The EU is horrified: Gazprom is terminating the transit contract with Naftogaz. Gazprom terminates transit contracts with Ukraine

The official representative of the company, Sergei Kupriyanov, explained to RBC that, despite the statement about the termination of all contracts with Ukraine, Gazprom will not stop gas transit through this country in the near future. “If it were so, we would say so directly,” he said.

Naftogaz has not yet received any documents from Gazprom indicating its intention Russian company terminate agreements under contracts for the supply and transit of natural gas, Interfax reported.

The judicial procedure for terminating a gas supply contract in the Stockholm Arbitration Court can last 1.5-3 years, says Maxim Kulkov, managing partner of Kulkov, Kolotilov and Partners. “In this case, it becomes meaningless, since the agreement will already expire at the end of 2019. However, under the terms of the contract, Gazprom has the right to stop gas supplies if Naftogaz fails to fulfill its obligations under it, by sending a corresponding notification,” the lawyer notes. In his opinion, Gazprom’s threat to begin the procedure for terminating contracts is aimed at forcing Naftogaz to agree to a settlement agreement on the decision made in Stockholm on terms favorable to Gazprom. “We now see that Gazprom continues the glorious traditions of Russian legal nihilism - “if I don’t like the court’s decision, I will not implement it,” Kulkov believes.

This is at least the fourth conflict between Gazprom and Naftogaz since the early 2000s, and Europe has been the victim of these gas wars more than once, notes Mikhail Krutikhin, partner of the consulting company RusEnergy. During these disputes, Gazprom argued that Naftogaz was reducing supplies of Russian gas by reducing transit, and also stopped supplies to Europe through Ukraine, fearing unauthorized withdrawal of gas.

Gas wars between Russia and Ukraine

2005-2006 conflict

In the spring of 2005, Naftogaz proposed revising the terms of the contract for the transit of Russian gas to Europe through the territory of Ukraine, abandoning barter in favor of cash payments, but Russian side put forward a counter-demand to increase gas prices for Ukraine. As a result, the contract for 2006 was not signed, and with its onset, natural gas supplies to Ukraine ceased. A few days after the cessation of gas supplies to Ukraine, a new contract was signed, according to which both the price of Russian gas and the transit rate through the territory of Ukraine increased, and the Swiss company Rosukrenergo, a joint venture of Gazprom and businessmen Dmitry Firtash, became the supplier. and Ivan Fursin. The contracts were concluded only for a year.

2008-2009 conflict

At the beginning of March 2008, Gazprom, in the absence of contracts signed by Naftogaz, including for already supplied volumes of gas, supplied 50% to Ukraine. At the same time, Kyiv did not recognize the receipt of Russian gas in 2008, and compensated for the reduction in supplies by reducing transit gas supplies to Europe. By the end of the year, the Ukrainian side’s debt was estimated at $2.1 billion. It was not possible to agree on the terms of the contract for 2009, and on January 1, supplies stopped again, and a week later, transit supplies of fuel were also suspended. On January 19, 2009, after negotiations between the prime ministers of the two countries, Vladimir Putin and Yulia Tymoshenko, new contracts for gas transit and supply, which are still in effect (until the end of 2019). The parties refused the services of intermediaries, including the services of Rosukrenergo.

2014 conflict

By April 2014 the price for natural gas for Ukraine increased sharply - to $485 per 1 thousand cubic meters. m, when Naftogaz did not transfer payment for the supplied gas, and Gazprom canceled the previously valid discount in the context of aggravated interstate relations after the annexation of Crimea to Russia. In June of the same year, the Russian side stopped gas supplies to Ukraine and introduced a prepayment regime. On October 30, 2014, after lengthy negotiations with the participation of EU representatives, the parties reached an agreement for the period from November 2014 to March 31, 2015. Moscow agreed to return the discount canceled in the spring, and in the fourth quarter of 2014 the gas price for Ukraine was supposed to be $378 per 1 thousand cubic meters. m, and in the first quarter of 2015 - $365 per 1 thousand cubic meters. m. In November 2015, Kyiv stopped purchasing Russian gas.

