Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
10MOSCOW203
2010-01-28 13:29:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Moscow
Cable title:
TRANSNEFT CONFIRMS OIL DEAL WITH BELARUS
how-toVZCZCXRO0385 PP RUEHDBU RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHNP RUEHROV RUEHSL RUEHSR DE RUEHMO #0203 0281329 ZNY CCCCC ZZH P 281329Z JAN 10 FM AMEMBASSY MOSCOW TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 6074 INFO RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE PRIORITY RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY RUEHXD/MOSCOW POLITICAL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY RHEBAAA/DEPT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC PRIORITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L MOSCOW 000203
SIPDIS
DEPT FOR EUR/RUS, EEB/ESC/IEC GALLOGLY AND GREENSTEIN,
S/EEE MORNINGSTAR
DOE FOR HEGBURG, EKIMOFF
DOC FOR JBROUGHER
NSC FOR MMCFAUL
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/28/2020
TAGS: EPET ENRG ECON PREL RS BO
SUBJECT: TRANSNEFT CONFIRMS OIL DEAL WITH BELARUS
REF: MOSCOW 53
Classified By: ECON MC Matthias Mitman for Reasons 1.4 (b/d)
----------------------------------------
ALL OIL OVER 6.3 MT SUBJECT TO FULL DUTY
----------------------------------------
C O N F I D E N T I A L MOSCOW 000203
SIPDIS
DEPT FOR EUR/RUS, EEB/ESC/IEC GALLOGLY AND GREENSTEIN,
S/EEE MORNINGSTAR
DOE FOR HEGBURG, EKIMOFF
DOC FOR JBROUGHER
NSC FOR MMCFAUL
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/28/2020
TAGS: EPET ENRG ECON PREL RS BO
SUBJECT: TRANSNEFT CONFIRMS OIL DEAL WITH BELARUS
REF: MOSCOW 53
Classified By: ECON MC Matthias Mitman for Reasons 1.4 (b/d)
--------------
ALL OIL OVER 6.3 MT SUBJECT TO FULL DUTY
--------------
1. (C) Oleg Pilipets, long-time International Affairs Advisor
in the Office of the President of Transneft, Russia's oil
pipeline monopoly, confirmed to us January 28 that Moscow and
Minsk signed a deal to end the dispute on oil shipments
(reftel). Pilipets said approximately 6.3 million tons (mt)
of Russian oil would be provided to Belarus in 2010
duty-free. The amount was agreed to based on Belarus's
domestic needs. According to Pilipets, Belarus is "free to
do whatever it wants" with the duty-free oil. He said the
agreement is effective immediately, but did not know how long
it would be in effect, only saying that such agreements are
typically applicable for one year.
2. (C) Pilipets added that the inter-governmental agreement
did not specify any amounts of oil to be purchased by Belarus
beyond the 6.3 mt. He explained that any additional oil that
Belarusian consumers would like to purchase from Russian
suppliers would be subject to the full export duty "according
to Russian law" with "no exemptions and no favors." (Note:
Belarus reportedly had bought an additional 15 mt of oil per
year that it processed and re-exported. End note.) Pilipets
said he did not know what DPM Sechin meant by remarks, as
quoted in the press, indicating that Russia had "compromised"
to make the deal happen. Pilipets noted, however, that under
the new deal, Belarus would still be receiving a subsidy of
about $1 billion per year -- his estimate of the foregone
duties on the amount of oil in the agreement.
3. (C) According to press reports, the deal included an 11%
raise increase tariffs on Russian crude transiting Belarus,
based on projected Belarusian GDP growth. Pilipets could not
confirm that detail, saying that Transneft "has nothing to do
with" Belarus's transit charges. He said Belarusian
authorities are free to charge what they want, keeping in
mind "market realities" that could cause consumers to
purchase oil from elsewhere if it is too expensive through
Belarus. Pilipets reiterated that the flow of Russian oil
solely transiting Belarus en-route to third countries was
never affected by the dispute.
