RUTHFULLY YOURS

• Biden’s decision — reportedly coordinated with Turkey but reached without consulting Israel, Greece or Cyprus, the main countries involved in the project — undercuts three of the strongest American allies in the Mediterranean region.
• EastMed’s cancellation — variously described as a “disastrous decision,” a “strategic mistake” and an act of “appeasement” of Erdoğan — represents a major geopolitical victory for the Turkish strongman.
• The EastMed pipeline has been in the works for more than a decade. The Israel-Greece-Cyprus project — joined by Bulgaria, Hungary, North Macedonia, Romania and Serbia — has long been seen as a way to diversify natural gas supplies to Europe.
• The Turkish government has always insisted that Israeli gas can only be sold to Europe through Turkey.
• “The Americans do not want the pipeline because Ankara might ‘get angry.'” — Theofrastos Andreopoulos, defense analyst, defensenet.gr.
• “If Erdogan perceives the non-paper as some form of appeasement by Washington, he will simply double down on his gunboat diplomacy in the Eastern Mediterranean and play the role of spoiler in the region.” — Richard Goldberg, a member of the U.S. National Security Council during the Trump administration.
• Is the Biden administration truly concerned about climate change, or does it want to prevent Israel from becoming a strategically important supplier of natural gas to Europe?
• “The reversal on the EastMed pipeline becomes only more hypocritical and offensive given the fact that President Biden continues to clear the path towards completion of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.” — U.S. Representatives Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) and Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), in a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken.
• “This is a disastrous decision that imperils European security and opens the door for further Russian energy hegemony in European gas markets. It should be reversed.” — Ariel Cohen, veteran energy analyst, The Hill.
• “Turkey is not looking to participate in Eastern Mediterranean initiatives, it wants to dominate them. Ankara’s goal is not one of cooperation but of regional primacy if not hegemony.” — Endy Zemenides, Executive Director, Hellenic American Leadership Council.

The Biden administration has abruptly withdrawn American support for the Eastern Mediterranean (EastMed) pipeline, a project aimed at shipping natural gas from Israel to European markets. The White House said the project was antithetical to its “climate goals.”

In reaching its decision, which effectively kills EastMed, the White House appears to have caved to pressure from Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who has vociferously opposed the underwater pipeline because it would bypass Turkey.

Biden’s decision — reportedly coordinated with Turkey but reached without consulting Israel, Greece or Cyprus, the main countries involved in the project — undercuts three of the strongest American allies in the Mediterranean region.

The White House could not have chosen a less opportune moment to announce its decision. With tensions rising between Russia and Ukraine, Europe (which relies on Russia for approximately one-third of its natural gas supplies) is searching for alternative sources of gas to reduce its overreliance on Moscow.

The Biden administration’s decision also smacks of hypocrisy. The White House claims that it wants the Mediterranean region to transition to “clean energy,” but it recently announced its support for the Russia-backed Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which would double shipments of Russian natural gas to Germany.

EastMed’s cancellation — variously described as a “disastrous decision,” a “strategic mistake” and an act of “appeasement” of Erdoğan — represents a major geopolitical victory for the Turkish strongman. Analysts worry that he will be emboldened to continue escalating tensions in the Aegean and the Eastern Mediterranean in his quest to expand Turkish control over energy supply routes to Europe.

EastMed Pipeline

The EastMed pipeline has been in the works for more than a decade. The Israel-Greece-Cyprus project — joined by Bulgaria, Hungary, North Macedonia, Romania and Serbia — has long been seen as a way to diversify natural gas supplies to Europe.

The 6-billion-euro ($6.8 billion) project envisages the construction of a 1,900-kilometer (1,180-mile) undersea pipeline that would carry up to 20 billion cubic meters of gas annually from Israeli and Cypriot waters to Crete and then on to the Greek mainland. From there, the gas would be transported to Italy and other countries in southeastern Europe.

(Image source: Israeli Ministry of Energy)

In January 2020, the leaders of Israel, Greece and Cyprus — with strong support from the Trump administration — signed the EastMed intergovernmental agreement, which aimed at reaching a final investment decision by 2022 and completing the pipeline by 2025. The EastMed project could eventually have supplied up to 10% of Europe’s natural gas needs.

At the time, then U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said:

“We are free countries, free-market countries, working together and working to create energy infrastructures. This is when better security follows. If we do it properly, we will attract investment and maximize these resources.”