Photo: Zurab Javakhadze / TASS

What does this mean for Europe, Russia and Ukraine

The European Commission called on all parties, companies and relevant ministers of Russia and Ukraine involved in the dispute to “immediately resolve the conflict in accordance with the decisions of the Stockholm Arbitration Court,” said Deputy Head of the European Commission for Energy Union Affairs Maros Šefčović. “The European Commission is ready to lead trilateral negotiations, which have proven their effectiveness in situations of disagreement in the past,” he said.

Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak will meet with Sefcovic in the near future and discuss all the details. “We proceed from the fact that contracts must be fulfilled,” he added (quoted by Interfax). The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry officially approached the European Commission with a proposal for trilateral negotiations, Alena Osmolovskaya, head of the Naftogaz communications department, told RBC.

The largest consumer of Gazprom gas from Germany, Uniper, said that Gazprom’s termination of all contracts with Ukraine will not affect the supply situation. Uniper press secretary Nicole Karchmaryk told RBC about this. She declined to comment further. “No negotiations were held with us, no one notified us about plans to abandon gas transit through Ukraine,” added the Uniper top manager.

Gazprom still has nothing to replace the gas transit route through Ukraine, says Alexey Grivach, deputy head of the National Energy Security Fund. In addition to Ukraine, the company supplies gas to Europe through Belarus and Poland (Yamal - Europe, capacity - 32.9 billion cubic meters per year), through Nord Stream along the bottom of the Baltic Sea (55 billion cubic meters), through Blue Stream » along the bottom of the Black Sea (16 billion cubic meters). But in conditions of increased demand due to low temperatures in Europe, all these transport capacities are loaded higher than the contract volumes, adds Grivach.

“Last year, Gazprom pumped 91 billion cubic meters through Ukraine to Europe. m out of 194 billion cubic meters. m of export. This means that Gazprom’s direct losses if transit through Ukraine is stopped could amount to about half of its revenue (for the nine months of 2017, the company’s total revenue amounted to 4.64 trillion rubles - RBC). In addition, it is necessary to add fines for non-fulfillment of contracts,” notes Mikhail Korchemkin, director of East European Gas Analysis.

If the transit of Gazprom gas through Ukraine is stopped, the greatest risk is for the economies of the Balkan countries, Bulgaria and Hungary, since there are no interconnectors there and liquefied natural gas (LNG) cannot be delivered there from the United States, says Krutikhin from RusEnergy. In countries Western Europe They have their own production, and they are able to diversify gas supplies, but this will take time.

On March 1, Gazprom also resumed gas supplies to Ukraine, despite having received an advance payment. The company explained this by the lack of an approved additional agreement with Kyiv. Due to gas shortages, the Ukrainian government adopted a five-day crisis plan that included restricting gas supplies to schools and residential buildings. According to Naftogaz estimates, lowering the temperature by several degrees will help save up to 9% of gas. The Ukrainian company also has a fixed-term contract with the Polish PGNiG for the supply of more than 60 million cubic meters. m of gas until the end of March 2018.

“Unfortunately, Russia and RAO Gazprom have once again demonstrated that as soon as cold weather sets in, attempts to use gas supplies as a mechanism for political pressure once again do. This won't work. Ukraine is a reliable partner, and these events have once again confirmed this,” said Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, assuring that nothing threatens the transit of Russian gas through the territory of Ukraine to EU countries.

How to resolve conflict

Having announced the start of the procedure for terminating contracts with Ukraine, Gazprom invited Europe to resolve the dispute, Alexey Gromov, director of energy at the Institute of Energy and Finance, told RBC. The monopoly only expressed its intention to break contracts, and did not turn off the valve, that is, it gave a signal to its European partners that there was still an opportunity to reach an agreement.

