FOI-R--3990--SE_reducerad

FOI-R--3990--SE
only. He said that even in the case of market liberalization, the Latvian choice
would be “to buy from Gazprom or to buy from Gazprom until 2017”. 348
The centrepiece of the discussion about reducing Latvia’s dependence on
Gazprom is the question of whether there are genuine alternative natural gas
supplies. The most popular argument for opponents of gas market reform is that
Latvia should not tease Gazprom with theoretical liberalization, and then be
forced to accept higher gas prices and international litigation because there are no
alternative suppliers in the near future. 349 Gazprom has already made unofficial
hints that it could take legal action against Latvia if necessary. 350 However,
Lithuania has a different position: it is working hard to create alternative
solutions by constructing an LNG terminal LNGT in Klaipeda. 351
The Latvian government has stated that its priority is a common regional LNG
terminal for the Baltic states, which would be co-financed by the European
Commission. Strategically, the LNG terminal project aims to start importing
LNG from other countries, which would end Gazprom’s monopoly on natural
gas deliveries to the Baltic states. 352 However, the Lithuanian government was
not prepared to wait for the construction of the regional terminal and launched its
own local project. At first, Latvia tried to persuade its neighbours to build a
common LNG terminal in Latvia, but this attempt failed in large part due to a
lack of confidence in Lithuania and Estonia, which believe that Latvia has
traditionally succumbed to Gazprom’s lobby. 353
Thus far, the Baltic countries have failed to reach an agreement on the location
for a common LNG terminal. The European Commission had to step in as an
arbitrator. EU involvement should help to base the decision on an assessment of
the project’s economically viability. Itera Latvia has hinted about its desire to
participate in the construction of the terminal, but it is clear that this proposal
would not be supported by any of the Baltic states. The chief of Itera Latvia,
Juris Savickis, has said that the terminal project is of interest to a group of likeminded
individuals, which includes Savickis but not Gazprom or Itera. Such a
group of like-minded people, however, would not escape suspicion of Russian
involvement in the project.
348 See “Dombrovskis: Liberalisation of natural gas market is geopolitical issue”, LETA, 4 March,
2013, available at http://financenet.tvnet.lv/viedokli/455800-
premjers_gazes_tirgus_liberalizacija_ir_geopolitisks_jautajums.
349 Brauna A. (2014): “Gas market. Is it really opened”, IR, 2-8 January 2014, pp.18–20.
350 Ibid.
351 See “Lithuanian President: Klaipeda LNG Terminal to Be Launched by End of 2014”, LNG World
News, 5 November 2013, http://www.lngworldnews.com/lithuanian-president-klaipeda-lng-terminalto-be-launched-by-end-of-2014/#.UtuSLrSxXIU.
352 See “Dombrovskis: Liberalisation of natural gas market is geopolitical issue”, LETA, 4 March,
2013, available at http://financenet.tvnet.lv/viedokli/455800-
premjers_gazes_tirgus_liberalizacija_ir_geopolitisks_jautajums.
353 Brauna A. (2014): op. cit.
109