Английский язык. Любинская Н.А - 16 стр.

                                            16
announced, the director of the institute of Energy Policy Vladimir Milov said that he
does not believe a foreign company can win a license in East Siberia. However, some
experts did not rule out that the wealthy China National Petroleum Corporation
(CNPC) could join Gazprom in the auction. Last year, CNPN announced it was ready
to bid for the Chayandinskoye field and a source close to CNPC has confirmed the
Chinese major is still interested in Siberian oil and gas assets and is ready to talk with
the Russian Government about possible cooperation.
        It seems, however, that Vladimir Milov was correct in his guess. Several days
later, the Russian Ministry of Natural Resources and the Federal Agency for Subsur-
face Use announced their decision to ban foreign controlled companies from taking
part in tenders to develop major oil and metals resources in 2005. Russia’s Natural
Resources Minister Yuri Trutnev, who made the statement, said that the tender list
included the Sakhalin-3 oil and gas field, which U.S. Exxonmobil had planned to de-
velop; the Sukhoi Log gold field, Eurasia’s biggest; and the giant Udokan copper de-
posit as well as many others. The companies that will be allowed to take part in the
tenders must have no less than 51 percent of Russian ownership. A source in the Fed-
eral Agency for Subsurface Use told the agency that “the state is interested in the de-
velopment of strategically important deposits by Russian companies”.
        The move, which created quite a stir in the Western media, is, in reality, not
surprising. The ban underscores the process which has been discussed for quite a long
time: namely, President Putin and his associates are trying to recapture state influence
in the oil and gas sector. It has been also said that the government is writing new leg-
islation to restrict foreign ownership of mineral deposits, except in special cases.
        Still, the Kremlin’s move is not the end of the world. After all, it permits par-
ticipation of companies with 49% foreign ownership. This should present no prob-
lems for newly created joint ventures, such as the potential ones between China’s
CNPC with Gazprom and Rosneft, as well as India’s ONGC with Rosneft. For others,
like the Russian-British TNK-BP 50-50 joint venture, the new ban may require some
consideration. The desire to partake in the development of Russia’s natural resource
riches, however, is a strong enough argument to somewhat change the ownership
structure. Like Valery Nesterov, an analyst with the Troika Dialog investment bank
told Dow Jones Newswires, “Russia isn’t shutting out foreign investors. It will just
regulate the influx of investment depending on the country’s needs.”
        After all, Russia is not the only country that prefers to develop its natural re-
sources on its own. The United States, for example, develops its oil deposits in Texas
and the Mexican Gulf without much help from foreign companies, while it conserves
its oil deposits in Alaska for future use. No one seems to have a problem with that no-
tion, no one criticizes the US authorities for banning foreign investors. What is so dif-
ferent about Russia, besides from the fact that many countries would like to consider
Russia as a natural resource backyard that can be used at leisure?
        Logically speaking, the Russian government is doing right in giving preference
for development to domestic companies. The only problem is that many actions of
the Russian government are logical and sound to start with, but somehow good inten-
tions get lost along the way. Selling development licenses to Russian companies is a
wonderful idea, but will these Russian companies really invest in the development of