Despite the fact that the final decision of the hitherto neutral Stockholm Arbitration Court regarding the mutual claims of Naftogaz and Gazprom, announced on February 28, turned out to be clearly in favor of Ukraine, the European Commission could act as an arbiter in resolving this dispute, to which they could listen to both sides, since none of the EU countries, whatever their political preferences, is unlikely to want to freeze this winter due to yet another Russian-Ukrainian gas controversy, the expert concludes. In addition, there is already positive experience of the EU’s participation in gas disputes between Russia and Ukraine, for example, in September 2015 there were trilateral agreements that determined the conditions acceptable for all participants for the supply of Russian gas to Ukraine in the autumn-winter period of 2015-2016 without damage for the transit of Russian gas to Europe, Gromov notes.

“And now the issue cannot be resolved without European consumers; a compromise can only be reached joint actions“Agrees Alexey Grivach. According to him, this could be a new contract with Ukraine on mutually beneficial terms, as well as Ukraine’s refusal of current demands on Gazprom or the acceleration of the construction of new capacities bypassing the republic (Gazprom is building two new gas pipelines - Nord Stream 2 along the bottom of the Baltic Sea and the Turkish Stream in the Black Sea) or a combination of these factors.

The head of the National Energy Security Fund, Konstantin Simonov, saw a connection between Gazprom’s threat to terminate contracts and the military rhetoric addressed to the West made by President Vladimir Putin on March 1. “This can be interpreted as follows: if you act harshly towards Russia, then Russia has something to respond to in the same harsh manner. And it is unknown who will benefit from this,” the expert notes. Gazprom is trying to gain time in order not to pay not only the $2.6 billion assigned by arbitration (this is Gazprom’s decision), but also possible fines for failure to fulfill obligations on transit volumes in 2018-2019. But this whole situation can be used by the company’s opponents in Europe to fight the implementation of the Nord Stream 2 project, which already has enough opponents in the West, the expert warns.

Gazprom terminates contracts with Ukraine / Photo UNIAN

The Russian gas monopolist Gazprom, against the backdrop of a loss in the Stockholm arbitration, decided to begin the procedure for terminating existing contracts for the transit and purchase of gas with the oil and gas holding Naftogaz of Ukraine. The Gazprom press service reported this on its Facebook page.

“Gazprom is forced to immediately begin the procedure for terminating contracts with NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine for the supply and transit of gas in the Stockholm Arbitration,” the Russian company said in a statement.

According to the head of Gazprom, Alexey Miller, the Russian company decided to take such actions after receiving the decision of the Stockholm Arbitration Court.

“The Stockholm arbitration, guided by double standards, made an asymmetrical decision on contracts for the supply and transit of gas with NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine,” Gazprom reported, adding that the arbitration decision significantly upset the balance of interests of the parties under these contracts, and also forces Gazprom decides economic problems Ukraine.

“In such a situation, the continuation of contracts for Gazprom is economically inexpedient and unprofitable,” the press service added.

As UNIAN reported, on February 28, Naftogaz received a claim from a Ukrainian company against the Russian gas monopolist Gazprom, according to which the arbitration ordered Gazprom to pay Naftogaz $4.63 billion. As a result of the consideration of two cases, the Russian Gazprom remained in debt Ukrainian company $2.56 billion

After receiving the court decision, on the morning of March 1, Gazprom refused to supply gas to Ukraine. Moreover, the Russian company has already received an advance payment for it. Naftogaz called this behavior of Gazprom a violation of the Stockholm Arbitration decision.

Moreover, according to Ukrtransgaz, Gazprom has not a single day this year complied with the requirement of the transit contract to maintain the required level of gas pressure at the entrance to the Ukrainian gas transportation system.

Cabinet of Ministers for five days to prevent a crisis situation in the energy sector due to the actions of the Russian monopolist Gazprom, which, among other things, provides for the transfer of generating companies from gas to fuel oil, as well as the cessation of work educational institutions until March 6.

