The European Union must do some difficult soul-searching. Photograph from a 2008 performance of William Shakespeare's Hamlet starring David Tennat.

Editor’s note: “To engage or not to engage — that is the question,” or so might have Hamlet said if he were a Western diplomat in Ashgabad.   neweurasia’s Annasoltan explores the Nabucco Project in this new post-series, this time with a view to the West’s oft-unspoken geo-strategic concerns.

Hamlet, perhaps the greatest creation of the English playwright William Shakespeare, famously asked himself, “To be or not to be?”  Well, it seems the question this Autumn for the West is, “To engage or not to engage?”

neweurasia‘s Schwartz, Pravdin, and Musafirbek have all meditated on the “to engage or not to engage?” question as it relates to Uzbekistan.  In my last post I explored how this question relates to Turkmenistan and the ongoing Nabucco Project.  Today, I look under the EU’s strange logic at some cold hard geo-strategic calculations being made by the West.

Euro-absurdity?

To rationalize working with as deplorable regime as Turkmenistan’s, the EU has taken the position that economic engagement with the country will lead to deeper political engagement as well, and hence, political liberalization.  China, where greater prosperity has led to more Western-style consumerism, is apparently one of the models Europeans have in mind.  But in China we’ve seen that tmore consumerism does not mean more freedom — quite the opposite.

Another argument, one quite popular in Germany, is that once the pipeline is completed, Turkmenistan will be in the awkward position of needing to please its new Western customers.  If the EU says to Turkmenistan, “Hey, give your people freedom or we’ll stop buying your gas,” then so goes the logic, Turkmenistan will be compelled to liberalize.  But this logic is even more laughable precisely because in such a scenario the EU would have only Russia to turn to for their energy needs.

The reality is that Turkmenistan, bordering Iran and Afghanistan, is seen as important for Western security.  Central Asia is landlocked and its countries are divided — they are up for grabs, or so the West likes to think.

There is little knowledge about what goes on inside Turkmenistan, a country with approximately 5 million people living in poverty. Yet, in several official EU documents Turkmenistan is described as a prime example of a peaceful and stable Muslim country with a secular government committed to fighting Islamist terrorism in Afghanistan!

Dangerous realpolitick

Global Witness’ campaign leader, Tom Mayne, believes that the repressive regimes policies may breed extremist Islam over time.  He remarks to me:

The more discontent the people are the likely they are turning toward extremist forms of Islam and the leaders might exaggerate the threat. This fear is being used to jail political opponents.

Who would most benefit from the emerging EU-Turkmen partnership?  Andrea Schmitz, from the Russian Federation/CIS division of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, in a comment to me says:

[I]n the short term, at least, it is very much likely that economic engagement of external actors, both EU and non-EU will rather serve the interest of a small elite and thus foster the current political system. As democratization is not a major political objective for the Turkmen elite the chances to help build democracy are scant.

However, a US energy business expert who spoke with me on condition of anonymity is cautiously optimistic:

If they see change in neighboring countries, Karimov, Nazarbayev and Bakiyev allowing more freedom, then they might allow some freedom.  If Medvedev makes more change in Russia and the countries feel more comfortable with democracy but there is no guarantee for it.

As for the Nabucco Project it’s far from clear right now that the pipeline, crossing 6-7 countries, will eventually be built. For one, the Russians and Iranians don’t want it.  For another, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan have overlapping claims over Caspian Sea energy resources, not to mention the fact that the status of the Caspian Sea still needs to be agreed upon by its surrounding states.  Finally, it’s unclear whether Turkmenistan will have enough gas to deliver.

Whatever consideration may make more sense and how it may eventually work out, for me the central issue is that the the Nabucco Project will send the wrong message to the Turkmen people.  They will lose confidence in Western promises of promoting democracy and freedoms, and that in turn may have a negative impact on the EU’s own moral integrity.

It’s not really a question of to engage or not to engage; it’s really is a question of to be or not to be.