Turkmenistan: Trying to Put Ecological Issues on the Energy Development Agenda

Natural-gas-rich Turkmenistan is presently being courted by Western energy executives and government officials, who are eager to secure energy development and export deals with Ashgabat. The non-governmental organization Crude Accountability recently issued a report detailing the environmental risks associated with developing Turkmenistan's abundant reserves. Kate Watters, Executive Director for Crude Accountability, recently spoke to EurasiaNet about the contents of the report.

EurasiaNet: Why did you decide to do this report on the environmental impact of hydrocarbon development?
Watters: Turkmenistan represents the last frontier for western corporate involvement in large-scale hydrocarbon development projects in the Caspian region. With the death of [former dictator Saparmurat] Niyazov, and President [Gurbanguly] Berdymukhammedov's interest in opening to the West, the time to discuss the risks of investment in Turkmenistan is now.

EurasiaNet: In the report, you focus on the role of the International Financial Institutions (IFIs), such as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the International Finance Corporation (IFC) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB). How can they play a role in preventing ecological damage?
Watters: They use public money to finance projects. So, they are accountable to the public. The IFIs have social and environmental standards, which their clients must meet if they are to receive financing. Non-governmental organizations [NGOs] and civil society activists can apply pressure on the IFIs to uphold their own standards, as well as the environmental and social laws of the host country, with which they must also comply.

EurasiaNet: How do you assess the performance of IFIs is safeguarding the environment, judging by oil & gas projects that such institutions financed in other Caspian Basin states, such as Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan?
Watters: Unfortunately, we have seen serious problems with IFI-financed projects in the Caspian region to date. The Karachaganak Field in Kazakhstan is one example where a recent audit by the IFC's own compliance mechanism found it to be out of compliance with numerous air monitoring requirements. Numerous complaints have been filed against the EBRD and IFC for their investments in the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, and we have grave concerns about the environmental impacts of EBRD financing at the Bautino Port in Aktau, Kazakhstan, which services the Kashagan field. Among other concerns at Kashagan are threats to the habitat of the Caspian seal.

EurasiaNet: The report asserts that Turkmenistan is not in compliance with the Aarhus Convention. Why this convention is so important?
Watters: The Aarhus Convention states that citizens and public organizations have the right to have access to and participate in environmentally significant decision-making, and to have legal recourse if this right is violated. Turkmenistan signed the Aarhus Convention in 1999 and is currently out of compliance with it because of the provisions of the country's 2003 NGO law, which is repressive in the extreme, and prohibits civil society from participating in the social and political life of the country.

EurasiaNet: Do you expect that Turkmen activists will be able to make their voices heard anytime soon?
Waters: At present, Turkmen activists are unable to voice their concerns within their country, [and] also in the international community. We can help them by providing a forum in which they can voice their concerns, and by pushing our governments and international institutions to be honest and realistic in their assessments of progress in Turkmenistan. We can also insist that engagement by Western governments, international institutions and corporations be predicated on improvements in the human rights sphere inside Turkmenistan.

EurasiaNet: How are US and EU officials responding to the report?
Watters: Most officials with whom we speak believe that Western corporations implement standards much higher than those of the Caspian countries. Some US government officials have gone so far as to say that claims against US corporations' compliance with national environmental laws are politically motivated. There seems to be an unwavering belief that US corporations will always be cleaner and more progressive. Unfortunately, as our report states, this is often not the case. Our concern is that Western corporations operating in Turkmenistan [could] fail to comply with Western standards of transparency, accountability and environmental protection, as they have in hydrocarbon-rich areas throughout the world.

As they [Western energy entities] operate with a very closed government, the risk is that they become complicit in the corrupt and un-transparent behaviors of their host. In Turkmenistan, environmentalists and others who would normally be active participants in discussions about environmental protection, health impacts and overall social benefits of Western projects are totally unable to engage in this critical dialogue. It is imperative that international civil society works to provide an opportunity for this dialogue to take place.

EurasiaNet: Is Crude Accountability optimistic that Berdymukhamedov will loosen government control over domestic life, perhaps allowing for a small flourishing of the non-governmental sector in Turkmenistan?
Watters: Unfortunately, the President continues to apply pressure on activists in the country. According to our sources, activists are under greater scrutiny than they were under Niyazov. As long as this is the situation, it is imperative that Western human rights and civil society organizations continue to demand greater freedom among civil society.