In November 2021, the European Commission (the administrative arm of the European Union) included the EastMed pipeline in its list of so-called Projects of Common Interest (PCI), priority cross-border energy projects aimed at integrating the EU’s energy infrastructure.

On January 9, 2022, in a sharp reversal of previous U.S. policy, the Biden administration announced that it no longer supports EastMed. Rather than delivering the news in person, as diplomatic protocol would require on an issue of such regional importance, the U.S. State Department quietly emailed the Greek government a so-called non-paper (unofficial diplomatic correspondence that lacks direct attribution) which described the EastMed project as a “primary source of tension” that was “destabilizing” the region by pitting Israel, Greece and Cyprus against Turkey.

The Biden administration appears to have lost its nerve after the Turkish Navy recently harassed the Italian-operated survey ship Nautical Geo while it was charting a potential route for EastMed in Greek waters off the coast of Crete. Turkey claimed that Nautical Geo was engaging in “unlawful, aggressive and provocative” infringement of Turkish-claimed waters.

The Turkish government has always insisted that Israeli gas can only be sold to Europe through Turkey. In 2016, Turkish and Israeli officials tried to sign a deal to deliver gas, but Erdoğan’s demand that Israel lift its blockade on the Hamas-run Gaza Strip made it impossible to reach an agreement.

The Greek public broadcaster ERT reported that the Biden administration’s non-paper downplayed Turkey’s objections to the pipeline as the reason for the White House’s decision. Instead, the document specified environmental concerns and a supposed lack of economic and commercial viability.

After the contents of the non-paper generated anger in Greece, the U.S. State Department engaged in damage control and cited climate change as the basis for its decision. It said that it was committed to “promote clean energy technologies” and that priority should be given to interconnecting the electricity grids of countries in the region.

Greek defense analyst Theofrastos Andreopoulos wrote that Biden’s decision was a triumph for Turkey and a defeat for Greece:

“In short, this means that Turkey, which supposedly was falling into disfavor with the Americans, got exactly what it wanted: the cancellation of the pipeline.

“The most important parameter in the non-paper justifying the U.S. position, beyond the economic and commercial elements, points out that ​​this pipeline is a source of tension in the Eastern Mediterranean — clearly taking the position of Turkey!

“That is, the Americans do not want the pipeline because Ankara might ‘get angry.'”

Erdoğan, the Turkish president, hailed Biden’s U-turn as a victory. “If Israeli gas is to be brought to Europe, it can only be done through Turkey,” Erdoğan said. “We can sit down and talk terms.”

Israel versus Turkey

The demise of the EastMed pipeline project appears to be — in large measure — the handiwork of Amos Hochstein, a political operator in the American Democratic Party and an acolyte of Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and former U.S. President Barack Obama. Hochstein, a confidant of U.S. President Joe Biden, currently serves as Senior Advisor for Energy Security at the U.S. Department of State.

In January 2022, Turkish state television channel TRT aired a documentary — “The Pipe Dream” (Part 1 and Part 2) — in which Hochstein repeatedly criticized the EastMed pipeline because it excludes Turkey. He also decried the Trump administration’s support of the project:

“I don’t see the need for the United States to come in and support this project. This is a project that probably should not happen because it’s too complicated, too expensive, and too late in the arc of history.

“Today in the Biden administration I would be extremely uncomfortable with the United States supporting this project. Why would we build a fossil fuel pipeline between the East Med and Europe at a time when our entire policy is to support new technology, new developments, and new investments in going green and going cleaner?

“So, by the time this pipeline is built, we will have spent billions of dollars of taxpayer money, probably, on something that is obsolete. And not only obsolete but against our collective interest between the United States and Europe.”

Hochstein’s comments reek of hypocrisy: he has long been a proponent of fossil fuels. In 2017, during a speech to the GE Oil and Gas Annual Meeting, Hochstein praised fossil fuels as creating “so much job growth and economic prosperity in the United States and around the world.” He added that natural gas “will continue to be the backbone of a cleaner energy future.” That same year, Hochstein joined the supervisory board of Naftogaz, the largest state-owned gas and oil company in Ukraine.

In 2019, Hochstein warned against bans on drilling for oil and bans on exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG). In 2020, he described climate change activists as being “emotional.” He added: “I truly believe that natural gas is going to play a far greater role in the [green energy] transition.” Hochstein also disparaged the idea of keeping fossil fuels in the ground:

“We are past the conversation of the last few years where transition was going to be immediate. ‘We’re just keeping it all in the ground and going to go to all renewables.’ That is not going to happen. We’re going to have the oil and gas industry here to stay for several decades, and the renewable industry is going to grow by leaps and bounds. That we all know.”

