Interview with Neoklis Sylikiotis, member of the Political Bureau of the C.C. of AKEL and AKEL Member of the European Parliament
“The Republic of Cyprus should continue to exercise calmly all our sovereign rights, denouncing Turkey’s violations and securing the international community’s support, and take effective steps to resume the negotiations immediately from where they had left off”
Sunday 18th February 2018, “HARAVGI” newspaper
What do you think Turkey’s goal is with its unprecedented provocations in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of the Republic of Cyprus?
NS: The international community, and in particular the UN and the EU, must take decisive measures to force Turkey to immediately end its pirate and dangerous actions. Whenever the Cyprus problem is at a deadlock, Turkey, as a rule, proceeds to the creation of new fait accompli. Let alone now, after the collapse at Crans Montana, it has remained unscathed without any responsibility whatsoever being apportioned on it, with the UN Secretary-General noting in his report that all the guarantor forces – without exception – went to the talks with a readiness to work together to reach an agreement. Now Turkey is making a show of strength, trying to create new fait accompli on the Mediterranean energy map.
What we must reflect on is the fact that Turkey is invoking the interests of the Turkish Cypriots by exploiting the suspension of the negotiations. I recall that when the drillings were being conducted in the “Aphrodite” field, the Christofias government had ensured a complete normalization (in the whole procedure). It is no coincidence that even the UN Secretary-General made reference to the Christofias-Talat convergences on maritime zones, natural resources and the sharing of federal revenues. These convergences registered in 2010 effectively safeguard the single sovereignty and single international personality of Cyprus, resolving at the same time the natural gas issue with the overall solution of the Cyprus problem.
Whatever Turkey’s goal may be, the best way to definitively resolve this issue is through the solution of the Cyprus problem. That’s why it’s imperative that the Republic of Cyprus should continue to exercise calmly all our sovereign rights, denouncing Turkey’s violations and securing the international community’s support, and take effective steps to resume the negotiations immediately from where they had left off. We therefore expect the President of the Republic to take initiatives for the resumption of the the talks, as noted by the UN Secretary-General in his report.
What would the possibility of the drilling in the “Soupia” field not being conducted, not even after 22nd February, mean?
NS: The Italian ENI Company said the drilling rig will leave in March and go to Morocco with all that would entail. No one can know exactly how Turkey’s provocative and illegal actions will develop, which is acting as a modern pirate in the region.
The government must demand that drastic action be taken by the international community to end Turkey’s illegal and piratical actions. It is imperative that the exploratory program continue unhindered. At the same time, the government must act swiftly to defuse the crisis and resume the negotiations. Otherwise we will continually find Turkey in front of us.
Gaps and shortcomings
What gaps and shortcomings do you identify in the safeguarding of the implementation of the Republic’s energy program?
NS: There are indeed a lot shortcomings because the Anastasiades government dismantled the comprehensive energy plan that existed during the Christofias government.
The Anastasiades government and ruling forces did not take advantage of the time frames and wasted five whole years indulging in improvisations, making wrong choices and issuing pompous declarations.
They abolished the state hydrocarbon company that was in the process of recruiting consultants to create a liquefaction terminal and destroyed the opportunity that Cyprus had to become an energy hub.
Unfortunately, they exhausted their efforts in celebrations about their tripartite partnerships, but they still have not persuaded Israel to sign a natural gas exploration agreement, which is common international practice so that the exploitation of the “Aphrodite” field can proceed.
They also renewed the contracts of the companies without these very companies having fulfilled their contractual obligations and as a result was there wasn’t consistency with regards the drilling program.
What do you mean when you say there was no consistency with regards the drilling program?
NS: According to the firm contracts that the Christofias government signed with the companies, after 2013 drillings should have been conducted in Block 2, 3 and 11, but no drillings took place. For example, the drilling in Block 3, which the Minister of Energy is proclaiming will be conducted in 2018, should have taken place in 2015.
