In October 2008, an audit by the British company Gaffney, Cline and Associates - GCA propelled Turkmenistan to the rank of the world’s second largest gas producer. This revelation confirmed the assertions of Saparmurad Niazov, the grotesque Turkmenbashy – Father of all the Turkmens – who, from 1985 until his death in December 2006, reigned over his country without sharing power. Less than a year later, two publications which appeared this past September, sow confusion among international energy experts and raise many questions. These two papers, one – an article written by Arkady Dubnov for the Russian newspaper Vremya Novosteï and the other – a report by the German NGO, the Eurasian Transition Group (ETG), - cast doubt on the estimations made public in October 2008.

Arkady Dubnov relies on information gleaned from Russian officials, while it is a Turkmen source behind the ETG pieced. In summation, they lead us to understand that the Turkmen authorities misled the managers of GCA by providing them with manipulated and falsified data. Disinformation or truth? At present, it is difficult to say. Nonetheless, one cannot really avoid wondering about a certain number of questions surrounding this polemic over resources, real or supposed, of Turkmenistan. This constitutes a new episode in the struggle in which the great powers are engaging for control and exploitation of the formidable energy resources of Central Asia.

The Baseline scenario finalised in November 2007 gives an update of the previous trend scenarios, such as the “Trends to 2030” published in 2003 and its 2005 update. The new Baseline scenario takes into account the high energy import price environment of recent years, sustained economic growth and new policies and measures implemented in the Member-States.

 When Joschka Fischer's lucrative new job as the "political communications advisor" to a consortium of European energy companies was leaked to a German business publication this summer, there was one comment that stood out. "Welcome to the club," said Gerhard Schröder, an even more highly paid advocate for the other side in Europe's increasingly politicized energy war.

The subject of Caspian and Middle East gas pipelines to Europe has become increasingly important and emotive in the late 2000s with many projects and aspirations being advanced to create a “4th corridor” aimed at significant reducing dependence on (primarily) Russian gas. The role of Turkey will be critical for all of these projects. While the details of pipeline projects are well known, the role and aspirations of Turkey as an energy transit country have received less attention. Some have portrayed Turkey as a country critical to European energy security and a potential hub for Caspian and Middle East (oil and) gas supplies. But some Turkish statements and commercial positions in relation to pipeline projects have raised questions about the conditions which the country may intend to attach to this role, some of which could be seen as obstacles to natural gas transit. Because of the partisan nature of much of the current debate, it was important to find an author capable of making an expert, but unbiased, assessment of the Turkish position.

Gareth Winrow has long experience in Turkey and was the ideal choice to interview Turkish stakeholders in relation to the many different aspects of the country’s energy situation and the fourth corridor. I am very grateful to Gareth for taking on this project and believe that his paper adds significantly to understanding the complexity of the problems related to these issues.

In the spring of 2009 Russia remains in the midst of deep recession, as the country seeks to pull itself out of the biggest economic crisis faced since 1998. The political challenge this poses to the current Russian government of Prime Minister and former-President, Vladimir Putin, is substantial...

Since the January 2009 gas crisis, top-level Russian officials have been suggesting that the Energy Charter Treaty should be reviewed. The Treaty was signed in 1994, but never ratified, by Russia. Russian gas giant Gazprom repeatedly invoked the Treaty’s incompatibility with its own interests and often claimed that it should be amended. One of the main dilemmas for Gazprom has always been the question of transit: how to ensure a reliable gas transit through Belarus and Ukraine on the one hand, while preserving a monopoly on the gas transit from Central Asia on the other?...