On March 1, the head of Naftogaz, Andrey Kobolev, at a meeting of the Council national security and the Defense of Ukraine proposed to introduce restrictions on gas consumption on March 3-4 due to a significant cold snap and the actions of the Russian Gazprom, which refused to supply gas to Ukraine from March 1 of this year.

He said that due to significant cooling in Ukraine there is a record daily consumption gas - 200 million cubic meters. m, with 18 million cubic meters. m of gas became a shortage, which could be covered thanks to gas supplies from Russia.

Kobolev noted that this deficit will be partially covered by purchases of gas at high prices from the European direction, adding that these bills will be issued to Gazprom for failure to fulfill the contract. At the same time, according to him, consumption of 10 million cubic meters. m of gas per day will not be able to be cut off, but after March 4 warming is expected and gas consumption will decrease.

Moscow, March 2 - "Vesti.Ekonomika". Gazprom is forced to immediately begin the procedure in the Stockholm arbitration for terminating contracts with NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine for the supply and transit of gas, said the head of the company, Alexey Miller. The European Commission expressed its readiness to organize trilateral negotiations to ensure the transit of gas from the Russian Federation to the EU through Ukraine.

“The Stockholm arbitration, guided by double standards, made an asymmetrical decision on contracts for the supply and transit of gas with NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine. Thus, the arbitration decision significantly upset the balance of interests of the parties under these contracts,” Miller said.

“The arbitrators justified their decision by the sharp deterioration in the state of the Ukrainian economy. We are categorically against the idea that Ukraine’s economic problems will be solved at our expense. In such a situation, the continuation of contracts for Gazprom is economically inexpedient and unprofitable,” the head of Gazprom emphasized.

Gazprom supplies gas to the EU in record volumes in other directions.

The European Commission (EC) expresses concerns about the transit of gas from the Russian Federation to the European Union through Ukraine, said EC Vice President for the Energy Union Maros Sefcovic.

“In the opinion of the European Commission, the dispute between the Russian Federation and Ukraine raises concerns about the transit of gas to the European Union and about direct gas supplies to Ukraine from the Russian Federation,” Sefcovic said.

The EC announced its readiness to organize trilateral negotiations with the participation of the EC, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, as in previous years in controversial situations.

“The European Commission is ready to organize a tripartite process, which has proven its effectiveness in controversial situations in the past,” noted the head of the EC.

At the end of February 2018, the Stockholm Arbitration Court satisfied the claims of the Ukrainian Naftogaz against the Russian Gazprom in a dispute over gas transit in the amount of $4.673 billion.

The court ruled that the Russian company must pay the Ukrainian side $2.56 billion.

“Of the monetary claims of $17 billion declared by Naftogaz, the arbitrators satisfied claims in the amount of $4.673 billion in connection with the supply of gas for transit to European consumers in a smaller volume than was provided for in the contract. Taking into account the amount previously awarded in favor of Gazprom the supply contract, the arbitrators offset counterclaims, as a result of which Gazprom is obliged to pay Naftogaz $2.56 billion,” Gazprom said in a statement.

The Russian company has already expressed disagreement with the Stockholm arbitration decision regarding Naftogaz’s claim under the gas transit contract.

Ukraine is forced to switch to fuel oil - this is the action plan adopted by the government. And Naftogaz launched a promotion with a telling name"Screw it on." All Ukrainians whose houses are heated gas boilers, called for lowering the temperature and reducing gas consumption.

“Previously, these same arbitrators agreed with Naftogaz’s arguments about the sharp deterioration in the state of the Ukrainian economy, which resulted in a decrease in demand for gas and Naftogaz’s failure to fulfill obligations to take gas. However, in relation to Gazprom, which referred to the decrease in purchases by the company’s European clients as main reason reduction of transit through Ukraine, this argument was not taken into account,” the report notes.