In July 2021, the Biden administration approved completion of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which would double shipments of Russian natural gas to Germany by transporting the gas under the Baltic Sea.

Biden’s decision abruptly reversed a long-standing bipartisan policy consensus. Both the Obama and Trump administrations opposed Nord Stream 2 on the grounds that, once completed, it would strengthen Russian President Vladimir Putin’s economic and political influence over Europe. Hochstein — known in Europe as “Biden’s guy” — initially opposed Nord Stream 2 but then reversed course and agreed to ensure that the pipeline would be completed.

Biden’s U-turn angered the leaders of many countries in Eastern and Western Europe. They argued that it will effectively give Moscow a stranglehold over European gas supplies and open the continent to Russian blackmail.

Meanwhile, U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports to Europe have reached record levels. The Biden administration has also held talks with several international energy companies on contingency plans for supplying natural gas to Europe if the conflict between Russia and Ukraine disrupts Russian supplies. The White House suddenly appears to have jettisoned its concerns over “climate goals.”

Hochstein’s claim that EastMed is not commercially viable is also in dispute. A 2019 feasibility study financed by the European Union confirmed that “the EastMed Project is technically feasible, economically viable and commercially competitive.”

Endy Zemenides, Executive Director of the Hellenic American Leadership Council, in a podcast with Kathimerini, a daily political and financial newspaper published in Athens, noted that the Biden administration’s assertion that EastMed’s is not commercially viable is not for the White House to decide:

“If you read the non-paper itself, there are so many conflicting and unnecessary rationales. Given our renewable energy policies, our climate goals, that’s fine, this is the policy we are taking. But then they went on with commercial viability. Two comments on that: It’s not their decision. If somebody steps up and pays for it, that makes it commercially viable. Nobody was asking the U.S. State Department or the USA. Second. They were supposed to give a report to Congress about commercial viability. Frankly, it sounds like they [the Biden administration] wanted to head off any further studies about commercial viability. This was aimed in part to the European Union, which has been funding feasibility studies. So, you read this, and this is truly a case of the cover-up being worse than the crime. This was not handled well at all.”

Richard Goldberg, a member of the U.S. National Security Council during the Trump administration, expressed bafflement at the Biden administration’s decision to withdraw support from EastMed:

“The paper was very surprising and raises questions as to why the administration would want to publicly waffle on such an important project at this time. Was there a quid pro quo for Turkish assistance on the withdrawal from Afghanistan or was this prompted by domestic political interests without considering the consequences for the region? Either way, the non-paper was a strategic mistake.

“The project has been moving forward now for several years and has passed several important milestones on the development path. The decision to call into question its technical feasibility, economic viability and commercial competitiveness now — at this late hour — smells of a political decision, not an economic one.

“If Erdogan perceives the non-paper as some form of appeasement by Washington, he will simply double down on his gunboat diplomacy in the Eastern Mediterranean and play the role of spoiler in the region.”

Meanwhile, NATO is studying the possibility of building a new pipeline across Spain that would transport natural gas from Algeria to France and Germany.

Is the Biden administration truly concerned about climate change, or does it want to prevent Israel from becoming a strategically important supplier of natural gas to Europe?

Turkish Opposition

Turkey has challenged the EastMed project by attempting to expand its claims over gas-rich areas of the Mediterranean Sea.

In November 2019, Turkey and Libya reached a bilateral agreement on maritime boundaries in the southeastern Mediterranean Sea. The deal, signed by Erdoğan and the UN-backed leader of Libya, Fayez al-Sarraj, attempted to redraw existing sea boundaries so that Libya ostensibly can claim exclusive rights over 39,000 square kilometers of maritime waters that belong to Greece.

The bilateral agreement — which established a new Turkey-Libya economic zone that the EastMed pipeline would now have to cross — appeared aimed at giving Turkey more leverage over the project. Referring to the Turkey-Libya deal, Erdoğan said:

“Other international actors cannot conduct exploration activities in the areas marked in the Turkish-Libyan memorandum. Greek Cypriots, Egypt, Greece and Israel cannot establish a natural gas transmission line without Turkey’s consent.”