Unfortunately, the Anastasiades government suspended the Christofias Government’s exploratory drilling program and out of the eight drillings that were scheduled to take place in all the Blocks, only two failed drillings by the EMI were conducted in Block 9, and after two years of delay, the drilling in Block 11 also failed. Subsequently in the beginning of 2018, literally just before the presidential elections, the drilling in the “Calypso” filed followed. Now the Minister of Energy is announcing that two drillings by “Exxon” Company will be made in Block 10, which he said was “the most sought-after” field.
However, the Minister must give an explanation, since they claim that the government does have an energy plan, as to why they have wasted five whole years without taking any action whatsoever even in relation to Block 10 which they consider as very promising.
Do the alleged discoveries in the “Calypso” filed bring back the Natural Gas Liquidation Terminal in the infrastructure plans or do they make its export (from the “Aphrodite” field too) to Egypt more feasible?
NS: As AKEL, we have said from the very outset that the identification of a natural gas field must not be used for celebrations and creating impressions, but represents an additional responsibility to plan the way the field should be developed and utilized as part of a coherent comprehensive strategy, which unfortunately is absent today. We hope that the same story will not be repeated in the case of the “Aphrodite” field too, which, seven years after its identification, continues to remain in the depths of the Cypriot EEZ without any worthy proposal whatsoever for its development.
As far as the two options you mentioned is concerned, unfortunately we have already lost valuable time and this has created new facts that we cannot ignore. Other countries in the region have surpassed us. The Israeli companies, “DELEK” and “AVNER”, who were the first to talk about a LNG terminal and that’s why they acquired part of the rights of Block 12, are moving towards transporting the natural gas to Turkey via a pipeline. Egypt has made its own projects and by 2020 will be producing large quantities of natural gas. Let us not forget that there have already been eighteen meetings with Egypt, looking at the possibility of exporting natural gas to the terminals, but without any tangible result.
However, even at this late stage the government must be act immediately. Any discoveries confirm the need for a comprehensive energy plan, a key element of which is the creation of a natural gas liquefaction terminal, which will exploit the region’s vast reserves.
If today we had pursued and implemented this strategy, the announcements of the companies would have brought the terminal’s goal even nearer and the transformation of Cyprus into an energy hub.
Why do you insist so much on the construction of a terminal?
NS: In recent years there has been a shift in global markets and in the EU itself towards liquefied gas, because it creates considerable flexibility in the market. The government of Demetris Christofias recognized this value and promoted the creation of a terminal in Vasilikos port. If the planning elaborated by the Christofias government had been followed, by the end of 2015 we would have been ready with the techno-economic studies required for the terminal, which need three years to be completed.
Unfortunately, however, despite the fact that in 2013 President Anastasiades had made a pre-election commitment to create a terminal, as soon as he had assumed office he canceled the planning that existed and abolished the National Hydrocarbons Company (KRETYK), creating in its place the Cyprus Hydrocarbons Company (EYK), whose sole responsibility is the commercial side.
And this despite the fact that the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), which made a study on the energy of Cyprus (according to an agreement we signed in 2012), in its conclusions in 2013 argued that the most suitable, flexible and effective option for Cyprus is to proceed to the creation of a terminal.
Whenever this issue was raised, the government’s response referred to the quantities of gas that would have to be confirmed to make the project viable…
NS: The “cost” and “quantity” arguments being put forward by the Anastasiades government to justify its inaction over the past five years have absolutely no substance whatsoever. It is clear that the terminal will work with the region’s reserves more widely, as is the case with EastMead too. In terms of the costs, the international practice is that, as a rule, it is not the states which pay the cost, but rather the big oil companies that conduct the drillings, as well as the companies interested in buying liquefied natural gas. That is why we demand from the government must not waste another five years, but proceed immediately to the elaboration of a comprehensive energy planning.
However as regards how we should use them to achieve social prosperity, economic growth and Cyprus’ political upgrading this has to do with the political handling (of the issue). And, regrettably, so far the Anastasiades government has failed!