Gazprom will protect its rights in the ways available to it in accordance with applicable law.

Gazprom also noted the imbalance in relations with Naftogaz regarding gas supplies and transit, which arose taking into account the results of two proceedings in the Stockholm arbitration.

“Taking into account the results of the two proceedings, a significant imbalance has arisen in the relations between Gazprom and Naftogaz regarding supplies and transit, disturbing basic principles Swedish law, which governs the contract," Gazprom said.

Gazprom unexpectedly announced its intention to terminate contracts with Naftogaz for the supply and transit of gas as part of the proceedings in the Stockholm arbitration. The company explains its decision by an unfair arbitration decision on a transit dispute. This step by Gazprom transforms the situation from a difficult one into a full-fledged gas crisis, although formally there is no talk of interrupting supplies yet.

Gazprom announced its decision to terminate both contracts with Naftogaz from 2009 - both for supply and for transit. “Gazprom is forced to immediately begin the procedure for terminating contracts with NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine for the supply and transit of gas in the Stockholm Arbitration,” the company’s message quotes its head Alexey Miller.

He explains this decision by the fact that the Stockholm Arbitration, “guided by double standards, made an asymmetric decision on contracts for the supply and transit of gas with NJSC Naftogaz of Ukraine.” Gazprom notes that “the arbitrators justified their decision by the sharp deterioration in the state of the Ukrainian economy.”

“We are categorically against the idea that Ukraine’s economic problems will be solved at our expense. In such a situation, the continuation of contracts for Gazprom is economically inexpedient and unprofitable,” the company said in a statement.

The fact that the termination of contracts will take place through an arbitration procedure means that this will not be done immediately. But in fact, this means at a minimum that Gazprom is not going to start supplying gas to Naftogaz and, moreover, reserves the right to stop transit. This extremely risky and harsh decision potentially jeopardizes the fulfillment of Gazprom's contracts for gas supplies to Europe, which the company has always called its top priority.

Both Gazprom and Naftogaz contracts provide for a standard arbitration clause, according to which disputed issues, as well as issues of contract termination, are considered in Stockholm arbitration. The commencement of arbitration proceedings is possible no earlier than 30 days after the start of negotiations between the parties (if they did not lead to success). Naftogaz said that it has not yet received documents from Gazprom regarding the termination of contracts - if they arrive in the coming days, the procedure in Stockholm will be able to start in early April.

According to the lawyers interviewed by Kommersant, the period for consideration of this dispute will most likely be at least a year.

Moreover, Gazprom, as a party wishing to terminate contracts, will need to justify the reasons for termination to the arbitrators, for example, prove that Naftogaz committed significant violations of the terms of the contracts, says general secretary Russian Arbitration Association Roman Zykov. He notes that arbitrators are not required to take into account previous arbitration decisions on disputes between Gazprom and Naftogaz - although the parties can cite them as arguments in favor of their position, in the final decision the arbitrators cannot refer to the results of other arbitrations. Mr. Zykov notes that Gazprom, theoretically, may try to impose interim measures - ask the arbitrators to remove its obligations under the contracts until the dispute is resolved on the merits.

That is, Gazprom has the opportunity to avoid gas supplies to Naftogaz (which it is in principle obligated to provide under the arbitration decision under the gas supply contract), and also not to comply with the transit arbitration decision, which required the company to transit through the Ukrainian gas transportation system at least 110 billion cubic meters per year (in 2017, transit amounted to 93.5 billion cubic meters).

Director of the National Energy Security Fund Konstantin Simonov on Kommersant FM:

The Stockholm arbitration applies some rules to Ukraine, and others to Gazprom, while naming the amount of the fine for the Russian company, without even explaining on what basis it was calculated, because there were no initial figures for this mathematics in the contract. In this regard, Gazprom was really, in my opinion, offended by this story, and I think it did this - since you, in fact, began to act according to the rules, we will also play by them...