In December 2019, the Turkish Foreign Ministry summoned Israel’s top diplomat in Ankara to inform him that Israel’s plan to lay down a natural gas pipeline to Europe would require Turkey’s approval.

Turkish Foreign Ministry spokesman Hami Aksoy said that there was no need to build the EastMed pipeline because the Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline already exists. “The most economical and secure route to utilize the natural resources in the eastern Mediterranean and deliver them to consumption markets in Europe, including our country, is Turkey,” he said in a statement.

The European Union dismissed the Turkey-Libya deal as inconsistent with international law. The President of the European Council, Charles Michel, said:

“The recent Turkey-Libya Memorandum of Understanding on the delimitation of maritime jurisdictions in the Mediterranean Sea infringes upon the sovereign rights of third States and does not comply with the Law of the Sea and cannot produce any legal consequences for third States.”

Egypt condemned the Turkey-Libya deal as “illegal and not binding or affecting the interests and the rights of any third parties.”

Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias noted:

“Any maritime accord between Libya and Turkey ignores something that is blatantly obvious, which is that between those two countries there is the large geographical land mass of Crete. Consequently, such an attempt borders on the absurd.”

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu hinted that Ankara could use its military to prevent gas drilling in waters off Cyprus that it claims as its own. “No one can do this kind of work without our permission,” he said in an interview with the newspaper Habertürk. “We will, of course, prevent any unauthorized work.”

Cyprus has been divided since 1974, when Turkey invaded and occupied the northern third of the island. Turkey, which does not have diplomatic relations with the southern Republic of Cyprus, an EU member, claims that more than 40% Cyprus’s offshore maritime zone, known as the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), is located on Turkey’s continental shelf and therefore belongs to Ankara or to Turkish Cypriots.

Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis said that the pipeline was of “geostrategic importance” and would contribute to regional peace. Greek Energy Minister Kostis Hatzidakis called it “a project of peace and cooperation” despite “Turkish threats.” Cypriot President Nicos Anastasiades said that his aim was “cooperation and not rivalry in the Middle East.”

Constantinos Filis, Director of the Institute of Global Affairs at the American College of Greece warned that the Biden administration’s decision to withdraw support from EastMed would incentivize Turkish belligerence:

“From Turkey’s perspective, it is very reasonable to believe that it is a diplomatic victory, achieved by using methods that all regional and other players condemned. What is most worrying is that Turkey could understand that what the U.S. is effectively saying is that you can destabilize the area and be blamed for that, but at the end of the day we take it into account and make a decision that satisfies you.”

Select Commentary

In a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, U.S. Representatives Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) and Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY) wrote:

“We write in stark opposition to the Biden Administration’s change of course on the EastMed pipeline project. Since 2019, the United States played a critical role in the establishment of the 3+1 [Greece, Israel and Cyprus plus the United States] framework and the Eastern Mediterranean energy development discussions. Digressing from that course is fraught with national security concerns. By undermining the EastMed pipeline project, the Biden Administration undercuts our allies and their hopes for energy independence and economic prosperity. The sting of the reversal is made worse by the Administration’s continued tacit approval of Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline, deepening Europe’s energy dependence on an adversary….

“Despite Europe’s decades long push towards green and renewable energies, the surge in energy prices has ironically led to the increased use of coal to meet demand. Since natural gas is a cleaner energy option over other fossil fuels, it is a crucial energy source for government policies seeking to transition into greener energies. The European Union recognizes this and has even declared the [EastMed] pipeline a special project. The EastMed pipeline project would not only alleviate future shortages of natural gas to Europe but would promote energy independence and economic prosperity for our strategic allies of Greece, Israel and Cyprus.

“The reversal on the EastMed pipeline becomes only more hypocritical and offensive given the fact that President Biden continues to clear the path towards completion of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. Biden’s announcement last May to suspend sanctions on the Russian pipeline and his continued fight against sanctions shows clear preference towards Russia over our allies….

“We hope you and President Biden recognize the significant national security implications the United States and our European allies are facing because of European reliance on Russian gas. The EastMed pipeline must be a priority. It is a viable alternative to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and European dependence on Russian natural gas. We strongly urge you to reconsider your opposition to the EastMed pipeline project and support energy independence for our allies in the Eastern Mediterranean and Europe.”

