessionary rate -- either less than China would pay, or lacking the upside pricing flexibility that might be built into a contract with Beijing. Gazprom needs this gas, both at home and perhaps to meet export contracts, particularly if Central Asian supplies remain volatile.

I do admire Exxon's single-mindedness. The jury is out, however, on whether the time for this attitude has passed.

Thanks for the comment as usual and best, Steve

February 11, 2008 7:11 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home