can
better monitor it and have some say in the future of the oil since
it would pass through their countries. They support the creation
of a pipeline quite similar to the one in existence, but with
the capacity to carry more oil.For at least the past ten years, there has been talk of creating a new pipeline that would carry oil across Caspian states directly to the Mediterranean. There are pipelines already in existence that carry oil from the oil fields of Azerbaijan to ports on the Black Sea. But these present pipelines can neither carry enough oil to keep up with the new larger outflow of oil from the region, nor do they, in any way, help to alleviate the strain on the Bosporus, because when the oil reaches the Black sea, it is put on boats and ultimately shipped through the Bosporus and out to the Mediterranean.
The search for a perfect pipeline comes up against the politics
of the region. (For a more detailed look into the politics and
economics of each pipeline try: http://knet.compulink.gr/future/
articles/wwc.htm .) The smaller Black Sea nations want the
pipeline to go to the Black sea, so they can
better monitor it and have some say in the future of the oil since
it would pass through their countries. They support the creation
of a pipeline quite similar to the one in existence, but with
the capacity to carry more oil.
Turkey and the U.S. however, pushed for, and just last November of 1999, signed a deal (Turkey, Azerbaijan, and Georgia signed) to build a pipeline from Baku (Azerbaijan's capital) through Georgia and into Eastern Turkey, ending in Ceyhan, a port city on the Mediterranean sea. This proposed pipeline would be approximately 1,000 miles long. The pipeline would be carefully planned, so as not to go through Iranian or Russian land. The U.S. does not want a possible threat of a choke point on the pipeline route, nor does the U.S. want either country to have any chance to dominate the region. Russia is not content with this pipeline, nor is Iran, as both would like to have some piece of the economic benefits of having the pipeline run through at least through some parts of their country.
Though this pipeline will cost significantly more than the other proposed routes, it will ease the strains on the Bosporus both environmentally and politically (however, it is important to remember that this pipeline will not necessarily reduce the strain on the waters, it will only keep from adding pressure to the straits). With most of the pipeline in Turkey, and the final destination, a Turkish port, Turkey will very likely become a leader in the region. From the point of view of the U.S., an alliance with Turkey, which is a main contender in the politics of the region, could be gained. Such an alliance is rare in that part of the world and would be very beneficial to both nations.
At this point, the pipeline is scheduled to be done by 2002 and will be expected to carry up to 38 billion cubic meters of oil. To go further in depth check out this website: Caspian Sea: Energy Official Promotes Alternate Source at, http:/www.refrl.org/nca/features/2000/04/F.RU.000403125632.html
Recent setbacks concerning the distribution of costs for the pipeline have come forth giving doubt that the pipeline will be finished by 2002. However, there is a definite sentiment that nations really want the building of the pipeline to progress (great economic gains could be reached by an increase in oil output from the region) and therefore, are readily approaching any difficult matters with a willingness to negotiate. At this point, there is little fear that this pipeline will not be built.
Another pipeline from Azerbaijan through Georgia and Turkey to Eastern Europe is now being negotiated, and is the top priority of the region presently. Europe is one of the leading consumers of the oil from this region. If all goes smoothly, this pipeline is also expected to be finished by 2002.