--------------
COMMENT
--------------
4. (C) We had expected a resolution to emerge before the
dispute caused any major disruptions in oil flows to Europe.
While the core issue primarily reflected the GOR's subsidy
mechanism to Belarus, the incident again called into question
Russia's reputation as a reliable energy supplier. Although
we may never know exactly what "compromises" were made by
either side, it is unlikely that the resolution was purely
commercial, with DPM Sechin quoted as "taking into
consideration the special relations with our brotherly
republic." Unfortunately, the agreement leaves room for
continued politicization of the oil trade with Belarus, as
the duty issue likely will emerge again as part of the
process of harmonizing tariff schedules among the
Russia-Belarus-Kazakhstan customs union. End comment.
Beyrle
SIPDIS
DEPT FOR EUR/RUS, EEB/ESC/IEC GALLOGLY AND GREENSTEIN,
S/EEE MORNINGSTAR
DOE FOR HEGBURG, EKIMOFF
DOC FOR JBROUGHER
NSC FOR MMCFAUL
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/28/2020
TAGS: EPET ENRG ECON PREL RS BO
SUBJECT: TRANSNEFT CONFIRMS OIL DEAL WITH BELARUS
REF: MOSCOW 53
Classified By: ECON MC Matthias Mitman for Reasons 1.4 (b/d)
--------------
ALL OIL OVER 6.3 MT SUBJECT TO FULL DUTY
--------------
1. (C) Oleg Pilipets, long-time International Affairs Advisor
in the Office of the President of Transneft, Russia's oil
pipeline monopoly, confirmed to us January 28 that Moscow and
Minsk signed a deal to end the dispute on oil shipments
(reftel). Pilipets said approximately 6.3 million tons (mt)
of Russian oil would be provided to Belarus in 2010
duty-free. The amount was agreed to based on Belarus's
domestic needs. According to Pilipets, Belarus is "free to
do whatever it wants" with the duty-free oil. He said the
agreement is effective immediately, but did not know how long
it would be in effect, only saying that such agreements are
typically applicable for one year.
2. (C) Pilipets added that the inter-governmental agreement
did not specify any amounts of oil to be purchased by Belarus
beyond the 6.3 mt. He explained that any additional oil that
Belarusian consumers would like to purchase from Russian
suppliers would be subject to the full export duty "according
to Russian law" with "no exemptions and no favors." (Note:
Belarus reportedly had bought an additional 15 mt of oil per
year that it processed and re-exported. End note.) Pilipets
said he did not know what DPM Sechin meant by remarks, as
quoted in the press, indicating that Russia had "compromised"
to make the deal happen. Pilipets noted, however, that under
the new deal, Belarus would still be receiving a subsidy of
about $1 billion per year -- his estimate of the foregone
duties on the amount of oil in the agreement.
3. (C) According to press reports, the deal included an 11%
raise increase tariffs on Russian crude transiting Belarus,
based on projected Belarusian GDP growth. Pilipets could not
confirm that detail, saying that Transneft "has nothing to do
with" Belarus's transit charges. He said Belarusian
authorities are free to charge what they want, keeping in
mind "market realities" that could cause consumers to
purchase oil from elsewhere if it is too expensive through
Belarus. Pilipets reiterated that the flow of Russian oil
solely transiting Belarus en-route to third countries was
never affected by the dispute.
--------------
COMMENT
--------------
4. (C) We had expected a resolution to emerge before the
dispute caused any major disruptions in oil flows to Europe.
While the core issue primarily reflected the GOR's subsidy
mechanism to Belarus, the incident again called into question
Russia's reputation as a reliable energy supplier. Although
we may never know exactly what "compromises" were made by
either side, it is unlikely that the resolution was purely
commercial, with DPM Sechin quoted as "taking into
consideration the special relations with our brotherly
republic." Unfortunately, the agreement leaves room for
continued politicization of the oil trade with Belarus, as
the duty issue likely will emerge again as part of the
process of harmonizing tariff schedules among the
Russia-Belarus-Kazakhstan customs union. End comment.
Beyrle