Energy analyst Ariel Cohen, in an essay — “America’s Strategic Mistake in the Mediterranean” — wrote:

“As tensions between the Kremlin and NATO over Ukraine highlight Europe’s strategic dependence on Russian gas, a critical natural gas pipeline stretching across the Mediterranean finds itself at the center of competing geopolitical forces. The EastMed Pipeline was supposed to diversify and increase European gas supplies, thereby enhancing the continent’s energy security.

“The pipeline, over 1,100 miles long and costing over $7 billion, was given ‘Special Project’ status by the EU and hailed as a boon to EU energy independence by the United States. But in early 2022 the Biden administration did an about-face, informing allies that it no longer supported the strategic pipeline on environmental grounds.

“The project was designed to bring some 20 billion cubic meters (bcm) of dry natural gas from the offshore fields of Israel and Cyprus, across Greece, to Italy and Bulgaria — much to the chagrin of Turkey and Russia, both excluded from the project. As Europe suffers from historically high gas prices, and the U.S. scrambles to sanction Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline to Germany, EastMed is about to be killed.

“This is a disastrous decision that imperils European security and opens the door for further Russian energy hegemony in European gas markets. It should be reversed.”

In an opinion article — “US Pipeline Withdrawal Marks New Chapter in Eastern Mediterranean” — Henri J. Barkey, a professor of International Relations at the U.S. based Lehigh University, wrote that the timing of the Biden administration’s announcement was ill-timed:

“Even if the US may have thought it had a responsibility as part of the 3+1 mechanism of meetings with Cyprus, Greece and Israel designed to encourage regional cooperation, the fact remains that the decision to build a pipeline rests with those three countries and the Europeans, and not Washington.

“Similarly, if the project did not fit the future European green energy plans, presumably this too was a European decision. After all, both Greece and Cyprus are members of the European Union. But as it stands now, this announcement will be perceived as an attempt by Washington at strong-arming the parties.

“The timing of the non-paper was awkward. Europe and the US are amid one of the most dangerous confrontations with Russia over Ukraine. Russian natural gas pipelines are the ones that heat European homes and fuel industry. If President Vladimir Putin were to attack Ukraine, it appears that the recently completed Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline to Germany would be the first target of retaliation. Even if the EastMed pipeline was unrealistic, would it not have been more astute to let Putin think that Europe has other options?”

In an essay — “It’s Not the Pipeline, Stupid” — Endy Zemenides, Executive Director of the Hellenic American Leadership Council, argued that the U.S. State Department must stop trying to appease Turkey:

“There has been a troubling trend of certain officials at State constantly probing for openings for Turkish participation in Eastern Mediterranean diplomatic initiatives.

“Turkey continues to make every State Department official who tries this look bad. A ‘rules-based international order’ — the very kind of order that President Joe Biden himself has set as his goal — is being established in the Eastern Mediterranean. Turkey doesn’t accept any of these rules — not the Law of the Sea, not the exclusive economic zones that were legally delineated etc.

“Turkey is not looking to participate in Eastern Mediterranean initiatives, it wants to dominate them. Ankara’s goal is not one of cooperation but of regional primacy if not hegemony. It is Turkey’s behavior that has led to a balancing coalition which includes not only Greece, Cyprus and Israel, but Egypt and features support from France and others. The problem for Ankara is that this balancing coalition (unlike balancing coalitions in the South China Sea for example) now features a much larger total population, more dynamic and innovative economies, more than capable militaries, and far more diplomatic leverage.

“Moreover, Turkey’s priorities are contrary to the priorities the US laid out in the non-paper, in two State Department statements and in interviews granted by Amos Hochstein following the controversy. Turkish officials are telling anyone that will listen that they also oppose the [electricity] interconnectors, which they declare “not viable” — directly contradicting State. President Erdogan declared that East Med gas is going nowhere without Turkey. Renewable energy goals in the region are hampered by the casus belli Turkey maintains against Greece in the Aegean — preventing for example wind turbines being developed outside of a 6-mile radius around Greek islands (an absurd limitation that would seriously and negatively affect Greek tourism if complied with).

“US officials recognize that the East Med Gas Forum has the potential to evolve and to be as significant as the European Coal and Steel Community. For Turkey to be part of that, it has to play the role of Germany of the 1950s instead of the Eastern Mediterranean’s version of the revisionist Germany of World War II. State Department officials openly muse about Turkey the day after Erdogan yet keep trying to give Erdogan a place at the table. It is Turkey’s behavior that has to change, not simply the manner in which it makes its demands.”

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.